Tentmaker Forum

This is just something someone brought to me earlier this week and I wrote some stuff out concerning my perspectives of how I see it to be.

The verse in question is verse 29 of John 5.
29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Upon first glance, it appears that dead people will be resurrected so they can then be judged and thrown into hell or the lake of fire, depending on the current flavor of the belief system one is in.  But before we jump into that conclusion, it's first break down what it is that we're claiming.

The belief is, that the sinners who are dead are in hell right now, or, they're in purgatory or, even some believe they are now spirits bound to this earth to wreak havoc on those still alive.  There are many variances as to where one goes when one dies.  And the belief then continues on to say that in the end, at the Great White Throne Judgment, every human being will be resurrected back to life and the sinners will then be sentenced to eternity in hell, which around that same time frame is thrown into the lake of fire.  And those that were believers when they died . . .and are now in heaven, will return to their bodies and then be judged for their good.

Now, that one varies a bit as well.  Some believe also that Christians won't be at the Great White Throne Judgment because Jesus already stood in for them.  But the verse here in question is believed to be saying that the dead believers will be resurrected, their spirit will "return" to their bodies and they'll be resurrected into life and the sinners will be resurrected into eternal torment, or annihilation. 

For me that raises a lot of issues.  For one, why is the sinner who is already in hell already, going to return to his body to be sent to hell again?  Is he not in an eternal state already?  Is there to be a greater level of torment once his body is reunited with his spirit?

Do we not realize that the "act" of resurrection is one of restoration?  And not destruction?  Life enters into the state of death and it over rides it's effects.  Life is not something that can be blended with death.  In other words, if life manifests in a body of death, it's showing death no longer has control.  And if death no longer has control, why would we think that the life can then be thrown into eternal torment? 

This is something that an individual merely swallows without realizing that it's poison, and it will affect their ability to see what Truth is all about.  They take verses like this and pull them out of it's context and claim it says something all together different from what it's really saying.  So, let's look at the whole context.

John 5
21For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.
22For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:
23That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.
24Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
25Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.
26For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
27And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.
28Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

First off, what dead are we talking about?  Are we talking about the physically dead people or the spiritually dead people?  This entire context is talking about spiritually dead people being made alive as the seeds of life fall upon the deadness of their inner man.  As life manifests itself to them, they become RESURRECTED.

Verse 25 . . .the time is NOW . . .not "today" now . . .2,000 years ago "now".  The dead were those whom Jesus ministered to.  "They" heard his voice and "their" lives were restored.

Verse 28, leading up to the verse in question, it speaks about those that are in their graves.  We ASSUME he's talking about natural graves.  But "in the context" with the rest of what's being said, we see that it's not literal graves, but graves of the flesh, carnal flesh.  Remember what Jesus said of the Pharisees?  That they were white washed "tombs".  "That's" the kind of graves Jesus is referring to here.

29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation

So, given what we have about the context of what Jesus has been saying, we then see that the resurrection is having different affects on different people.  This isn't about some going to heaven and others going to hell.  This is about who gets rewarded for their good deeds and who gets purged for their bad deeds.  The purging isn't removing the bad people . . .they've just been RESURRECTED.  God is not a god of destruction of men, but of restoration. 

When we look at this from a resurrected state, we'll see that this is not a literal judgment any more than the rest of this context is about literal dead people.  Those who have done wrongly are resurrected just the same as those who've done rightly, the difference is, the WORKS are dealt with at their resurrection through the purging of the fire of God's grace.  It's the carnality in them that's being destroyed at their resurrection. 

You do realize that there are many good people out there that are still dead.  Well, that's what this is addressing.  The good people, the people that are just as nice as can be, but spiritually are just as dead as the next guy, when they "do" come into their resurrection experience, the deeds they did when they were spiritually dead don't go unnoticed.  They're rewarded for them as well.

When Jesus called out the twelve disciples, they weren't all bad people.  There were some really great guys he called up.  But at the same time, ALL of them were spiritually dead and ALL of them were yet to be spiritually resurrected.  And when they were, the ones that had a history of good deeds were rewarded, the ones that had a history of bad deeds were purged from those deeds, but all were resurrected.

1 Corinthians 3
11For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;  13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.  14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.  15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.   

The fire here is the same as the resurrected unto damnation.  We've just got to get our minds into that ascended place where the resurrection "is" and let go of what "was" that got us here.  What got us here was never meant to sustain us once we entered into the upper room of his truths.  The order of life is not the same in the ascended place from what it is in natural reasoning. 

Knowledge only reveals truth in segments.  The spirit reveals all things beyond the reaches of the logic of our minds.  Restoration goes beyond the logic of men.  It reaches ALL men.  God is just that great.


16Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?  17If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.  18Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.  

I thought we'd finish that passage out with this to show once again how spiritual truth brings a whole other dimension to literal understanding.  In the first breath, he reveals that "we" are each a temple of the Holy Ghost.  In the next breath, he says if any man defiles the temple, God will destroy him  . .. so . . .logic says God's telling us if we abuse these bodies OF FLESH that God will destroy US.

But God is not a god that destroys men, he destroys MAN in men.  Any MAN defiles.  . . not "men" who defile their bodies, all though that's not advisable either, but this is speaking about the CARNAL man in us that would defile US . . .remember WE are a temple ..not just OUR BODY, but ALL OF US . .my WHOLE being is a temple of God and should the carnality defile me, God will destroy what's defiling me so that I may be restored to my original purity in him.

Lastly, I thought I'd throw in another translation of the original text we just covered so you could kinda see the entire message in it's context.  Just remember, God's judgment is based on love, ours is based on vengeance and destruction.

John 5
20-23"But you haven't seen the half of it yet, for in the same way that the Father raises the dead and creates life, so does the Son. The Son gives life to anyone he chooses. Neither he nor the Father shuts anyone out. The Father handed all authority to judge over to the Son so that the Son will be honored equally with the Father. Anyone who dishonors the Son, dishonors the Father, for it was the Father's decision to put the Son in the place of honor.
24"It's urgent that you listen carefully to this: Anyone here who believes what I am saying right now and aligns himself with the Father, who has in fact put me in charge, has at this very moment the real, lasting life and is no longer condemned to be an outsider. This person has taken a giant step from the world of the dead to the world of the living.
25-27"It's urgent that you get this right: The time has arrived—I mean right now!—when dead men and women will hear the voice of the Son of God and, hearing, will come alive. Just as the Father has life in himself, he has conferred on the Son life in himself. And he has given him the authority, simply because he is the Son of Man, to decide and carry out matters of Judgment.
28-29"Don't act so surprised at all this. The time is coming when everyone dead and buried will hear his voice. Those who have lived the right way will walk out into a resurrection Life; those who have lived the wrong way, into a resurrection Judgment.  

 After this I heard what sounded like  the roar of a great multitude in heaven shouting,'HALLELUJAH!  SALVATION AND GLORY AND POWER

  BELONG TO OUR GOD,   FOR TRUE AND JUST ARE HIS JUDGEMENTS"

I now understand these types of passages Sheila.  For his JUDGMENTs are RIGHT and TRUE.  Grace has overwhelmed my guilt and shame.  Love has never failed.

I can not see a celebration of this magnitude taking place while 99.9% of the human race suffer in torment for eternity.  What kind of joyfulness can manifest if people are judged according to earthly standards?  How much greater is the joy when the earth-dwellers come into the realization that the cross has affected the entire human race?

Embrace the Grace, the crown of thorns (curse of the mind) are transformed into a crown of gold (renewed to purity of Truth)  Resurrection is coming to both the alive and the dead!!!

Quote from: Nathan on August 29, 2011, 09:43:03 PM
I now understand these types of passages Sheila.  For his JUDGMENTs are RIGHT and TRUE.  Grace has overwhelmed my guilt and shame.  Love has never failed.

I can not see a celebration of this magnitude taking place while 99.9% of the human race suffer in torment for eternity.  What kind of joyfulness can manifest if people are judged according to earthly standards?  How much greater is the joy when the earth-dwellers come into the realization that the cross has affected the entire human race?

Embrace the Grace, the crown of thorns (curse of the mind) are transformed into a crown of gold (renewed to purity of Truth)  Resurrection is coming to both the alive and the dead!!!

Can you imagine that scene?  Every knee bowing and every tongue confessing?  Everyone who ever lived worshipping our Savior?   :cloud9:

"First off, what dead are we talking about?  Are we talking about the physically dead people or the spiritually dead people?  This entire context is talking about spiritually dead people being made alive as the seeds of life fall upon the deadness of their inner man.  As life manifests itself to them, they become RESURRECTED.

Verse 25 . . .the time is NOW . . .not "today" now . . .2,000 years ago "now".  The dead were those whom Jesus ministered to.  "They" heard his voice and "their" lives were restored.

Verse 28, leading up to the verse in question, it speaks about those that are in their graves.  We ASSUME he's talking about natural graves.  But "in the context" with the rest of what's being said, we see that it's not literal graves, but graves of the flesh, carnal flesh.  Remember what Jesus said of the Pharisees?  That they were white washed "tombs".  "That's" the kind of graves Jesus is referring to here."


Rom 6:23  for the wages of the sin is death, and the gift of God is life age-during in Christ Jesus our Lord.
The payment for sin is death

Joh 5:25 Verily, verily, I am saying to you that coming is an hour, and now is, when the dead shall be hearing the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear shall be living."
DEAD G3498  nekros  (a corpse); dead (literally or figuratively; also as noun): - dead.

