Dr. Stanley and Eternal Security

[skypair]

History Of The​

Millennial Teaching​

The early apostles did not teach a millennial reign. That doctrine came much later in church history when the Roman Catholic Pope commissioned two Jesuit Priests (Ribera and Alcuser) to publish a teaching that would counter the Protestant belief that the Pope was the Antichrist. ​

Better get rid of that "source." He does nothing by scripture but line his own pockets! You should be ashamed!

skypair​

 

[skypair]

Christ speaks of one resurrection yet to come but in order to justify the Millemium reign, don't we have to come up with two more resurrections to come. One would be the "rapture", and the other one would be the lost after the Millemium. Does that not go against the Doctrine of Christ? Also, Christ would have to come back 2 more times instead of one.

"Come" means to the earth (not to the heavens alone). In the Olivet Discourse, Acts 1, and elsewhere, His "coming" again is to the Mount of Olives. The rapture is to the clouds in the air" and will be seen by all Christians wherever they are as the lightning from east to west IMO.

According to the following scriptures is there not but one resurrection to come?

Matthew 13:30, 49-50, Matthew 25:31-46, John 5:28-29, Acts 24:15, II Thessalonians 1:6-10, Revelation 1:7 Revelation 20:12-15, I Corinthians 15:51-52

Mt 13 - yes, in the scriptures you cite. But where did the "mustard seed"/church disappear to in this whole range of parables?

MT 25:31-46 -- yes, to judge the nations. But why do you leave out 25:1-13? There He comes near the camp but believers/5 wise virgins, GUT to meet Him.

John 5:38-39 means there is a "time" ("hour") for everyone to be judged. No, I cannot think of any time when all will come forth at once and neither can you. The rapture and first resurrection is believers only. The second resurrection is unbelievers and is 1000 years later than the first.

Acts 24:15 -- Paul referring to the first and second resurrections, period.

2Thes 1:6-10 -- rapture followed by 7 years later by Christ's return to destroy unbelievers.

Rev 1:7 -- no doubt you've heard of a "televised event." Same thing happens when the 2 witnesses arise.

Rev 20:1-4 -- first resurrection of OT and trib saints -- no "bad guys."

1Cor 15:51-52 -- pretrib and postMK raptures, the former TO Christ in the air and NJ, the latter WITH Christ to NJ.

skypair

 

[skypair]

I do not think so. Your premillemium did not really get started until the ninetenth century by a John Napier, as best I can remember.

Oh, stop with your "doctrines of men" already!! Can you really not see anything else like Rev 20 that establishes the "first resurrection" pre-1000 years??? Do you truly not understand the parables in Mt 13:33-50, Mt 22, Mt 25:14-50, etc. to be the resurrection and judgment of believers into His 1000 year kingdom?? How about OT? Psa 50:3-5, Job 14:13-14, 19:25-28, Isa 26:19-21, Mt 24:31, etc.? You're trained in this and still let laymen such as myself "walk circles around you??" :laugh:

I know that I do not teach that the general resurrection has already happened, when all that are in the graves shall come forth, unto them that have done good, the resurrection of life, unto them that have done evil, the resurrection of damnation. Jesus taught one more resurrection to come, you and others teach at least 2 more.

What makes you think any WRONG eschatology is any better in God's eyes than Hymenaeous' was??

You teach that Jesus returns and is not even a part of the First Resurrection.

You got me there. :laugh: So Jesus hasn't already been resurrected?? I teach He sends out His angels at the first resurrection, Mt 24:31.

No, a resurrection is not raising to the earth and staying there. A resurrection is to come out of the grave, and as the children of God, be received up into the heavens.

Like I said, Paul often treats rapture and resurrection the same. The OT saints DEFINITELY (scriptures I quoted above) expected to be resurrected to the earth bodily in the "first resurrection," the "resurrection of the just."

Also, You say we do not know it to be true that "many arose with Christ"! Jesus told us so, and I believe Him.

NEVER said that! You must be thinking of someone else.

