Posted on 04/12/2008 7:19:29 AM PDT by DouglasKC
"Presumably" exactly because scripture doesn't say what happened to them. However, we can deal with what was written after this event.
Mat 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Mat 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
I'm not exactly sure what your position is, but these saints didn't go to heaven. Scripture doesn't say it. Subsequent writers never mention it.
There are saints mentioned elsewhere. Hebrews 11 lists the leaders of faith, all of whom died for their faith. Yet they have not yet received the promise of eternal life:
Heb 11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
Heb 11:40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.
God's plan is for all his saints to be perfected at the same time, at his return:
1Th 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
Those who sleep, are dead in the grave, will be resurrected to glory with those who are alive and are Christ's at his return.
These are the same ones pictured here:
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshiped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
So scripturally you have to believe that like Lazarus, these saints lived for a period of time and then died.
And the word "dead" is where we differ. Righteous life leads to eternal life, not death.
A righteous life does not lead to eternal life. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Only the sacrifice and acceptance of Christ will lead to eternal life. And as pointed out, this doesn't happen until Christ returns. We don't already have eternal life, we receive it as a gift of God.:
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
And how can Elijah be dead if he was taken away on a Chariot of Fire?
He was certainly taken away by a chariot of fire, but he wasn't carried away into heaven, at least the heaven you're thinking of:
2Ki 2:11 And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.
"Heaven" can and does refer to the skies, the atmosphere. Elijah was taken up into the sky in a whirlwind. God simply moved him to another location on earth. The proof of this is found later in scripture. Thirteen years after Elijah was carried away, Jeroham received a letter from him:
2Ch 21:12 And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet, saying, Thus saith the LORD God of David thy father, Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah,
2Ch 21:13 But hast walked in the way of the kings of Israel, and hast made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to go a whoring, like to the whoredoms of the house of Ahab, and also hast slain thy brethren of thy father's house, which were better than thyself:
Why did God move Elijah to another location? Maybe so the mantle would be passed without controversy? Who knows? But scripture is entirely consistent if we only examine it. That was the promise. And how can Elijah be dead if he was taken away on a Chariot of Fire?
Great post!
Try as I might, I'm not able to see your point. Can you explain what you're driving at here?
You wrote:
“And this blows my mind. Mary would NEVER have called herself sinless.”
Right. Did Jesus ever call Him sinless? I don’t recall seeing a verse like that, but there might be one.
“She would have recognized her sin and have accepted the sacrifice of Christ to cleanse her from it.”
And she would have considered herself fortunate to receive Christ’s grace even if she was sinless.
“It’s simply unrealistic that John, the author, the caretaker of Mary after the death of Jesus, would write this and NOT say “except Mary”.”
No, actually it isn’t at all. Mary is rarely if ever mentioned after the events of Pentecost precisely because she was taken into protection by John after Jesus’ death. We hear almost nothing about her even though we know she must have lived for years afterward.
Correctly. Worship is adoration and I don’t give adoration to Mary. Never have. Never will.
“The Catholic Encyclopedia’s definition of Adoration has this as a component:”
Whoa! Cutting a sentence in half won’t help you when this is the first part of that sentence (and the first sentence of the article):
“In the strict sense, an act of religion offered to God in acknowledgment of His supreme perfection and dominion, and of the creature’s dependence upon Him;”
And here’s the fourth sentence to the end of the first paragraph:
“This worship called forth by God, and given exclusively to Him as God, is designated by the Greek name latreia (latinized, latria), for which the best translation that our language affords is the word Adoration. Adoration differs from other acts of worship, such as supplication, confession of sin, etc., inasmuch as it formally consists in self-abasement before the Infinite, and in devout recognition of His transcendent excellence. An admirable example of adoration is given in the Apocalypse vii 11, 12: “And all the angels stood rouud about the throne, and about the ancients, and about the living creatures; and they fell before the throne upon their faces, and adored God, saying: Amen. Beneditiction and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, honour, and power, and strength to our God. forever and ever. Amen.” The revealed precept to adore god was spoken to Moses upon Sinai and reaffirmed in the words of Christ: “The Lord thy God thou shalt adore, and Him only shalt thou serve” (Matthew 4:10).”
Notice that? “This worship called forth by God, and given exclusively to Him as God is designated by the Greek name latreia (latinized, latria), for which the best translation that our language affords is the word Adoration.”