1Co 15:14  and if Christ hath not risen, then void is our preaching, and void also your faith,
1Co 15:15  and we also are found false witnesses of God, because we did testify of God that He raised up the Christ, whom He did not raise if then dead persons do not rise;
1Co 15:16  for if dead persons do not rise, neither hath Christ risen,
1Co 15:17  and if Christ hath not risen, vain is your faith, ye are yet in your sins;
1Co 15:18  then, also, those having fallen asleep in Christ did perish;
1Co 15:19  if in this life we have hope in Christ only, of all men we are most to be pitied.
1Co 15:20  And now, Christ hath risen out of the dead--the first-fruits of those sleeping he became,
1Co 15:21  for since through man is the death, also through man is a rising again of the dead,
1Co 15:22  for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive,
1Co 15:23  and each in his proper order, a first-fruit Christ, afterwards those who are the Christ's, in his presence,
DEAD G3498  nekros  (a corpse); dead (literally or figuratively; also as noun): - dead.

Heb 9:27  and as it is laid up to men once to die, and after this--judgment,

DIE G599  apothnēskō  be dead, death, die, lie a-dying, be slain (X with).

Its the context......

The context is . . .SPIRITUAL DEATH . . .sigh . . .

Quote from: Nathan on August 29, 2011, 11:21:51 PM
The context is . . .SPIRITUAL DEATH . . .sigh . . .

The reality of the context is that the DEAD will be raised.

Besides your post subject reads, " Resurrection unto death " just who is going to be resurrected to death?

carnality in us . . .I thought that was clear.

Quote from: Nathan on August 29, 2011, 07:13:35 PM
This is just something someone brought to me earlier this week and I wrote some stuff out concerning my perspectives of how I see it to be.

The verse in question is verse 29 of John 5.
29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Upon first glance, it appears that dead people will be resurrected so they can then be judged and thrown into hell or the lake of fire, depending on the current flavor of the belief system one is in.  But before we jump into that conclusion, it's first break down what it is that we're claiming.

The belief is, that the sinners who are dead are in hell right now, or, they're in purgatory or, even some believe they are now spirits bound to this earth to wreak havoc on those still alive.  There are many variances as to where one goes when one dies.  And the belief then continues on to say that in the end, at the Great White Throne Judgment, every human being will be resurrected back to life and the sinners will then be sentenced to eternity in hell, which around that same time frame is thrown into the lake of fire.  And those that were believers when they died . . .and are now in heaven, will return to their bodies and then be judged for their good.

Now, that one varies a bit as well.  Some believe also that Christians won't be at the Great White Throne Judgment because Jesus already stood in for them.  But the verse here in question is believed to be saying that the dead believers will be resurrected, their spirit will "return" to their bodies and they'll be resurrected into life and the sinners will be resurrected into eternal torment, or annihilation. 

For me that raises a lot of issues.  For one, why is the sinner who is already in hell already, going to return to his body to be sent to hell again?  Is he not in an eternal state already?

This may come as a shock but I agree Nathan. :winkgrin:
Some say hell is mild and the real stuff starts in LoF. But even that view is very problematic because it means two judgements.
Simply because being placed in hell or heaven IS a judgement.

QuoteIs there to be a greater level of torment once his body is reunited with his spirit?

According to many the answer is yes. Then it's mental and physical torment at the same time.

QuoteDo we not realize that the "act" of resurrection is one of restoration?  And not destruction?  Life enters into the state of death and it over rides it's effects.  Life is not something that can be blended with death.  In other words, if life manifests in a body of death, it's showing death no longer has control.  And if death no longer has control, why would we think that the life can then be thrown into eternal torment?

http://www.gtft.org/Library/knoch/RaiseRouseAndVivify.htm

QuoteAll life is the result of spirit. It is the spirit that vivifies (John 6:63). Hence, when the term "make alive" is used of the return from death there is an extraordinary emphasis on the spiritual aspect. It is not used of resurrection or rousing merely, for life is implied in both cases. Resurrection is not the standing up of a dead body but of one come back to life. Rousing is not possible without passing from death into life. When vivification is superimposed it brings life, not only after death, but beyond the reach of death.

So, whats the resurrection all about, isnt it about being raised from the dead?  I seem to understand by what you say that this spiritual death is all that is needed.

"But God is not a god that destroys men, he destroys MAN in men."  The MAN if men, is that the old man? Is not that MAN dead?
Rom 6:6  this knowing, that our old man was crucified with him , that the body of the sin may be made useless, for our no longer serving the sin;

Now this I can understand,  1Jn 3:8 Yet he who is doing sin is of the Adversary, for from the beginning is the Adversary sinning. For this was the Son of God manifested, that He should be annulling the acts of the Adversary."

I understand this to be a very literal death of carnal mankind.  Heb 9:27  and as it is laid up to men once to die, and after this--judgment,

2Co 5:17  so that if any one is in Christ-- he is a new creature; the old things did pass away, lo, become new have the all things.
Gal 6:15  for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation;
Gal 6:16  and as many as by this rule do walk--peace upon them, and kindness, and on the Israel of God!

This is who I am, a new creature and ALL things have become new. I was crucified with Christ and it is no longer I that is living. Gal. 2:20

This quote below is orthodox, theologian, tales.

Quote from: Nathan on Today at 11:13:35 AM

    This is just something someone brought to me earlier this week and I wrote some stuff out concerning my perspectives of how I see it to be.

    The verse in question is verse 29 of John 5.
    29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

    Upon first glance, it appears that dead people will be resurrected so they can then be judged and thrown into hell or the lake of fire, depending on the current flavor of the belief system one is in.  But before we jump into that conclusion, it's first break down what it is that we're claiming. 
Okay Ill wait.
   
The belief is, that the sinners who are dead are in hell( this word I know you know is GRAVE and that is where dead people are ALL dead people, and the dead know not anything) right now, or, they're in purgatory(SHOW me where this is, please) or, even some believe they are now spirits bound to this earth to wreak havoc on those still alive.(GULP!)  There are many variances as to where one goes when one dies.  And the belief then continues on to say that in the end, at the Great White Throne Judgment, every human being will be resurrected back to life and the sinners will then be sentenced to eternity in hell, ( the GRAVE) which around that same time frame is thrown into the lake of fire.  And those that were believers when they died . . .and are now in heaven,( Can you give me a Book and verse for such a statement?) will return to their bodies and then be judged for their good.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne; and, books, were opened, and, another book, was opened, which is, the book, of life; and the dead, were judged, out of the things written in the books, according to their works.
I reason "the dead" is ALL, the reason where the dead stand is in front of the THRONE.


    Now, that one varies a bit as well.  Some believe also that Christians won't be at the Great White Throne Judgment because Jesus already stood in for them.  But the verse here in question is believed to be saying that the dead believers will be resurrected, their spirit will "return" to their bodies and they'll be resurrected into life and the sinners will be resurrected into eternal torment, or annihilation.

    For me that raises a lot of issues.  For one, why is the sinner who is already in hell( the dead sinner is in his GRAVE) already, going to return to his body to be sent to hell again?  Is he not in an eternal state already?  NO! Again Book and verse for a statement as that.

I realize that some people do not believe that the Word of the OT is alive and full of Truth, but for me, Psa_119:160  The sum of Thy word is truth, And to the age is every judgment of Thy righteousness!

And when that man we call Solomon is no longer a verifier of God's Word I'll quit reading him as a source for my learning, as I will with David and the Lord God.
Gen 3:19 In the sweat of your face shall you eat your bread, till your return to the ground, for from it are you taken, for soil you are, and to soil are you returning.
Psa 104:29  Thou hidest thy face, they are dismayed, Thou withdrawest their spirit, They cease to breathe, And, unto their own dust, do they return:
Ecc 12:7  And the dust returneth to the earth as it was, And the spirit returneth to God who gave it.

Once again, you ignore the fact that there are just as many passages that claim "I once was dead but now am alilve" and Jesus AS I ALREADY STATED BEFORE refered to many who were dead spiritually but alive physically.  This is not about a physical death.  It's those who are physically alive but spiritually dead.  The resurrection . . . we were born unto death . . .in Adam all have DIED but in Christ all are made ALIVE . . .that . .is resurrection and it's not just pertaining to physical . . .I'm not saying that it's "never" about physical death, I'm saying "this" passage that speaks about being resurrected unto life and being resurrected unto damnation is NOT about a PHYSICAL resurrection but a SPIRITUAL one.

You're not going to win this one.  I'm sorry you can't see it, but just because you can't see it has no affect as to whether or not others "can" see it.  You're over looking the core of the whole passage.

25Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

That's not about a time in the future, that's about a time in current state!  Why do you continue to resist? 

Nathan, I see this running along real nicely with the "saved" thread.   :thumbsup:

Those not as yet believers, not resurrected to torture, but to "torment" [basanizo], i.e., convicting (being drawn), cleansing, the conditions being set for repentance and confession of Jesus as Lord.  Not a picture of a hateful, vindictive God, but of a Father Who will do whatever it takes to bring His children to Him. 

Worthy is the Lamb.

Quote from: Nathan on August 30, 2011, 01:32:40 AM
Once again, you ignore the fact that there are just as many passages that claim "I once was dead but now am alilve" and Jesus AS I ALREADY STATED BEFORE refered to many who were dead spiritually but alive physically.  This is not about a physical death.  It's those who are physically alive but spiritually dead.  The resurrection . . . we were born unto death . . .in Adam all have DIED but in Christ all are made ALIVE . . .that . .is resurrection and it's not just pertaining to physical . . .I'm not saying that it's "never" about physical death, I'm saying "this" passage that speaks about being resurrected unto life and being resurrected unto damnation is NOT about a PHYSICAL resurrection but a SPIRITUAL one.