Jesus took both souls and bodies to Heaven which is a resurrection and Christ being the firstfruits.

No, technically it is a RAPTURE to go to heaven.

Where in your theology of the thousand year reign, does it teach that Jesus came back? Also, only the souls lived and reigned, where is the resurrection?

You are misreading Rev 20:4 there, mate. The souls appear before the throne to receive in their bodies what they have inherited. You appear to believe in "soul sleep." Is that it? No, we have all kinds of scripture (Job 14, 19, Psa 50, etc) telling us that the receive bodies.

After the thousand years, the rest of the dead lived, this being the first resurrection. This is the First resurrection "rest of the dead".

Wow! You got yourself all messed up! The first resurrection is NOT after 1000 years in 20:5 --- 20:5 says the preceding is the first resurrection and the second is after 1000 years because 20:6 says those in the second resurrection are subject to the second DEATH!!

I am pleased to find that I have many who believe as I do and I didn't know so many knew it was only souls that lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years, of which if it happened today, you or I would not be able to see it.

IOW, all your resurrection theology can be summed up in Rev 20:4-6 and Rev 20:11 is the "first resurrection" AKA "great white throne." OK, let's see who gets raised there --- "13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. 14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." These are ALL UNBELIEVERS, Bob!! They were devoured by the angels and left on/in the earth (20:9) while the BELIEVERS were raptured away with Christ's throne to heaven (20:10). In 20:13-14, the DEAD are called from the sea, graves, even hell -- they were "dead," slain by angels, not saved at the last rapture!!

If only the souls of the beheaded will be in the thousand year reign, what does it have to do with us. I am just raising the questions that many many people raise, down through time.

Precisely nothing. The OT passages I gave you and Mt 13:44-45 (if you understood them raying: ) would tell you that Rev 20:4 is only the dead trib saints -- both Jew/treasure and Gentile/pearl -- resurrected to their judgment with LIVING Jews/wheat and Gentiles/fish of which Mt 25:14-46 also speaks.

Just curious --- what denom, seminary, man, ??? ... taught you your resurrection doctrine??

skypair

 

[J. Jump]

Please tell all of us the difference between "eternal saved and eternal life? It don't make any sense.

Eternally saved and eternal life if you want to call it that are the same thing, although everlasting life is really a better and more accurate of saying it.

If you say you have a King but He is not ruling yet, that kinda throws me off, but is not a lie as you accuse. It is kinda like saying you are a Baptist, but don't believe in baptizing.

Brother Bob why do you keep trying to justify something that you have done that is wrong? If you don't understand something then ask for clarification. But your lack of understanding doesn't give you the right to make false claims (lie) about someone. Right?

I asked for the same and did not receive it.

Brother you asked me to apologize for your mistake. Sorry I don't think I need to do that and my conscience is perfectly at peace on that. You were the one that continued to make false claims about me. I don't have to apologize for calling you on the carpet for that.
Maybe I should have done so in private instead of on the board, so for that I will apologize. We certainly don't need to air our laundry in front of many others.

Why did it take nineteen hundred years for it to become a doctrine that was not called "heresy".

As I believe EdSutton has said this doctrine has been "heresy" for a long time and is stll considered as much by some today, so claiming that this doctrine is heresy doesn't do anything to help one's case.

Oh, now we find out that no one is going to Heaven in the end. The church sure is preaching wrong according to you. I didn't know you didn't believe we were going to Heaven.

If you don't want to go to Heaven, then listen to J. Jump. He says the children of God will not go to Heaven to live, if I understood him right.

Yes you are correct there are a number of church traditions that are taught in error. One of them happens to be that eternity will be spent in "heaven." There is no Scriptural support for this especially when Scripture tells us that God's throne is going to be on the earth in the midst of His people. So why would you want to go to a place where God Himself is not going to be? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

You need to talk with Jesus, He is the one that came up with the one resurrection to come.

Jhn 5:28Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
Jhn 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.

This is talking about the rapture. There is no evidence that I am aware of that there is one general resurrection and one general judgment.