Case closed. If you have to cut sentences in half to make your case, then you don’t have one.
Modalism is where God is behind the scenes, and shows himself sometimes as Father, sometimes as Son, sometimes as Holy Spirit. Since his real person is though God...behind the scenes, we never encounter him personally—since we only know him through those roles. I’m not saying you are believing that, however, the author of the website and the organization/church he represents seems to be teaching that.
While the word trinity itself is not found in scripture, all of its concepts are. The Father is God, Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God. At the same time, the Father is not Jesus, the Father is not the Holy Spirit, and Jesus is not the Holy Spirit. Distinct real persons (not merely roles) yet each one one in essence. While describing it that way comes from tradition, none-the-less it is fully orthodox and biblical—and has been the formula since at least Athanasius, before Nicea. Show me Christians who compromise on this, and I’ll show you Christians becoming a cult—it is that important.
As far as holidays, in importance, its a mere distraction (though I do believe there is biblical evidence the 1st Century churches worshiped on Sunday), and not important, according to Col 2:16. I would never cry “heretic” or break with someone over the observation of holidays. On the nature of God, the Trinity, definitely....and besides, it’s a point of commonality with Roman Catholics (they’ve always been orthodox on the Trinity)—so to convince them, one should use orthodox sources.
It seems your argument is Catholics worship Mary, they just don't know it. Or do you think this is some kind of deep dark ritual and we worship Mary just prior to sacrificing babies(the latter being as absurd as the former)?
Since you have yet to find any Catholic who supports your assertion that Catholics worship Mary, more or less any Church doctrine to that effect, I wonder why you persist in trying to convince us we do?
I really do admire so much about the Catholic Church, and there have been many a moment where I've considered "crossing the Tiber". But there are extremely important theological issues, points of doctrine, I just can't in good conscience agree with. For me, Mary is the biggest road block. I could never pray to anyone other than God (whether that be any of the persons of the Trinity: as Father, as Son, or as Holy Spirit). There's a lot that attracts me to the Church but there are some big things that repel me, too. For as many things as I agree with, I can point to things I disagree with.
Like Luther, I have to go on reason, intellect, conscience, and guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Let me put this into perspective again. John writes:
1Jn 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
1Jn 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1Jn 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
John makes an exception for nobody. Nobody. Yet those who would say Mary was sinless are forcing Mary into a position of making Christ a liar and saying that she has no truth in her. By making her sinless, you make Christ a liar and make Mary a deceiver.
“The Catholic Encyclopedia’s definition of Adoration has this as a component:” Whoa! Cutting a sentence in half won’t help you when this is the first part of that sentence (and the first sentence of the article):
I was clear that it was a component of "Adoration" and the component I quoted pertained to how Catholicism seems to regard Mary.
****************
Surely one can see that Mary is unique among women?
Scripture teaches and if I'm not mistaken this organization most likely teaches that God has only revealed himself through the son:
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Joh 6:46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.
1Jn 4:12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
While the word trinity itself is not found in scripture, all of its concepts are. The Father is God, Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God. At the same time, the Father is not Jesus, the Father is not the Holy Spirit, and Jesus is not the Holy Spirit. Distinct real persons (not merely roles) yet each one one in essence. While describing it that way comes from tradition, none-the-less it is fully orthodox and biblical—and has been the formula since at least Athanasius, before Nicea. Show me Christians who compromise on this, and I’ll show you Christians becoming a cult—it is that important.
It may be orthodox and traditional, but it's not biblical. Every picture of the Godhead in heaven is comprised of two individuals, the father and son:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
No person called "Holy Spirit" up there in heaven.
Dan 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
Father and son.
Rev 22:3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
No throne for the holy spirit.
Rev 22:1 And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
Again.
Rev 7:10 And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.
No praise for another, separate entity called "the holy spirit".
I can give scripture after scripture that affirm the Godhead is comprised of the father and son.
Adding a third person to the Godhead obscures a great truth. Marriage is a God given picture of the type of relationship the father and son have. A perfect marriage (if one were possible) would be one where the husband and wife were completely in agreement about goals, aims, direction and ambitions. They are two separate people, but unified as one.