You're not going to win this one.  I'm sorry you can't see it, but just because you can't see it has no affect as to whether or not others "can" see it.  You're over looking the core of the whole passage.

25Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

That's not about a time in the future, that's about a time in current state!  Why do you continue to resist?

Could'nt you just have said what Jesus said  Joh 3:7 You should not be marveling that I said to you, 'You must be begotten anew.'"  I understand very well, as far as I know, should a soul not be begotten anew, that soul will not hear.
25Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.
26For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

Joh 6:44  no one is able to come unto me, if the Father who sent me may not draw him, and I will raise him up in the last day;  Well thats the "now is," when the Father draws/drags, then they will hear the voice of the Son.

Yes, there is the spiritual understanding, and that is good, but this "dead" that Jesus spoke of in verse 25 is
G3498 nekros  (a corpse); dead

As compared to what you, I believe are refering to ASLEEP G2837  koimaō    to put to sleep, that is, (passively or reflexively) to slumber; figuratively to decease: - (be a-, fall a-, fall on) sleep, be dead.

1Co 15:18  then, also, those having fallen asleep in Christ did perish;

Again King James doth do uth a myth thervice (mis-service  :laughing7:)
the word "damnation" is krisis. It means tribunal. To stand before an objective court

Also, context is everything. IMO, Jesus is detailing a mystery in John 5 about judgment and the resurrection.

Joh 5:29  And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.




RESURRECTION ONE
Joh 5:24-29  Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.(25)  Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.(26)  For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;  (27)  And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. 


For those who hear....."Today if you hear His voice..." and abide in the hearing of it, the sentence is PASSED, DEAD to the world, ALIVE to Christ- first resurrection


(28)  Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,  (29)  And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

The great white throne judgment. For everyone who ever lived who was not in the first resurrection. Sheep on one side (resurrection of life)....enter into the joy of your Lord.

Goats on the other side...... Time to get opened up by the two edged sword at the "tribunal" of the Lord (damnation- krisis- means objective tribunal) Everything hidden in darkness will be brought to the light. In that day I will slay Leviathan the serpent that lives in the sea with my great and mighty sword; in that day SING OF IT; A VINEYARD. Deliver such a one over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord Jesus. For evrything is open to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do. And His eyes were as flames of fire. YEA thats my Jesus!

:2c:

VERY well said!      YEA thats my Jesus!

My friend what you said is worth a lot more that 2 cents!

A little bit about the concept of life and death in the OT. It isn't the opposite of the western way of seeing it, but not the same either....

---

As a verb this root appears in three stems in Hebrew. The Qal conveys the basic meaning "to live or have life" whereas the two derived stems overlap in their meaning of "giving or restoring life."
Throughout the ot the possession of life is an intrinsic good, "All that a man has will he give for his life" (Job 2:4), and "a living dog is better than a dead lion" (Eccl 9:4). "Long life is in Wisdom's right hand" (Prov 3:16). Against this estimation of life one can appreciate the depths of Job's despair when he desired to surrender his life (Job 3:17ff.).
Physical life originally came from God (Gen 2:7). After the Fall, death entered man's experience. The fruit of the tree of life would have endowed man with immortality (Gen 3:22). God continues to be the source of life (Ps 36:9; 139:13ff.) and the Lord of life and death (Num 27:16; Deut 32:39; Job 12:10).
The ot speaks of life as the experience of life rather than as an abstract principle of vitality which may be distinguished from the body. This is because the ot view of the nature of man is holistic, that is, his function as body, mind, spirit is a unified whole spoken of in very concrete terms. Life is the ability to exercise all one's vital power to the fullest; death is the opposite. The verb ḥāyâ "to live" involves the ability to have life somewhere on the scale between the fullest enjoyment of all the powers of one's being, with health and prosperity on the one hand and descent into trouble, sickness, and death on the other. Sometimes the Psalmist calls on the Lord to be saved alive from the very brink of the pit (Ps 30:3 [H 4]). He asks to be "preserved alive" and "revived" so that he can enjoy "the land of the living." Some have been extreme in maintaining that this "land of the living" is heaven, while others have gone too far in maintaining that the Israelites did not understand man as having a spirit but simply as being an animated body. Some have quoted verses like Isa 26:14; "The dead do not live," to prove that Israel's view was that death is total. There are indeed some verses that say the living, not the dead, praise the Lord, but these verses are expressions of simple physical observation. The fact is that in contrast to Mesopotamian ideas of creation where man was made to be mortal, in the m man was created to immortal life, not as a spirit but as a whole man, body and soul ("Life," ZPEB, III, p. 927). The entrance of death was viewed as unnatural.
The ot word ḥāyâ has a range of meaning which includes "to prosper, to sustain life," or "to nourish" (Gen 27:40; Gen 45:7; II Kgs 18:32; I Sam 10:24; II Sam 12:3) or "to restore to health, to heal, recover" (Josh 5:8; II Kgs 1:2; 8:10).
In contrast to the ancient near east, where men sought to link themselves with forces of life thought of in terms of nature deities, by magical recitations of myth accompanied by appropriate magical ritual, in the ot life is decided by a right relationship to the righteous standards of the Word of God. Moses places the people in a state of having to decide between life and death by laying the word of God before them (Deut 30:15–20). Israel is called upon to choose life, "for this word is not a vain thing for you: because it is your life" (Deut 32:47). Bultmann notes that Ezekiel "frees life from all false supports and obligations and relates it wholly and utterly to the Word of God (Ezk 3:18ff.; 14:13ff.; 18:1ff.; 20:1ff.; 33:1ff.)" (TDNT, II, p. 845). In Prov, man is again called upon to make a decision for life, by embracing Wisdom (Prov 2:19; 5:6; 6:23; 10:17; 15:24). By cleaving to God, the righteous have life (Hab 2:4; cf. Amos 5:4, 14; Jer 38:20).
But there is also the somewhat less concrete meaning where one "lives" by the words of God, "not by bread alone" (Deut 8:3; Ps 119:50, 93). Some would insist that this refers to prosperity as the gift of obedience rather than to the spiritual quality of life, as Jesus seems to have interpreted Deut 8:3. But considering again the biblical unity of man's nature, it obviously refers to both.
While it may be difficult to show any developed concept of incorporeal immortality in the ot, there are a number of passages where the verb ḥāyâ means "to restore to life," which would imply the overcoming of death. Since ot terminology uses death and life in a wide spectrum of nuances, in some passages it is difficult to tell whether extreme trouble or illness or what we would call death is meant. (The reader should keep in mind that modern medicine, despite its technological sophistication, has trouble defining actual death.) Two such passages are II Kgs 13:20–21, where a man's body "revives" or is "restored to life" upon touching the bones of Elisha. The other is I Kgs 17:17–24 where Elijah "restores to life" the body of the widow's son. Both of these passages appear to be dealing with resurrection from death, but one would have some difficulty from the terminology alone proving whether they were resurrected or merely revived. But the people involved in II Kgs 13:20–21 are treating the man as dead that is, burying him and the boy "had no breath left in him." So in each case the person was received back to life from what the Hebrews called "death."
Psalm 49, while using the word ḥāyâ only twice (vv. 9, 18 [H 10, 19]) is very instructive in what it says about the Psalmist's attitude toward living and dying. He teaches that evil men perish. There is no way for them to be redeemed so that they can go on living forever and never see death (vv. 7–8 [H 8–9]). But the Psalmist is not totally negative about death. He expresses his faith in God's promise to redeem his life from the power of the grave (Sheol) for he says, "God will receive (take, snatch, as Enoch and Elijah, see lāqaḥ) me" (v. 15 [H 16]). This passage should be linked with Ps 17:15, "I will be satisfied when I wake in your likeness" and also to Ps 16:11 where "the path of life" and overcoming of death is predictive of the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:24–29). Bultmann adds, "There is a remarkably plain expression that the relationship of grace will persist, that fellowship initiated by God cannot be destroyed in Ps 73:23ff. One may say that here the OT belief in the hereafter finds its purest formulation. This expectation is neither magical nor mythical not speculative nor mystical. It is a certainty which is produced in the righteous by the concept of grace alone" (TDNT, II, p. 848).
One of the meanings of the word ḥayyı̂m, "endless life," has been generally recognized in the past only as a very late usage of the word. (See BDB on Dan 12:2, p. 313). M. Dahood (Psalms I, II, III, in AB, 16, 17, 17a) has brought the Ugaritic literature to bear on the early meaning of this word.
Though Dan 12:2 is often cited in the lexicons as the usage of ḥayyı̂m to mean eternal life, Dahood sees it so used in the Psalms. He refers to the Ugaritic antecedent in 2 Aqht VI. 27–29 (AB pp. 91, 170)
"Ask for eternal life (ḥym)
And I will give it to you,
Immortality (blmt)
And I will bestow it on you.
I will make you number years with Baal,
With gods you will number months."
Proverbs 12:28 uses 'al-māwet (no death) as the parallel of ḥayyı̂m (life). The Ugaritic blmt translated "immortality" above is an equivalent expression. The RSV says that the Hebrew is uncertain and proceeds to give a translation based on an emended text. However, Ewald, Bertheau, Franz Delitzsch, and Saadia, the Judeo-Arabist of the Middle Ages, said 'al-māwet means "immortality." The KJV wisely translated it "no death," NIV, "immortality." They have all been proved correct by the Ugaritic bl mt as used in the above citation. Dahood translates the verse:
"In the path of virtue is eternal life (ḥayyı̂m),
And the treading of her way is immortality ('al-māwet)."
M. Pope (JBL 85:455–66) objects to this translation on the basis that the synonymous parallelism goes against the larger context which consists of a series of couplets in antithetical parallelism and "therefore death not immortality is the proper antithesis." But is there here a larger context? Are not these proverbs a list of independent thoughts? Indeed it is not unusual of the proverbs to shift from one form of parallelism to another (cf. 17:21–22; 19:4–5, etc.). Pope states that ḥayyı̂m as eternal life is not justified by the parallelism of ḥym and blmt in Ugaritic because, the hero's, Aqhat's, reply shows he did not believe immortality could be had by a mortal and he therefore accuses the goddess Anat of lying to him. The implication is that since the Ugaritic hero didn't believe humans could have immortality, the writers of the Old Testament must share the same skepticism. The point is not what the Ugaritians believed but that they used the word ḥym for eternal life, whereas the Hebrew lexicons generally list only Dan 12:2 as using ḥayyı̂m distinctively to denote eternal life because of its alleged Maccabean origin.
Another similar use of ḥayyı̂m is in Prov 15:24 where it is put in antithesis with Sheol:
"The path of life above belongs to the wise,
because he turns away from Sheol below."
Whether this passage has relevance on this subject depends on how one interprets Sheol (q.v.) here and in other places in the ot. Sheol often means only "the grave" in ot usage. If that is the meaning here, then ḥayyı̂m as its antithesis need mean only "this earthly life." But if Sheol can mean "netherworld," then ḥayyı̂m here may mean "life after death." The writer holds that Proverbs entertains the concept that "death" (māwet) and Sheol involves more than the grave. Prov 2:18–19 parallels death with the place where "the shades" (rĕpā'ı̂m) are. And Prov 9:18 parallels Sheol in the same way. This at least opens the possibility that in Prov 15:24 "the path of life above" can mean eternal life in heaven in contrast with Sheol below where the shades dwell.
Some ot scholars would reject this notion, even though they might admit ḥayyı̂m could mean "endless life" on earth. But we are reminded of the repeated ot idea that God dwells in heaven (Deut 4:36, 39: I Kgs 8:27; Job 22:12; Ps 20:6 [H 7], 80:14 [H 15], etc.) where his throne is (Ps 11:4) and that the Psalmist longs to see his face (Ps 17:15). Amos (9:2), a prophet the critics accept at face value from the eighth century, considers both heaven and Sheol as places where people might conceivably go. Although Dahood may be extreme in his application of this meaning for ḥayyı̂m, his critics may be equally extreme in rejecting the notion entirely. For example, in what sense does the king receive eternal life in God's presence (Ps 21:4–6 [H 5–7])? And in what sense does Mount Zion abide forever (Ps 125:1)? The answer is similar in either case. The earthly Mount Zion has a counterpart in heaven (cf. Ps 123:1) and the king's prosperity on earth is only the beginning of all God's eternal goodness to him (Ps 16:11). It is very interesting (Ps 30:5) to see the temporal contrast between the Lord's anger and his favor. His anger is for a moment but his favor is for "life-eternal" not just a "lifetime" as in the rv.
ḥay. Living, alive. This adjective is often used as an epithet of God (Josh 3:10; Hos 2:1; Ps 42:3, etc.) but also of man, animals, and vegetation in contrast to what is dead or dried up. The plural form describes flowing or fresh water (Gen 26:19; Lev 14:5–6; Num 19:17, etc.). Jesus used a word play on this meaning (Jn 4:10).
ḥayyâ. Living thing, animal. The term is used mostly of wild animals in contrast to domestic animals. Psalm 104:25 uses it of creatures that live in water. Ezekiel in chapter 1 employs the term to describe the "living creatures" of his vision, which were composite in nature, having features of both man and animals. More rarely it means anything that lives (Ezk 7:13).
ḥayyı̂m. Life, as an abstract idea, meaning the state of being alive as opposite to being dead. Life at its best, health, endless life.
miḥyâ. Preservation of life (Gen 45:5), the appearance of new flesh (Lev 13:10), food, subsistence (Jud 6:4, 17:10).
Bibliography: Greenberg, Moshe, "The Hebrew Oath Particle hay/he," JBL 76:34–39. Gruenthaner, Michael J., "The Old Testament and Retribution in this Life," CBQ 4:101–110. Lehman, Manfred R., "Biblical Oaths," ZAW 81:74–92. O'Connell, Matthew J., "The Concept of Commandment in the Old Testament," TS 21:351–403. Richardson, TWB, pp. 127–28. Rust, Eric C., "The Destiny of the Individual in the Thought of the Old Testament," Review and Expositor 58:296-311. Sawyer, John F. A., "Hebrew Words for the Resurrection of the Dead," VT 23:218–34. TDNT, II, pp. 843–61. THAT, I, pp. 549–56.
E.B.S.