I have found out that you don't think you make mistakes, so an apology would not be real anyway.

Why do you keep personally insulting me? You are a liar. You can not prove that I think I don't make mistakes. I have had to eat crow many times and even here on the board I have admitted to mistakes. Why do you keep issuing insults and personal slurs? Do you think it helps your cause?

 

[J. Jump]

I perceive you are either self taught or man taught but definitely not Spirit taught on this.

Right back at you. Time will tell.

 

[Brother Bob]

Skypair; you post all those scriptures and cause me to have to look each on up to see if it made any sense and they were all off the mark, and had nothing to do with the thousand year reign. It was just Skypair doctrine all the way.

Better get rid of that "source." He does nothing by scripture but line his own pockets! You should be ashamed!

skypair

He is not alone, I don't expect you to agree with anyone who does not fit into your theology.

Originally Posted by Brother Bob
Christ speaks of one resurrection yet to come but in order to justify the Millemium reign, don't we have to come up with two more resurrections to come. One would be the "rapture", and the other one would be the lost after the Millemium. Does that not go against the Doctrine of Christ? Also, Christ would have to come back 2 more times instead of one.
"Come" means to the earth (not to the heavens alone). In the Olivet Discourse, Acts 1, and elsewhere, His "coming" again is to the Mount of Olives. The rapture is to the clouds in the air" and will be seen by all Christians wherever they are as the lightning from east to west IMO. You opinions are the problem. Jesus is going to come in the same manner He left in a cloud of Glory, scripture calls it "return in same like manner", but you want to say because we will meet Him in the air, that it does not mean come.

Quote:
According to the following scriptures is there not but one resurrection to come?

Matthew 13:30, 49-50, Matthew 25:31-46, John 5:28-29, Acts 24:15, II Thessalonians 1:6-10, Revelation 1:7 Revelation 20:12-15, I Corinthians 15:51-52
Mt 13 - yes, in the scriptures you cite. But where did the "mustard seed"/church disappear to in this whole range of parables?

MT 25:31-46 -- yes, to judge the nations. But why do you leave out 25:1-13? There He comes near the camp but believers/5 wise virgins, GUT to meet Him. (I left it out because its not a resurrection, but "likened unto one", there is a difference, don't you know that Skypair?

John 5:38-39 means there is a "time" ("hour") for everyone to be judged. No, I cannot think of any time when all will come forth at once and neither can you. The rapture and first resurrection is believers only. The second resurrection is unbelievers and is 1000 years later than the first. (Jesus said ALL, shalt come forth), Again that is not the doctrine of Skypair though!!

Acts 24:15 -- Paul referring to the first and second resurrections, period.

15: And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust. (again, you leave the doctrine of the scripture and go to the Skypair doctrine.

2Thes 1:6-10 -- rapture followed by 7 years later by Christ's return to destroy unbelievers. 9: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction (Where did you get 7 years, oh I know, Skypair doctrine.

Rev 1:7 -- no doubt you've heard of a "televised event." Same thing happens when the 2 witnesses arise. (Oh, in Skypair doctrine we will be watching television?)

Rev 20:1-4 -- first resurrection of OT and trib saints -- no "bad guys." I saw the souls of them that were beheaded (Have to use Skypair doctrine here again, to get to the OT and trib saints.)

1Cor 15:51-52 -- pretrib and postMK raptures, the former TO Christ in the air and NJ, the latter WITH Christ to NJ. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23: But every man in his own order ( Well, it says ALL again, so we have to go to Skypair doctrine again.)

skypair So, you have a disagreement with the Lord here. He said ALL that are in the grave shall come forth, you don't believe ........all is all, then do you?

Hogwash. Don't you believe the words of Jesus Himself, He is the Resurrection and I believe He knows more about than you or me.

Jhn 5:28Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

Jhn 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.