. On the nature of God, the Trinity, definitely....and besides, it’s a point of commonality with Roman Catholics (they’ve always been orthodox on the Trinity)—so to convince them, one should use orthodox sources.
I've always found biblical truth to be a more effective tool. If you feel comfortable accepting Roman Catholic tradition on the trinity instead of biblical evidence than that's your choice.
I'm curious - I think I had this discussion with you in this thread, but I may be wrong. How does Hebrews relate?
"No, you have approached Mount Zion and the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and countless angels in festal gathering, and the assembly of the firstborn enrolled in heaven, and God the judge of all, and the spirits of the just made perfect, and Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and the sprinkled blood that speaks more eloquently than that of Abel." - Heb. 12:22-24
It seems pretty clear that the spririts of the just have been made perfect, and are currently in Heaven. How else do you explain this?
Also...you claim the saints after the tearing of the veil did not go to Heaven because the Bible does not explicitly say so. I agree. But it also doesn't say they went back into their graves. And your quote from Hebrews concerns what had happened to the OT leaders - they could not enter Heaven, regardless of their faith, until Christ atoned for them. Further, in my quote from Hebrews above - the assembly of the firstborn - who are they? I think, reading the whole in context, it speaks directly about the "firstborn" - the Jews listed in Hebrews 11. How do you read that?
A righteous life does not lead to eternal life. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Only the sacrifice and acceptance of Christ will lead to eternal life. And as pointed out, this doesn't happen until Christ returns. We don't already have eternal life, we receive it as a gift of God.
I agree eternal life is a gift of God - but do you subscribe to the school that, for example, American Indians living in 100AD are all condemned to Hell because they did not accept Christ?
And how can Elijah be dead if he was taken away on a Chariot of Fire?
This begs the question - is Elijah dead?
She did give birth to Jesus, but that honor could have been bestowed upon anyone God chose. John knew both Mary and Jesus personally. He didn't mince words. He didn't exclude Mary. He didn't exclude himself. He said clearly that if ANYONE claims their sinless than they're deceived and they make a liar out of Jesus Christ.
******************
And yet, He didn't. For some reason, God chose Mary.
If you read it fast and out of context than you can certainly come to that conclusion.
Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
The author is addressing people who are alive. These Christians haven't literally come to Mount Zion or any of this other stuff yet, but they've drawn near. Greene's Literal Translation renders the verse above as:
Heb 12:22 But you have drawn near Mount Zion, even the city of the living God, to a heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels,
Nobody alive is in the city of the living God. We're not in the heavenly Jerusalem. But we have drawn near. It's our promise.
Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
But we have come to the church of the firstborn, the general assembly, whose name are "written in heaven". The Literal translation again:
Heb 12:23 and to a gathering, an assembly of the first-born ones having been enrolled in Heaven; and to God the Judge of all, and to spirits of just ones who have been perfected;
That word translated "written" in the King James and "enrolled" in the Literal Translation means "a list, an enrollment". So the names of Christians HAVE been enrolled in heaven. We have a spot there. But nobody is there yet. It's an open enrollment. You can have 10,000 people enrolled at a university but if it's not the start of the school year than nobody is there.
Heb 12:23 and to a gathering, an assembly of the first-born ones having been enrolled in Heaven; and to God the Judge of all, and to spirits of just ones who have been perfected;
This last highlighted part is different than the enrollment in heaven. Our (Christians) spirits have been perfected through the indwelling of Christ.
Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
We've been brought to Jesus, and the other things mentioned here.
I agree eternal life is a gift of God - but do you subscribe to the school that, for example, American Indians living in 100AD are all condemned to Hell because they did not accept Christ?
Not at all. When Christ died on the cross his death atoned for the sins of all mankind, living and dead, past and future. However as in your example not everyone has had the chance to hear and accept this wonderful good news. That's why God in his infinite wisdom is going to stage 3 resurrections. The first resurrection is the resurrection that Christians and those who died in Christ will have:
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshiped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
When Christ returns, Christians and those who sleep in Christ will be instantly transformed:
1Co 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
Christians, the chosen of God, will live and reign in a milleniel kingdom for 1000 years.
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
After the thousand years, there is another resurrection, this one to physical life of those who were not called by God in their lifetimes:
Rev 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
This passage is describing a process, a judgment period, where God's plan and the redemption of Christ is explained and taught to people out of "the books", the books of the bible. People are being given the chance to accept the sacrifice of Christ and their response ("their works") determines their destiny. This is the group that your example Indians would be part of.