Look, this all boils down to pursuing the spiritual, the invisible truths BENEATH the LITERAL definitions.  What you are doing with emphasizing the defintions of "dead" or what have you, is really no different than the argument Nicodemus tried to muster up with Jesus about being born again . . .Nicodemus stressed the fact that it's impossible to literally go back into his mother's womb . . . If that conversation would taken place in this day and age on a forum much like this one, the conversation would be extremely similar to the argumentative nature in which several here on "this" thread also are doing.

Until you lay down your dictionaries and concordances, you're not ever going to see what I'm saying or agree with what I'm trying to share.  Because once again, you're putting your belief into the sign pointing toward the substance, but instead of pursuing what the sign is pointing to, you are embracing the sign as if "that" is the substance.  Your definitions and dissections of Scripture can only reveal to you more about the sign . . .Scripture is the sign that points to Christ.  Scripture is not the Christ.  Yes, it was inspired by the Spirit of Christ, but even Jesus said it "points" to "Him".  It's a sign.  Yes it's extremely important to read but if we are going to read it with our minds and not our hearts then what good is it?

Nicodemus was a Pharisee, and he was a leader of the Jews.  He was as educated as you can get.  He had an advantage over ALL of us here.  He had the ORIGINAL translation, he had the CULTURAL back ground, he had the best religious teachers to fill in all the blanks and yet he STILL was miles away from understanding what Jesus was saying because it's not about obtaining a lot of knowledge . . .It's not about literal birthing anymore than it's about literal death.  Regardless of what the word definition states . . .the message is in the symbolization of what is being said.  So you found that the original text explicitly says "death".  Great!  But my original point was never to clarify the original text, but to pursue what it symbolized.  And I hope by now we all know that Jesus never meant his words to be taken literally.  Because literally, it "is" impossible to go back into my mother's womb.  Just as it makes absolutely no sense for Jesus to resurrect a literally dead person who's supposedly in hell, just to judge him and throw him back into hell.

But if you choose to believe that, feel free to do so.

"Just as it makes absolutely no sense for Jesus to resurrect a literally dead person who's supposedly in hell, just to judge him and throw him back into hell." Nathan

But, but, but....1Co 15:16  For, if the dead are not raised, not even Christ, hath been raised;
1Co 15:17  And, if Christ hath not been raised, to no purpose, is your faith, yet, are ye in your sins!

You talk of "signs" that point, I'm sure you know that hell is the grave, and when you are raised from the dead(spirit or literal) you are raised from the grave, and who says that after the person is judged they get thrown back into the grave? The person may be judged and have to spend time(ages) in the very uncomfortable place out side of God's view, until that person too,

Rom 14:11  for it hath been written, `I live! saith the Lord--to Me bow shall every knee, and every tongue shall confess to God;'

And, as for "makes absolutely no sense"  remember 1Co 3:19  for the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, for it hath been written, `Who is taking the wise in their craftiness;'  :dsunny: :HeartThrob:

Nathan that made me think of Matthew 16

13 When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?"
14 They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
15 "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
17 Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.

I believe much of the maturation process involves us being able to shed the training wheels (natural thinking, logic used to interpret spiritual meaning)...and move into that hearing phase of our walk with Christ.  Learning to trust that inner voice hasn't happened over night for me.  Learning to discern my fleshly mind crying out, and the gentle voice of the Holy Spirit, imo is the key to maturity in the Kingdom.  It is the key to understanding Scripture.

Quote from: micah7:9 on August 30, 2011, 05:28:54 PM
"Just as it makes absolutely no sense for Jesus to resurrect a literally dead person who's supposedly in hell, just to judge him and throw him back into hell." Nathan

But, but, but....1Co 15:16  For, if the dead are not raised, not even Christ, hath been raised;
1Co 15:17  And, if Christ hath not been raised, to no purpose, is your faith, yet, are ye in your sins!

You talk of "signs" that point, I'm sure you know that hell is the grave, and when you are raised from the dead(spirit or literal) you are raised from the grave, and who says that after the person is judged they get thrown back into the grave? The person may be judged and have to spend time(ages) in the very uncomfortable place out side of God's view, until that person too,

Rom 14:11  for it hath been written, `I live! saith the Lord--to Me bow shall every knee, and every tongue shall confess to God;'

And, as for "makes absolutely no sense"  remember 1Co 3:19  for the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, for it hath been written, `Who is taking the wise in their craftiness;'  :dsunny: :HeartThrob:

You're not hearing me at all Micah . . .never said there would be NO RESURRECTION at all . . .I said there isn't going to be a resurrection of the LITERAL dead who are SUPPOSEDLY in hell already only to be judged and then thrown back into hell . . .that was what the position is on the original passage of John 5 that speaks about resurrection unto life and resurrection unto damnation . . .thus the title of the thread???  My whole point has been IT'S ALL A SIGN . . .yes, death is a sign that God uses to reveal principles of the kingdom. . .which is life.  And that's what this passage has been all about . . .not literal death, but those who are SPIRITUALLY dead . . .I feel like I'm kicking a dead horse with this but you seem to not be hearing any of what I'm saying.