Originally Posted by Brother Bob
I do not think so. Your premillemium did not really get started until the ninetenth century by a John Napier, as best I can remember.
Oh, stop with your "doctrines of men" already!! Can you really not see anything else like Rev 20 that establishes the "first resurrection" pre-1000 years??? Do you truly not understand the parables in Mt 13:33-50, Mt 22, Mt 25:14-50, etc. to be the resurrection and judgment of believers into His 1000 year kingdom?? How about OT? Psa 50:3-5, Job 14:13-14, 19:25-28, Isa 26:19-21, Mt 24:31, etc.? You're trained in this and still let laymen such as myself "walk circles around you??" :laugh: Well, I don't have the Skypair doctrine to use.

You are adding the thousand years and you give me scripture where anyone will be in the thousand year reign, except "beheaded souls".

I know that I do not teach that the general resurrection has already happened, when all that are in the graves shall come forth, unto them that have done good, the resurrection of life, unto them that have done evil, the resurrection of damnation. Jesus taught one more resurrection to come, you and others teach at least 2 more. What makes you think any WRONG eschatology is any better in God's eyes than Hymenaeous' was??

That makes about as much sense as falling off a log backwards. Those words are the words of Jesus, you speak heresy.

Quote:
You teach that Jesus returns and is not even a part of the First Resurrection.
You got me there. :laugh: So Jesus hasn't already been resurrected?? I teach He sends out His angels at the first resurrection, Mt 24:31. (So here you agree that Jesus is a part of the first resurrection and it took place over 2000 years ago, well that is what I been arguing all along.)


Quote:

Where do you find this in the thousand year reign. You just add it as you need it dont' you.

Quote:
I am pleased to find that I have many who believe as I do and I didn't know so many knew it was only souls that lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years, of which if it happened today, you or I would not be able to see it.
IOW, all your resurrection theology can be summed up in Rev 20:4-6 and Rev 20:11 is the "first resurrection" AKA "great white throne." OK, let's see who gets raised there --- "13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. 14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." These are ALL UNBELIEVERS, Bob!! They were devoured by the angels and left on/in the earth (20:9) while the BELIEVERS were raptured away with Christ's throne to heaven (20:10). In 20:13-14, the DEAD are called from the sea, graves, even hell -- they were "dead," slain by angels, not saved at the last rapture!!

Jesus said they would all come forth at the same hour!

:If only the souls of the beheaded will be in the thousand year reign, what does it have to do with us. I am just raising the questions that many many people raise, down through time. Precisely nothing. The OT passages I gave you and Mt 13:44-45 (if you understood them raying: ) would tell you that Rev 20:4 is only the dead trib saints -- both Jew/treasure and Gentile/pearl -- resurrected to their judgment with LIVING Jews/wheat and Gentiles/fish of which Mt 25:14-46 also speaks. 44: Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field.
45: Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls: (Again, we going to have to resort to Skypair doctrine for this is parables that Jesus likened unto the Kingdom.)


Just curious --- what denom, seminary, man, ??? ... taught you your resurrection doctrine?? (Sure glad it was not Skypair).

skypair

You got your hands full with the junk you post on here. I have said nothing in the past but will be watching in the future for you weird posts.

Do you deny that the Kingdom exists within the believers also?

Quote:
BBob; If you don't want to go to Heaven, then listen to J. Jump. He says the children of God will not go to Heaven to live, if I understood him right.

J. Jump;
Yes you are correct there are a number of church traditions that are taught in error. One of them happens to be that eternity will be spent in "heaven." There is no Scriptural support for this especially when Scripture tells us that God's throne is going to be on the earth in the midst of His people. So why would you want to go to a place where God Himself is not going to be? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.


Quote:

DO YOU BELIEVE THAT NNE IS GOING TO............HEAVEN ALSO?

 

[Brother Bob]

J. Jump;

Quote:
Why did it take nineteen hundred years for it to become a doctrine that was not called "heresy".
As I believe EdSutton has said this doctrine has been "heresy" for a long time and is stll considered as much by some today, so claiming that this doctrine is heresy doesn't do anything to help one's case.

This just proves you called me a liar for nothing.