This begs the question - is Elijah dead?
He is now. See the end of post 221.
And for some reason God chose Paul:
1Co 15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
1Co 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.
Paul didn't have to be perfect for God to use him.
Nobody has to be perfect for the spirit of Christ to indwell in us and thank God for that!
Mat 9:13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
None. Including Mary.
“It seems your argument is Catholics worship Mary, they just don’t know it. Or do you think this is some kind of deep dark ritual and we worship Mary just prior to sacrificing babies(the latter being as absurd as the former)?”
Exactly. I think many of our fellow Christians think that we do worship Mary, but just don’t know we do. Thus Catholics are awful at worshipping Mary, because we don’t admit to our goddess worship, even to ourselves — imagine how poor the unknowing worship has got to be as compared to knowing worship. So they think we are goddess worshipers, but are just aweful at it.
And some of our fellow Christians think that there is a conspiracy (but a poor one, as they’ve easily seen right through our lies) of goddess worship amongst Catholics who actually know that they worship Mary, but deny it. What they think the reason for these denials are I couldn’t say. It’s not like the Church has ever been afraid of the scorn of other Christians. “Oh no!! These other Christians who already know that we worship Mary will think even worse of us!! Sob!!
Freegards
Basically it's an argument over the role assigned Mary your theology. Can a Catholic believe that Mary was a sinner because the bible teaches that everyone sins except Jesus? Can a Catholic believe that prayers to Mary aren't being heard by Mary because she's dead because the bible teaches that the dead have no knowledge?
It seems your argument is Catholics worship Mary, they just don't know it. Or do you think this is some kind of deep dark ritual and we worship Mary just prior to sacrificing babies(the latter being as absurd as the former)?
To be honest I just think it boils down good intentions coupled with an unwillingness to question tradition.
Since you have yet to find any Catholic who supports your assertion that Catholics worship Mary, more or less any Church doctrine to that effect, I wonder why you persist in trying to convince us we do?
As so eloquently pointed out by Mr. Twain by any measure except perhaps the insistence of Catholicism to the contrary it certainly seems as if Mary is an object of worship for Catholicism.
As far as my purpose I have no choice in the manner. It's incumbent upon the church of God to correct doctrine that is in error.
2Ti 4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;
2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
A perfect example of the problems of Sola Scriptura. Here you come to a profund theological conclusion based only on your personal interpretation of exactly one verse in Scripture
To be honest I just think it boils down good intentions coupled with an unwillingness to question tradition.
So your argument is that Catholics are too stupid to know we are worshiping Mary?
As so eloquently pointed out by Mr. Twain by any measure except perhaps the insistence of Catholicism to the contrary it certainly seems as if Mary is an object of worship for Catholicism.
So it seems to everyone that Catholics worship Mary except to Catholics ? It appears then that the problem is not that Catholic worship mary but ignorance on the part of most Protestants on how Catholics view Mary
As far as my purpose I have no choice in the manner. It's incumbent upon the church of God to correct doctrine that is in error.
What doctrine is that? I am not aware of any doctrine that calls on Catholics to worship Mary.
You wrote:
“Let me put this into perspective again. John writes:”
You’re not putting it into perspective. What you’re doing is c,aiming one thing means another. The verse reads: “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”
I never, EVER, claimed I have no sin. Stop insinuating that I did claim that. To say that Mary was sinless is not the same thing as “we say WE have no sin.” Stop pretending the verse is talking about one thing when it is actually talking about another.
“John makes an exception for nobody. Nobody.”
John says WE. I am not talking about myself.
“Yet those who would say Mary was sinless are forcing Mary into a position of making Christ a liar and saying that she has no truth in her.”
Completely false. Those who say Mary was sinless merely speak the truth of God’s power and mercy. There is no lie in His power nor in His mercy.
“By making her sinless, you make Christ a liar and make Mary a deceiver.”
We are not making Mary sinless. CHRIST’S GRACE made Mary sinless. Christ’s grace cannot make liars or deceivers. Period.
Gee, I noticed you didn’t even comment on the fact that you were caught cutting half the sentence away from your quote of the Catholic Encyclopedia. Why is that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.