I don't understand why you felt you needed to quote a couple passages about resurrection.  Where have I ever stated that there's no resurrection?

The person may be judged and have to spend time(ages) in the very uncomfortable place out side of God's view, until that person too,

The reason why "I" personally don't buy into that one is because I don't believe the spiritual realm is confined by "time".  I believe time only governs the natural realm.  So to say that someone would be tormented "for a time" after death isn't feasible.  But that's only part of it.  Again, if it is necessary for a person to experience ANY kind of torment, be it eternal or temporal IN THE SPIRIT REALM, I'm not talking about the natural realm of things.  But in the spirit, which for me is God's atmosphere . . .who is light and in him there is no shadow or turning.  Torment, for me, is not light.  It doesn't induce light, it doesn't manifest light.  So for me, again, I want to make that part clear, I'm not pushing it on to you, but for me, if there is ANYTHING that does not reflect the nature of God, then it doesn't exist in the atmosphere of God.

Where is grace if there is torment on any level?  Where is love?  "pain" didn't manifest until "after" Adam and Eve were removed from the garden.  If I'm to still expereince torment, of any kind, then what was the purpose of the cross again?  Because I believe it was supposed to be the ULTIMATE sacrifice of ONCE and for all.  If it was, then why again are we to experience the pain of something that Jesus already dealt with?

What if . ..
What if the passage from this world into the spirit realm, from our life in the flesh to our life in the spriit upon our physical death, what if "that" passage was like the astronaughts that leave this atmosphere and enter into outer space?  What if the curtain between the two realms is like an ozone layer .. .anything that passes through from one atmosphere to another must go through the layer of fire that purges us from any impurities that have attached themselves to us?  Isn't that what the ozone layer does?  It protects us from debri that is constantly passing through our solar system . .. who's to say that at our passing that "that's" the lake of fire experience.  Death is the gate that leads us into it.  Everyone passes through the fire . . .but only the works that reflect the nature of God in our lives bring us reward, the works that reflect the nature of the flesh are purged, we all pass through the fire, we all survive the passing . . .it's the carnality that's destroyed, not the beings that carnality has attached itself to.

Quote from: shawn on August 30, 2011, 05:51:19 PM
Nathan that made me think of Matthew 16

13 When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?"
14 They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
15 "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
16 Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
17 Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.

I believe much of the maturation process involves us being able to shed the training wheels (natural thinking, logic used to interpret spiritual meaning)...and move into that hearing phase of our walk with Christ.  Learning to trust that inner voice hasn't happened over night for me.  Learning to discern my fleshly mind crying out, and the gentle voice of the Holy Spirit, imo is the key to maturity in the Kingdom.  It is the key to understanding Scripture.

Just as the tabernacle of Moses is the grand-daddy of the type and shadow of Jesus, I believe this Peter experience that you've brought up is the New Testament version of that.  This is where things seem to take a whole other level of relationship in God.  Jesus even changed the direction, the emphasis of his ministry because of this.  I think this was the ignition of the fire that first began in the hearts of men.  Revelation from God himself.  That and the fact that Jesus quickly pointed out that it's beyond the reach of flesh and blood.  Often times, flesh and blood was directly connected to religious structuring and teaching.  It's where the veil was torn.  On the other side of the veil was division and independant opinions.  There were no personal experiences between God and individuals.  It was all based on what others taught. 

It's like "I" personally don't have any experience in this, but I'm really good at telling you what everyone "else" says about the matter.  And what that kind of did was, it built up a false sense of authority through the power of knowledge.  But knowledge and revelation are at opposite ends of the spectrum.  Knowledge is natural logic and reason, revelation is invisible truth.  it can't be seen, only to the individuals to whom God reveals it to.  you don't earn it, grace gives it to you.  And I totally agree . . .maturity is key.  "When I was a child, I spoke as a child . . .having two 6 year old boys keeps that one pretty much "in your face" at all times.  They like to bicker a lot.  They don't mean to, and they don't see it as that.  But they're 6.  They don't have a lot of control over any of that yet.

But when we become men, we put away our childish nature . . .so . . .if you take a childish believer and a mature believer, which one do you suppose is quicker to run to an argument?  I think revelation can easily come to the mature and immature alike. In the process of letting the life seeds birth in us, do we then mature "in" the truth that the revelation contains to the point where we can manifest it through our own lives rather than "just" in our words.

However you decide or have decided as to how you understand is okay with this "dead horse." :bigGrin: :HeartThrob:

 Micah ch 3 God's plan

  v 12 I will surely gather ALL of YOU,O'Jacob...I will surely bring togather the remnant of Israel. I will bring them togather like

   sheep in a pen,like a flock in it's pasture,the 'place' will throng with people.

   ONE WHO BREAKS OPEN THE WAY WILL GO BEFORE THEM...THEY WILL BREAK THROUGHT THE GATE[of hell} AND GO OUT


   THEIR KING WILL PASS THROUGH BEFORE THEM,THE LORD AT THEIR HEAD

Micah 3:12  Therefore shall Zion for your sake be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of a forest. (ASV)

John 11:35

Jesus wept

Amen!

I think, that in this passage, "damnation" is a word that is too strong: the Greek word (at least according to the Interlinear Scripture Analyser) is something like, "kriseos", which, in 2 Peter 2:9, is associated with "kolazomenous" in (like kolasis I presume, referring to corrective punishment). In this way, I would say that, whatever this verse actually refers to, it is corrective in nature.

Blessings to all! :)

AMEN! :bigGrin:

Quote from: Nathan on August 30, 2011, 05:00:51 PMUntil you lay down your dictionaries and concordances, you're not ever going to see what I'm saying or agree with what I'm trying to share.

To be honest I don't care about anything shared that can't be found in them (or the Bible itself).  It's not the dictionaries and concordances that gave rise to so much false teachings. It was "Yeah, HS wrote that but actually He meant this...." that cause most of teh trouble.
:2c:

ww, your post reminded me of the vision given to Peter on the rooftop.........a cloth come down from heaven,with all kinds of creatures on it..both clean

  and unclean...three times...and went back up.How could they ascend back up unless they had come down?    'RISE PETER,KILL AND EAT"....

   the literal interpretation? I beleive the christian crusades followed that when they warred and killed 'heretics" in a literal way.

   quit calling unclean what God has cleansed.

    This vision proves that men of various understandings come down from heaven[spirits]lowered...'rise,Peter' shows understanding,resurrection/spiritual...

   Was it a literal meaning to kill? or a spiritual  raising?

    I suggest you do a study on that exhortation of the Holy spirit and see if you can come up with the correct spiritual interpretation by

  a literal'word' translation

   and Micah,how can these 'creatures' come down from heaven,then go back up?

     the whole vision speaks of men without understanding[as beasts] ignorance slayed in them...and ascending back into heaven,from whence they came

    the whole purpose of the good evil exercize of spiritual sons of God[man without understanding is as a beast]

   So, I challenge you,ww, to give a word by word 'correct translation'of the above...and 'prove' your hypothesis......for I tell you..it is God through the spirit

  of Christ that gives the perfect translation.   ONLY HE CAN OPEN THE SEALS...   a 'word' in itself can have several meanings...the spirit behind the spoken word

  alone knows the intent...whether to kill or make alive...

Quote from: sheila on September 02, 2011, 04:53:01 PM
ww, your post reminded me of the vision given to Peter on the rooftop.........a cloth come down from heaven,with all kinds of creatures on it..both clean

  and unclean...three times...and went back up.How could they ascend back up unless they had come down?    'RISE PETER,KILL AND EAT"....

   the literal interpretation? I beleive the christian crusades followed that when they warred and killed 'heretics" in a literal way.

   quit calling unclean what God has cleansed.

    This vision proves that men of various understandings come down from heaven[spirits]lowered...'rise,Peter' shows understanding,resurrection/spiritual...

   Was it a literal meaning to kill? or a spiritual  raising?

    I suggest you do a study on that exhortation of the Holy spirit and see if you can come up with the correct spiritual interpretation by

  a literal'word' translation

   and Micah,how can these 'creatures' come down from heaven,then go back up?

     the whole vision speaks of men without understanding[as beasts] ignorance slayed in them...and ascending back into heaven,from whence they came

    the whole purpose of the good evil exercize of spiritual sons of God[man without understanding is as a beast]

   So, I challenge you,ww, to give a word by word 'correct translation'of the above...and 'prove' your hypothesis......for I tell you..it is God through the spirit

  of Christ that gives the perfect translation.   ONLY HE CAN OPEN THE SEALS...   a 'word' in itself can have several meanings...the spirit behind the spoken word

  alone knows the intent...whether to kill or make alive...

:thumbsup:

The Spirit gives the meaning, makes alive.  Amen.

However, if we say the Spirit has given us something, but it clearly/directly contradicts the written Word, IMO, we have a "problem".  Many say "thus and thus", but I want to be able to go to the written Word and at least find the foundation for that assertion - and NO scrips that contradict it.   :2c:

Sometimes a person is really doing that (going along with the written Word) we just have to look and be sure.  Sometimes not.  It can be a "tricky" balance - open to the Spirit, checking against the Word - without quenching the Spirit.

Really?  Are you hearing what you're saying bro?  We are saved by grace through FAITH . .. right?  "Yeah, I believe Jesus died for me and I give my life to him . . .but . . .I want proof!!!