Quote:
If you don't want to go to Heaven, then listen to J. Jump. He says the children of God will not go to Heaven to live, if I understood him right.
Yes you are correct there are a number of church traditions that are taught in error. One of them happens to be that eternity will be spent in "heaven." There is no Scriptural support for this especially when Scripture tells us that God's throne is going to be on the earth in the midst of His people. So why would you want to go to a place where God Himself is not going to be? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.


Quote:

A LOT OF PEOPLE BELIEVE IN THOUSAND YEAR REIGN YET TO COME EVEN THOUGH IT WAS CONSIDERED HERESY UNTIL 150 YEARS AGO, BUT YOU ARE THE FIRST I FOUND WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE........NNE IS GOING TO HEAVEN.

 

[Brother Bob]

I'm talking about when David - the giant killer, shepherd... the man - was anointed king vs when he ascended the throne.

After Saul had been rejected, although he was still occupying the throne, God singled out David and instructed Samuel to anoint him king in Saul’s place. Although he was anointed king in Saul’s stead, David didn't immediately ascend the throne. Although Saul was rejected, he continued to reign. During this time, David found himself rejected in a different sense (by man, not God), exiled, and passing through a time of trials and sufferings.

During this time, a number of individuals who were dissatisfied with existing conditions in the kingdom under Saul, left Saul's kingdom and associated themselves with David. In doing this, they found themselves occupying exactly the same position in which David found himself during this time; they were rejected, exiled, and passing through a time of trials and sufferings.

The band of men who had left the kingdom under Saul and had associated themselves with David simply changed positions, and this is what it's talking about in Colossians 1:13. There was no existing kingdom under David in which these men found themselves, just as there is no existing kingdom under Christ in which Christians presently find themselves. In David's day, Saul still occupied the throne, just as Satan continues to occupy the throne today. David was waiting to ascend the throne, just as Christ is presently waiting to ascend the throne. Those who had joined themselves to David had been moved into a new position (from the kingdom under Saul, anticipating the kingdom under David) in order to share David's glory in a coming day, and those who have joined themselves to Christ have been moved into a new position (from the kingdom under Satan, anticipating the kingdom under Jesus Christ) in order to share in his glory in that coming day.

BTW, don't forget that Christ's reign is limited. 1 Corinthians 15:24 says, "Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

I see what you are saying but Jesus said My Kingdom is not of this world, also said, The Kingdom is within you and was referring to the Kingdom the Jew were looking for.

When He shall deliver the Kingdom up to the Father, these three are one, equal in essence and power. Its pretty hard to separate one from the other. I kinda believe that will be the end of His reign here on earth.

Hope of Glory; Do you believe no one is going to ........Heaven as J. Jump believes?

 

[J. Jump]

This just proves you called me a liar for nothing.

Have you been out in the heat too much today Brother Bob? You are a liar because you keep saying things that are untrue about me. You have been apprised of this on more than one occassion and yet you continued in the same line. This is not atypical behavior on your part. It is a pattern. This has been discussed in several threads with you in the past. Each time you keep chalking up your mistakes as misunderstandings, well this time that won't work and because of that it makes me wonder your intentions in the past.

Just own up to your mistakes.

A LOT OF PEOPLE BELIEVE IN THOUSAND YEAR REIGN YET TO COME EVEN THOUGH IT WAS CONSIDERED HERESY UNTIL 150 YEARS AGO, BUT YOU ARE THE FIRST I FOUND WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE........NNE IS GOING TO HEAVEN.

No need to shout. My hearing hasn't gone out yet. By the way this is not even a true statement because you participated in a thread that talked about this in another section of the BB where there were at least two others that would agree with me.

Yes the "church" wouldn't consider it orthodoxy, but there are a number of things that are orthodox according to the "church" that don't line up with Scripture.

Heaven is not the goal of the saved. Again why do you want to spend eternity in a place where God Himself is not going to be? That's doesn't make a lick of sense to me, but to each their own I suppose.

 

[EdSutton]

Now how did you get in this one, are you a moderator, or just "play one", or maybe you slept at the Holiday Inn, last night.

Well, perhaps unlike some, at least I slept inside, last night!

Ed

P.S. Yes, I am a moderator, although not on the BB, nor have I ever remotely claimed such, as regards the BB.

But I would assume I have the right, here, as a member, to post an opinion, especially when it lines up with BB rules, as much as any other member, especially when it is in a debate forum, that is not limited to one or two persons. I seem to recall others doing the same thing, you know, posting.

 

[Brother Bob]

Quote:
This just proves you called me a liar for nothing.
Have you been out in the heat too much today Brother Bob? You are a liar because you keep saying things that are untrue about me. You have been apprised of this on more than one occassion and yet you continued in the same line. This is not atypical behavior on your part. It is a pattern. This has been discussed in several threads with you in the past. Each time you keep chalking up your mistakes as misunderstandings, well this time that won't work and because of that it makes me wonder your intentions in the past.

Just own up to your mistakes.

Instead of just calling me a liar, why not post the times please?

A LOT OF PEOPLE BELIEVE IN THOUSAND YEAR REIGN YET TO COME EVEN THOUGH IT WAS CONSIDERED HERESY UNTIL 150 YEARS AGO, BUT YOU ARE THE FIRST I FOUND WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE........NNE IS GOING TO HEAVEN.
No need to shout. My hearing hasn't gone out yet. By the way this is not even a true statement because you participated in a thread that talked about this in another section of the BB where there were at least two others that would agree with me.

Yes the "church" wouldn't consider it orthodoxy, but there are a number of things that are orthodox according to the "church" that don't line up with Scripture.

Heaven is not the goal of the saved. Again why do you want to spend eternity in a place where God Himself is not going to be? That's doesn't make a lick of sense to me, but to each their own I suppose.

Heaven is my goal, and I suspect the vast majority on this board. I feel sorry for you, that you believe you are not going to Heaven. You don't have much to look forward to now do you?

 

[Brother Bob]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Bob
Now how did you get in this one, are you a moderator, or just "play one", or maybe you slept at the Holiday Inn, last night.

Well, at least I slept inside, last night!

Ed

I have to ask, being you supported J. Jump several times.

Do you believe no one is going to..........Heaven also?

P.S. Yes, I am a moderator, although not on the BB, nor have I ever remotely claimed such, as regards the BB.

But I would assume I have the right, here, as a member, to post an opinion, especially when it lines up with BB rules, as much as any other member, especially when it is in a debate forum, that is not limited to one or two persons. I seem to recall others doing the same thing, you know, posting.

Post as you like, it is just not a good practice to stick your nose into a disagreement, when someone posted he didn't know why this thread was going on, I said he didn't have to join in. If I knew that it was going to draw you into it, being you was in bed and all, I think I would of left it off.

 

[J. Jump]

Instead of just calling me a liar, why not post the times please?

Brother Bob if you don't want to own up to your mistakes that is between you and God. However I'm not going to waste time going back through these pages of threads to once again proved that you have lied about me. I have already done that once for you. Either own up to it or don't, but don't make me go hunting down something you know took place. Just eat crow and be done with it.

Heaven is my goal, and I suspect the vast majority on this board.

I suspect this is a true statement unfortunately for you and all the others.

I feel sorry for you, that you believe you are not going to Heaven.

Well I will be there for a short period of time as the bride of Christ is revealed and the rewards are determined, but I will not be staying there. I don't know why you would feel sorry for me. You are the one that wants to spend an eternity in a place where God Himself said He isn't going to be.

You don't have much to look forward to now do you?

Actually yes I do. I have an eternity to spend with God where God is. You on the other hand want to spend eternity in a place where God will not be and yet you say I don't have much to look forward to hmmmm . . .

But don't worry Brother Bob you won't be left in a heaven devoid of God. He will actually take you with Him despite a flawed theology . Just don't be surprised when you spend eternity on the earth instead of heaven .