Confining myself to a definition, to a verse, to a concordance, they are nothing more than "helps" but they aren't where truth lies.  Truth is not what my mind PERCEIVES Scripture to say.  Truth is what the Spirit reveals Scripture is saying.

Jesus tried telling us, in the kingdom, it's not going to work like it does in this realm.  In the spirit realm what is greatest in the natural, is least in the spiritual.  What is first in the natural is last in the spiritual . . .when the Sabbath day comes, the rules are the opposite than they were for the previous 6 days leading up to the Sabbath.  6 being the days of labor and the number of man.

What you're saying then is, you want to be spiritually born, but you want your natural man to retain the right for approval of the spiritual birth.

I'm just not willing to rely on "anyone's" mind.  Not mine, not yours . . .not someone's definition and not even someone's translation or interpretation.  Spiritual is opposite of natural.  If I walk in the spirit then the things that are in operation in the natural (my mind) need to be brought into submission so I can be free to see the things in the spirit.  Do you "really" want to rely on what you're mind thinks?  Really???

1Co 2:14  and the natural man doth not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for to him they are foolishness, and he is not able to know them , because spiritually they are discerned;
1Co 2:15  and he who is spiritual, doth discern indeed all things, and he himself is by no one discerned;
1Co 2:16  for who did know the mind of the Lord that he shall instruct Him? and we--we have the mind of Christ.

Are you addressing me Nathan?   If so, I believe that if you, me, or an angel says anything clearly contrary to what's written (and spiritually revealed) it's not to be believed.  You say you won't accept what anyone's "mind" says.  Conversely, you want me or anyone else to just accept whatever anyone chooses to say, claiming it's "spiritual", without any discernment or "standard" of which to check it against?  That's a recipe for "every wind of doctrine".   Have you not seen the error floating around today, claiming to be spiritual, when in fact much of it is loaded with New Age thinking and all sorts of anti-scriptural, anti-Yeshua deceit?

Are you saying you believe we're in "the seventh day" so the scriptures are no longer relevant?  I don't really think that's totally how you feel, but if that's not what you mean, maybe you could clarify. 

I have no personal qualms with what you personally have been saying recently.  I believe you have a lot of good things to share.   

But for me, the Spirit and the written Word don't cancel each other out, they work together.

Absolutely they work together.  The issue that I'm trying to emphasize here is not throw one out over another, my issue is "what order" are we to receive it?  Do I take the Scriptures "first" and let them direct my spirit?  Or, do I listen to the Spirit and let it reveal the Word "in" the Scriptures?  And "my" vote on that one is definitively the latter because the former is based on natural reason more than spiritual discernment.  There was a line drawn by Jesus when Peter received his first revelation.  Peter didn't come to his conclusions through personal studying of the Word and Jesus made sure Peter recognized that it wasn't flesh and blood that revealed that to him.  Spirit reveals and "in" that revelation, the Scripture affirms.

The reason why this is important is because the Spirit ascends us . . .he elevates us up into a realm where our minds can't predict or conceive, which means our reasoning no longer applies here.  And "in" that place, our minds are then affected by the change of elevated venue, we "become" what we behold and in "that" perspective we read Scripture as it was intended to be read, which is inwardly . . .

On the other side, if I take Scripture first, because my mind is not spirit but flesh, it is easily deceived and the zeal in me becomes misguided because I'm trying to read something that was written in an elevated place, and I'm trying to wrap my mind around something written for another realm.  "That's" why it's foolishness to everyone else.  They read it from a natural perspective and call it spiritual and those that are already listening to the spirit "in" them can see it from where the Spirit has brought them and it'll have a whole other affect in us.

If you receive truth in Scripture from what's being spoken within you, it becomes "your" experience.  But if you are basing it on what others have written and you're just copying it over, then it's not "your" experience, it's someone elses experience, it's "your" argument.  That's why we want to rely on "proof".  Truth doesn't need Scripture to "prove". Our minds demand proof, but truth requires faith.

I gotta cut this short, my access to this computer has ended and I gotta go find another one.

Well, first of all, I'm not denying spiritual things.  I am saying though, many claim things are spiritual, when in fact, they are in error.  And the scriptures are a "bottom line", WHEN ACCURATELY TRANSLATED AND SPIRIT REVEALED.  I AM NOT talking about just going by the letter, but I'm also not OK with people saying "whatever, will nilly, just believe me" either.

You said "you're saved by grace through faith, but you want proof?"   Firstly, I think that kind of pushes the envelope of what I'm personally saying.  However, where did you get that line from, "saved by grace"?   What if someone told you "you're saved by works through effort"?  What would you check that against?  Don't you think many people could be fooled by that?

I'm not even sure you and I have that big of a gripe with each other/are that far apart on this;  it was your reaction, so it must mean something to you.  I was trying to support sheila and WW.  But, now that we're here, I'll give you an example of where I'm coming from.  I won't even say who said this awhile back on the boards.  But someone gave this advice;  "sin all you want", i.e., God will take care of it, grace will cover it and "fix it", etc.    Well, exactly what do the scriptures say about that?

Well then, should we keep on sinning so that God can show us more and more of his wonderful grace?  God forbid!   Romans 6:1,2

So tell me, who should I believe, and against what do I check that person's "spiritual advice"?

And I've got absolutely no issues against you either bro.  In fact, if I'm to have this kind of conversation, I'm extremely happy to have it with you because there's more of a freedom to share without the concern that I'll offend you by it.

And . . .I so love your question and had every intention of getting to that point but ran out of time . . .which . .I'm kinda short on again here as well, but I really want to touch on this because I do think it's an awesome question.  and . .for me, the answer is really simple.

What I rely on is, the fruit of the situation.  The end result.  The sum of the message that someone is speaking, or, the end result of their actions.  What came of it?  Life?  or Death?  If I am relying on the SOUND of his voice . . .the same sound that reveals spiritual truth in Scripture to me will also speak to me as to what is abuse and what is bondage.

I've never said "just take my word for it I'm right".  It may be read that way, but that's not my intentions.  My desire is, rather than rely on our interpretation of what we think Scripture is saying about a subject, that we instead, listen for the sound of the situation to see where it aligns with the sound of life in us.  it's very easy to do.  Is there life in the idea that I can live however I want cuz I know I have a free ticket in the end?  Is that really what truth is speaking to me inwardly?

I will tell you no.  it's not because those that live like that are catering more to their flesh, which immediately the life/death dial swings difinitively toward "death".  There are only two voices at work in every situation.  Spiritual and carnal . . .same with in every one of us . . .there are two nations at war in all of us . . .there is a Jacob and there is an Esau.  The Esau side of us is our beastly nature .  .our natural man . . .he relies on flesh to sustain him, he's a hunter of flesh . . .that's an awesome picture of what's going on inside of us when you read the whole story in that light.

Jesus then comes out and says nation will fight against nation . . .the message isn't about doom and gloom to the world, but the carnality in me . . .it's a message that "appears" to be about death on the surface but underneath, it's about life and freedom.  Just like the ten plagues were plagues to the Egyptians . .. but underneath, it was the preparation of freedom comng to the Israelites.

My mind, in and of itself can not see these things . . .so again, why would one want to rely on what the mind sees Scripture to say when there is an infinite realm of truth in the spirit of what has been written?

Quote from: sheila on September 02, 2011, 04:53:01 PMSo, I challenge you,ww, to give a word by word 'correct translation'of the above...and 'prove' your hypothesis......for I tell you..it is God through the spirit

I won't take that challange.
But don't see that as proof for your view. I'm just someone that plays with smilies on a Christian forum. I never claimed I have all the answers. To be honest I don't have  a clue what verses you wrote about.
I want to add your request is a bit unfair. I could ask you to do the same with a spiritual explanation. But that would be a very simple request. I can explain every problematic concept in a spirital way. Just write something and add a lot "God showed me" and that's it.
Besides that I'll refuse to take that route it would prove nothing. In theory I can convince people of something by showing a number of verses that prove my view is right. But how would I prove that the HS revealed me something spiritual? It would be 100% impossible to refute my views. Well....., maybe it could be refuted by Scripture. But that's just the road I suggested and raises bloodpressure by some.


Another thing I keep noticing that you, and others, seem to have a black and white view on things. If it isn't spiritual then it must be literal. For me it's all about patterns. So while I'm convinced the Bible teaches Jesus was a Lamb, I'm also convinced Jesus wasn't a sheep. That's a contradiction....until you see the pattern.
I so often mention patterns and quite often explained my view on them. And still.... :sigh:
And it's are those patterns I'm looking for. Not for literal things. I simply don't accept a spiritual view if a pattern can't be shown. A pattern is a link between spiritual and literal things. Call me misguided, but it's my belief that even the deepest revelation of the HS somehow links to some literal verses through a pattern.

Now I'll try to explain why word defenitions are of such great importance.
Literal things are used to establish a pattern that point and verifies spiritual things.
BUT! if we don't understand the meaning of words the pattern is build with false assumptions. That (possibly) gives a false pattern. And false patterns allow false spiritual 'facts' to be promoted.
A chain is a strong as it's weakest link. A spiritual truth is as false as the biggest lie/mistake it's build on.

   i like patterns,too! WW :bigGrin:

   AS FAR AS BLACK AND WHITE GOES......two spirits,two men....but yes,when satan transform himself into an angel of light..you can expect gray areas.

  also,in us...as long as sin remains in our flesh...there is 'darkness' to an extent.  Now,my pov is you lean to the 'technical' side of the word...[constraint].

  and yours is I lean to far the other[too liberal].. What can I say,God has made us each so?  Maybe we can learn something beneficial from each other. :thumbsup:

    Irregardless of that,I always appreciate your contribution,know you are loved of Him..and consider you my brother :HeartThrob:

                                               peace Bro

A couple things WW . . .I know I frustrate you from time to time and sometimes I'll admit, I do it on purpose, but it's not to goad you into an argument, but it's to see if "you" believe what you're saying, or if your just repeating something you've dug up in your research that someone else stated.

So, I know a while back you would claim you're an atheist, is that still true?

And two, and a little more closer to our contentional line . . . I was a bit surprised at your last post where you stated you're more prone to look for patterns.  Because many of my points of contention with you haven't been about pattern, but about definition of a word.  But because of your emphasis of the importance of defining the word before constructing the pattern, that kind of explains itself as to why I didn't pick up on the fact you search for patterns.

As you well know I'm pretty much the opposite in my initial approach to Scripture . . .to be totally honest with you, I don't ever read Scripture with the conscious thinking that "okay, how can I see this differently from what is actually written?"  When I read Scripture, I'll just read it like anyone else, but then stuff starts flying out of the story and I hardly ever get more than 3 or 4 verses at the most when I have to stop and address the patterns that are forming themselves.  I'm not looking "for" them so much as just seeing them as they form themselves.

I don't have charts written down so I can remember the patterns or numerology or colors or whatnot.  It's a river . . .when I read Scripture, it gets the river to flow . . .I can turn it off like a faucet, but I can also turn it back on again as well.  And the more it matures in me, the harder it is for me not to apply it to all the conversations going around in the forum.  it's kinda become a part of my personality.  It's not an opinion anymore.  it's not an observation or an idea, a theology or a doctrine . .. it's kinda overtaken all of that and now it's the biggest share of me and half the time, I do all I can to just hang on to where it's going. 

And when you and I tie up in a thread, my responses to you aren't from personal offenses, my responses are to the message, not to the messenger.

I'm in another conversation right now on another forum that's unfortunately not UR for the most part, but I brought up 1 Corinthians 3 and asked the guy to explain to me how he sees it to read.  It's the one about those who build upon the foundation of Christ using a range of different kinds of materials, be it gold, silver, hay, wood or stubble . . .all their works will be tested by fire and if they used wood or straw, they will suffer great loss but the builder will be spared . . .you know the one?

I'd never heard the argument against that and I was just curious . . .the guy came back and said it's not about unbelievers versus believers . .it's about believers only.  He's reading what's literally there.  He doesn't see the fact that his conclusions are contradictory to the "nature" of who God is.  His mind is embracing the literal words that are there.  He's got the literal definitions, but he's still very much off the mark.  And "that's" my point here as well.  I don't read Scripture by definition so much because my first concern is, is it in line with God's nature. 

Because as I've said before in conversations such as this, the Pharisees were the elite of the elite when it came to knowing the original definitions, and they were lightyears ahead of us even moreso due to the fact that their personal history was the culture from when these things were unfolding.  They had it all.  But they still couldn't recognize Jesus was the Son of God and he was standing right in front of them.  That's why I say I don't rely on what my mind concludes. 

It's exactly as you said, if the Holy Spirit doesn't reveal to us what is being said, then we're warped from the beginning.

Would you have ever guessed when Peter saw the blanket drop in front of him with all those unclean animals and the conversation Peter had about what he can and can't eat, would you ever have guessed that it was "really" about God turing "from" the Jews "to" the Gentiles with the good news?  That wasn't even hinted at in the dream.  It was a huge enough deal that God was telling Peter, for the first time in Peter's religious life, that it's okay to eat a pig now!  I would think "that" would have been monumental enough.  But out of "that" little revelation came the fact that God was going to offer the same gift to the Gentiles that he'd offered the Jews.

Only the Holy Spirit could reveal that depth of meaning.  Which again is why I pose the question . . .why rely on my mind when we already know our minds are finite and flesh?  Why can't we rely solely on the sound of his voice "in" us without our minds approval as to whether the definition is accuarte or not?

Quote from: Nathan on September 02, 2011, 11:02:02 PM
Why can't we rely solely on the sound of his voice "in" us without our minds approval as to whether the definition is accuarte or not?

IMO, that's where the written Word and the Spirit witness with each other.  Also, many people apparently aren't hearing His voice "inside us", when they must think they are.  How many people who believe in ET think they're led by the Spirit?  But a little information about 'aion' and 'hell', along with the Spirit's revelation when it's their time to hear, can open their eyes.  How many people pushing New Age doctrines off as truth, believe they are being led by the Spirit?  I'd guess most of them think they're right?  They're listening to a "voice".  Take what they're saying to the written Word, have the Spirit quicken it, and one can see many of them are wolves in sheep's clothing, ripping apart the flock.

I don't know;  there's a balance here, I'm not saying I always know where it is or always get it right.  Your position may be hard to state Nathan, and some of it also may be my "hearing". 

I'm editing this.  Nathan you asked,  "Why can't we rely solely on the sound of his voice "in" us without our minds approval as to whether the definition is accuarte or not?"     

What do you think about this scrip?

All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right.  2 Timothy 3:16

I'm not big on rescuing, but I feel something needs said.  I have read many of Nathans posts here and writings outside of this board.  Not once have I seen something that can't be supported scripturally.  I have however seen much of what he writes go against current doctrines preached in churches.  I have see those who are dogmatic about issues, become irritated with him on many occasions when their dogma is challenged.  Personally, I want my dogmas challenged, I want my world shaken by the roots.

For me to read and receive Nathan's posts I have to find a dose of humility.  Why is that?  Because, I like to think I really know my Bible.  I like to think of myself as a spiritual guy.  After reading some of his stuff, I feel like I know little.  I see much truth and wonder why I could have missed that all these years.  I have not seen Nathan decrease the significance and importance of the Scriptures.  I have seen him challenge how we are supposed to use them in our walks.  I have seen him challenge how we are to use them in our understanding.  I have seen him challenge the way we discern. 

I'm not sure why I see so many posts where Nathan is needing to defend himself.

Sorry Nathan for being too persistent.  If things are alluded to several times, I may question them or ask for clarification.  Maybe in this case I've said too much, and it may have appeared I was "picking on you".

We all say things that don't come across as exactly what we really believe, myself included.

You can either address my thoughts or not. 

Blessings, James.

Whew!  Where to go from here!
First thing that comes to mind right now is "Thy word, is a lamp unt my feet, and light unto my path . . ."  What "word" is it that's a lamp and a light?  Scripture or the inner word in us?  Jabcat, the first line you wrote in your response  ..  .totally agree with you.  Without the author breathing in me there'd be no illumination to the Word at all.  Kind of like . . .ha, kinda . . as if . . .it's JUST like in the holy place where the candlestick's flame illuminates the table of shewbread.  The light of truth is the only source that can illuminate the words on the pages of Scripture and bring them to life in us.

My personal desire is not to be right or to prove I'm accurate.  That would put way too much pressure on me being accurate every time.  My desire is that  . . if you pardon my expression, but it's my desire that I get you pregnate.  I want to reproduce life.  I want to not only know, but also "be" in that abundant life Jesus spoke so much about.  I want to harmonize with the sound of truth and life in what others bring to the table.  But none of those things will happen in me if my spiritual aignment is out of order.  Should Scripture align with what the Spirit is saying in us?  uh .  . yeah-ah. 

To Shawns supportive post, I do remember creating some concern around this in the past as well.  Scripture is like salvation . . . if I can put this right without mudyying the waters even worse.  But coming into UR did rasie some questions about the importance and purpose of asking Christ into my heart bengs the final destination would be the same for all anyway.  But in maturing furthing into the UR understanding, i've come to understand it's ony increased the importance of Salvation, but the motivation has changed consderably.  Now, I'm not needing salvation based on my fear of going to hell if I dont'.  Now, I see it's importance is connected with the ability to see spiritual truths . . .God cant reveal them if there's no relationship there through which he operates.

It's the same for me with Scripture.  It's no less important, but the motivator as to "why" it's important has changed.  Now, it's not about needing to know it in order to build or base my belief.  Now, it's important because it's the matrix that leads me"into" the dimensions of God in the first place.  But relying on what I read still has no guarantees that my interpretation will be accurate if my mental belief is biased already.  I still agree with you Jabcat, we're both in agreement for the most part.  Scripture and spiritual discernment or revelation or whatever we call it, should always be in harmony with each other.  My whole point on it though is, if we put spirit ahead of Scripture, we'll not need to worry about one contradicting the other so much because the autor of Scripture is the one doing the leading in the first place.

Have you ever found yourself in an argument with someone and you really aren't in an arguing mood but for some reason, you're still in the middle of it, you hear yourself say stuff that prolongs the argument, but you don't know why that's happening?  I wonder if in this case, there's a level of the subconscious that is just automatically proddng things when our conscious side really doesn't see a distinct reason for it.  Perhaps the "idea" of someone being foolish enough to imply that knowledge may not be as much as a priority as our comfort zone sees it to be, could be what's underneath it all? 

If you think about it, it really "is" easier to let the spirit "show" us things we can't  fully comprehend, than put all our efforts in to accumulating knowledge in the attempt to try to see the same things.  But our minds have trouble fathoming the idea tht it could be "that" simple of a concept??

Oh and by the way, I welcome the questions  . .I love the opportunity of someone opening a door, especially when there's no condemning overtones mixed in with it.  Which clearly are not visible here for me at all Jabcat, so . . .if you have any other questions or want further clarification on somehting, by all means, feel free to ask!!

I'm in agreement :)

I do think I'll PM something though, as friend to friend.

Thanks, good post. 