 

[Brother Bob]

Instead of just calling me a liar, why not post the times please? Brother Bob if you don't want to own up to your mistakes that is between you and God. However I'm not going to waste time going back through these pages of threads to once again proved that you have lied about me. I have already done that once for you. Either own up to it or don't, but don't make me go hunting down something you know took place. Just eat crow and be done with it.

Didn't figure you could produce them!!

Quote:
I feel sorry for you, that you believe you are not going to Heaven.

Well I will be there for a short period of time as the bride of Christ is revealed and the rewards are determined, but I will not be staying there. I don't know why you would feel sorry for me. You are the one that wants to spend an eternity in a place where God Himself said He isn't going to be.

Oh, so now you changing your tale and going to Heaven a little while. cya

You don't have much to look forward to now do you?
Actually yes I do. I have an eternity to spend with God where God is. You on the other hand want to spend eternity in a place where God will not be and yet you say I don't have much to look forward to hmmmm . . .

But don't worry Brother Bob you won't be left in a heaven devoid of God. He will actually take you with Him despite a flawed theology . Just don't be surprised when you spend eternity on the earth instead of heaven .

Wonder why Jesus went upwards and sat down with God, when God is not there.
Wonder why Jesus said I go away to prepare a place for you and will come again to receive you unto myself so where I am, THERE you may be also.

Wonder what Jesus said, in my Father's house are many mansions, already there. I have never seen them if they are on this earth.

Well J.Jump; You can look forward to spending eternity anywhere you want. I look forward to going to Heaven, where God is.

So, you don't believe the saved will live in Heaven? I have to say J. Jump, you got a weird belief there.

I guess God will have to turn out the lights when He leaves Heaven?

 

[EdSutton]

Never met a man yet, who had it all right, including him, or me and you.

And I never made such a claim, as to myself or any other.

I never said you did, again you are misreading and accusing.

I made absolutely no accusation, here. And in fact, basically denied that I always right. And what am I supposed to have misread, here?

If I understand this right, you can use the "aorist" as a past tense if there was no happening there, such as building a temple, I suppose.

This is correct, as far as it goes. But again, I brought it up because of the insistence that it must be past tense. You "can" use this in the "past tense" in English, but it is not automatic, as Dr. Robertson (and Keating, also) has pointed out, and both of whom I quoted from. This "when" is necessarily determined by the context, and in fact, the Greek aorist endings, which determine the tense, on "reigned" in Rev. 20:5, are from the future tense, which gives, in effect, a "future aorist", although that is not exactly a technically correct definition. ( See Wigram, Analytical Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, A P & A, p. 110. Col B, entry 17; p. xvi, section XIII, rem. 8d; Compare with Thayer's Lexicon, A P& A, p. 98, Col. A, entry 3)

You have repeatedly cited Keating as to the past tense, yet either ignored or dismissed the same person, when he also says -

If one has the mistaken concept that aorist tense means past time, many passages of the New Testament will be very confusing if not altogether nonsensical. (Corey Keating at http://www.ntgreek.org/ )

How is it you have managed to miss this, as I have posted it three times, now?

An Overview of Aktionsart with Time with the Different Tenses ​

If the writer is referring to an action that happened in past time, he could refer to it as either progressive (by using the imperfect tense) or as merely a simple occurrence, with no emphasis on the action's progress (by using the aorist tense).

I'm pretty sure I do understand some things, at least, about "aktionsart", but thanks for posting the help.

All that and it still does not tell us where or when it took place.

Exactly! The "when" has to be determined by the context, of the text. (The "where" is irrelevant to the tense.) That is why I posted the citing from Robertson.

[long list snipped] Dispensationalism as a modernist aberrational (disorder of the mind) interpretation.
This pejorative 'slamming' statement does not deserve a response.
Not my slamming, it was others and according to them the majority of Christians. St. Augustine, I think was one who disputed the thousand year reign in the end of time and on this earth.

I realize that you are not the one who originated the list, but merely quoted from it. Nor was I attempting to attribute it to you. That does not, in any way, change the fact of what I said about the "crack".