Oh . . .I forgot . . .the Sabbath thing, the reason why I didn't go into it that much is because I've mentioned it several times before . . .

Qucikly . . .it's the "day is as a thousand years" principle . . .it's was roughly 4 thousand years from Adam to Jesus . . .it was on the fourth day the sun, moon and stars were created.  Elements of illumination.  From Jesus to today, it's "been" another 2,000 years . . .which then makes it a total of 6 days. We are at the dawning of the 7th day.  Not just us as individuals, but the whole earth is there.  Which is telling me the atmosphere spiritually has shifted from the laws of labor to the law of rest.  Which then when you overlay that with the fact that there seems to be a surgeance of UR going on around us, I believe there's a definite connection. 

Now, at the same time, there will always be those that would challenge the math.  Once again, being more of one who pursues spirit over natural, I see this Sabbath Day thing as a personal positioning anyway so if they want to argue semetics I say let them.  However . . .there "is" one other piece to the math that they "can't" question.  And that is the fact that Jesus stated "tear down this temple and in three days I will raise it up."  yeah, we know he was talking about his physical body  . .but again, everything is dimensional.  And are we not all living stones being fashioned and positioned into the house of God as we speak?  So . . .Jesus said "that" two days ago and today is the dawning of the third day which is when SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE should be  able to start seeing a resurrected church where the message is not about destruction, but resurrection . . .and once again, I think UR fits that bill to a "t" as well.  So, either way, it's a win/wn.

One last piece to the other discussion . . .why am I so bent on spiritual sound "in" me taking precedence over Scriptural translations and interpretations?

1 Corinthians 2
9But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
11For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
12Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

For me, this only affirms everything else I've already stated on the matter.  I hope you can see the same way as well.

Quote from: sheila on September 02, 2011, 10:32:51 PM
   i like patterns,too! WW :bigGrin:

   AS FAR AS BLACK AND WHITE GOES......two spirits,two men....but yes,when satan transform himself into an angel of light..you can expect gray areas.

  also,in us...as long as sin remains in our flesh...there is 'darkness' to an extent.  Now,my pov is you lean to the 'technical' side of the word...[constraint].

  and yours is I lean to far the other[too liberal]..

That's not what I'm saying. Maybe each and every letter you wrote on this forum is absolute truth. If that's true you aren't to liberal at all. My point is that I like some way of verifying your truth. I wanna be sure the words you wrote come from HS or satan dressed as an angel of light. If I trust everyone I'm in great trouble because internet is filled with contradicting teachings of people who saw the spiritual side. Yeah, you can toss the lexicon lovers on that same heap :winkgrin:

Quote from: Nathan on September 02, 2011, 11:02:02 PM
A couple things WW . . .I know I frustrate you from time to time and sometimes I'll admit, I do it on purpose, but it's not to goad you into an argument, but it's to see if "you" believe what you're saying, or if your just repeating something you've dug up in your research that someone else stated.

I posted many things, and many of those things are views of others. In that case I post a link to the article. By now I posted more than can be researched in a lifetime. But I usually filter things a bit. So in those cases I post my view.
Sometimes I see people discussing things and just post an article without having a real opinion on it. In those cases I hope it's of use for those taking part of that discussion. Or I post something I disagree with in the UR refuted sections. I also like to do some brainstorming and ask for feedback of my toughts. THIS thread (http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/members_lounge/lake_fire_molten_sea_glass_laver_9507.msg119448.html#msg119448) is the best example of that.

QuoteSo, I know a while back you would claim you're an atheist, is that still true?

I think I'm becoming a Jekyll and Hyde :winkgrin: Let's just say that calling myself a Christian is an insult to every Christian.

QuoteAnd two, and a little more closer to our contentional line . . . I was a bit surprised at your last post where you stated you're more prone to look for patterns.  Because many of my points of contention with you haven't been about pattern, but about definition of a word.  But because of your emphasis of the importance of defining the word before constructing the pattern, that kind of explains itself as to why I didn't pick up on the fact you search for patterns.

I'm not always looking for patterns. It's hard to explain how my brain works. But basicly I collect massive amounts of information and do some pre-filtering. But everythig is remembered. I don't fear leaving the flock to find my stuff. And then suddenly, even when doing something totally unrelated, I see two bits of info allign. I truely don't know how I do those things. The searching for defenitions give me more info to store. Info that can proof useful for later use. I don't know how to explain my thought process. I very often do things while thinking of other things.
I'm sure Jabcat has some professional views on that :winkgrin:
I can't explain it. Let's just say I'm usually doing one thing. Even if it looks like one thing it often isn't  :mshock:

QuoteAs you well know I'm pretty much the opposite in my initial approach to Scripture . . .to be totally honest with you, I don't ever read Scripture with the conscious thinking that "okay, how can I see this differently from what is actually written?"  When I read Scripture, I'll just read it like anyone else, but then stuff starts flying out of the story and I hardly ever get more than 3 or 4 verses at the most when I have to stop and address the patterns that are forming themselves.  I'm not looking "for" them so much as just seeing them as they form themselves.

It that case you may understand part of what I wrote just above.
It's almost impossible for me tho read a whole chapther. It goes a bit like this. Jesus says something about a goat. Then my mind automaticly jumps to Leviticus. Or when I read about Peleg my mind jumps to secular science. So for me it starts flying to. But in another direction.

QuoteI'm in another conversation right now on another forum that's unfortunately not UR for the most part, but I brought up 1 Corinthians 3 and asked the guy to explain to me how he sees it to read.  It's the one about those who build upon the foundation of Christ using a range of different kinds of materials, be it gold, silver, hay, wood or stubble . . .all their works will be tested by fire and if they used wood or straw, they will suffer great loss but the builder will be spared . . .you know the one?

I know the concept but not in what book it can be found. I make extensive use of electronic Bibles to search. After all this time I still can't name all the books of the OT or NT. Many/most on this forum read whole chapthers/books for context. I do so to but on a much more limited scale. I look for a red thread as my context. So while for many the context of Romans 6:8 is Romans 6:1-15 for me it is Gen 3:25, Leviticus 2:3-8 and Revelation 1:8-10. Just as an example. The verses are totally unrelated. Maybe that's the reason I don't know all the books in The Bible.

QuoteI'd never heard the argument against that and I was just curious . . .the guy came back and said it's not about unbelievers versus believers . .it's about believers only.  He's reading what's literally there.  He doesn't see the fact that his conclusions are contradictory to the "nature" of who God is.  His mind is embracing the literal words that are there.  He's got the literal definitions, but he's still very much off the mark.  And "that's" my point here as well.  I don't read Scripture by definition so much because my first concern is, is it in line with God's nature.

I think part of the works of all people that ever lived will be burned up. That's what I get from literal things. I see 2 judgements. One of works and one of faith. The moment I wrote judgement my mind jumps to the defenition stored somewhere in my head. A very interesting defenition that opens huge doors for UR views I might add.

QuoteBecause as I've said before in conversations such as this, the Pharisees were the elite of the elite when it came to knowing the original definitions, and they were lightyears ahead of us even moreso due to the fact that their personal history was the culture from when these things were unfolding.  They had it all.  But they still couldn't recognize Jesus was the Son of God and he was standing right in front of them.  That's why I say I don't rely on what my mind concludes.

Very little of what said was of His own. Take for example the parables. They were (almost) all commonly used by the leaders to teach the common people. "Pluck out your eye" was just one of a whole series of teachings about the same thing. Yes the Pharisees had their flaws. Question to you. Say you are forced to place a $10000 bet on the average (or best) Pharisee teacher or Christian teacher. Jesus will judge their teachings on correctness.
On who would you put your money? I would put it on the Pharisee.

QuoteOnly the Holy Spirit could reveal that depth of meaning.  Which again is why I pose the question . . .why rely on my mind when we already know our minds are finite and flesh?  Why can't we rely solely on the sound of his voice "in" us without our minds approval as to whether the definition is accuarte or not?

But the HS can also live in a lexicon. Maybe Thayer was inspired when he penned down all of those defenitions. Ok, or possesed by the devil. If God is everwhere in His creation then I wouldn't suprised He has hidden little gems all over the place. Could be in a secular archeology book. In a vision. In verse. Or in a lexicon

Quote from: WhiteWings on September 03, 2011, 10:43:31 AM
If God is everwhere in His creation then I wouldn't suprised He has hidden little gems all over the place. Could be in a secular archeology book. In a vision. In verse. Or in a lexicon

Or on a discussion forum   :wink2:

During the recent banking crisis, goldmansachs ran into the arms of the Treasury saying, we're a bank make us a bank.  They were embraced and made a bank and thereby allowed to enjoy the covering of Tarp and other perqs offered only to banks and not to rapacious hedge funds.  Thus, they were saved to ply their evil wares another day.

Divine Justice will not be so forgiving, for which cause I am a literalist.  Evil will not be allowed to transform itself into an angel of light.  It will be wiped off the face of the earth.

Quote from: jabcat on September 03, 2011, 10:55:10 AM

Quote from: WhiteWings on September 03, 2011, 10:43:31 AM
If God is everwhere in His creation then I wouldn't suprised He has hidden little gems all over the place. Could be in a secular archeology book. In a vision. In verse. Or in a lexicon

Or on a discussion forum   :wink2:

Absolutely. His angels often have dirty wings and his prophets don't always kno they prophesy.

John 5:25-29 is talking about the first and second resurrection.

Quote from: Molly on September 03, 2011, 04:37:34 PM
John 5:25-29 is talking about the first and second resurrection.

Absolutely.

Amen! Mark 5;8   'COME OUT OF HIM"