No, its your friend J. Jump that does not believe He is reigning. I have said all along that His Kingdom is within the "saved for eternal life", have to put that clause on there for J. Jump, or he gets messed up.

Please don't blame me on J. Jump. He doesn't deserve to have that happen to him. :tonofbricks::laugh:

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Bob
Never met a man yet, who had it all right, including him, or me and you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdSutton
And I never made such a claim, as to myself or any other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Bob
I never said you did, again you are misreading and accusing.





I made absolutely no accusation, here. And in fact, basically denied that I always right. And what am I supposed to have misread, here?

Why did you bring it up?? I am at a loss here.

Quote:
If I understand this right, you can use the "aorist" as a past tense if there was no happening there, such as building a temple, I suppose.
This is correct, as far as it goes. But again, I brought it up because of the insistence that it must be past tense. You "can" use this in the "past tense" in English, but it is not automatic, as Dr. Robertson (and Keating, also) has pointed out, and both of whom I quoted from. This "when" is necessarily determined by the context, and in fact, the Greek aorist endings, which determine the tense, on "reigned" in Rev. 20:5, are from the future tense, which gives, in effect, a "future aorist", although that is not exactly a technically correct definition. ( See Wigram, Analytical Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, A P & A, p. 110. Col B, entry 17; p. xvi, section XIII, rem. 8d; Compare with Thayer's Lexicon, A P& A, p. 98, Col. A, entry 3)

You have repeatedly cited Keating as to the past tense, yet either ignored or dismissed the same person, when he also says -
Quote:
If one has the mistaken concept that aorist tense means past time, many passages of the New Testament will be very confusing if not altogether nonsensical. (Corey Keating at http://www.ntgreek.org/ )
How is it you have managed to miss this, as I have posted it three times, now?

Glad to hear you say, it can mean "past tense".

Quote:
All that and it still does not tell us where or when it took place.
Exactly! That has to be determined by the context, of the text. That is why I posted the citing from Robertson.

Again, glad that at least I may be right.


You skip around the question with ease.

Do you believe no one is going to Heaven to live for eternity? Please answer the question.

 

[J. Jump]

Didn't figure you could produce them!!

Catch a clue Bob. You have repeatedly said I don't claim Christ as my King. And I have repeatedly told you that Christ is in fact my King. Why do you keep up this stupidity? Eat your crow. Be a grown up and admit your mistake. Ask for forgiveness and move on, but cut the kindergarten nonsense.

You know you lied. Now fess up or just admit you aren't going to seek forgiveness. This is nonsense.

Oh, so now you changing your tale and going to Heaven a little while.

Nice try Bob. I have never said ANYWHERE that we will not go to heaven at ALL. We will not spend eternity there.

Wonder why Jesus went upwards and sat down with God, when God is not there.

Because that is where He is NOW.

Wonder why Jesus said I go away to prepare a place for you and will come again to receive you unto myself so where I am, THERE you may be also.

Right Bob thanks for proving my point THERE means where Jesus is. Please show one passage of Scripture that says Jesus is going to spend eternity in heaven. Just one will suffice.

Well J.Jump; You can look forward to spending eternity anywhere you want. I look forward to going to Heaven, where God is.

Again please provide ONE Scripture which says that is where He's going to stay and then please tell me how that corresponds with this text:

And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them,

Your view is simply misguided church tradition. God plans to dwell among men not the other way around.

 

[Brother Bob]

Didn't figure you could produce them!! Catch a clue Bob. You have repeatedly said I don't claim Christ as my King. And I have repeatedly told you that Christ is in fact my King. Why do you keep up this stupidity? Eat your crow. Be a grown up and admit your mistake. Ask for forgiveness and move on, but cut the kindergarten nonsense.

Not true!...

Wonder why Jesus said I go away to prepare a place for you and will come again to receive you unto myself so where I am, THERE you may be also. Right Bob thanks for proving my point THERE means where Jesus is. Please show one passage of Scripture that says Jesus is going to spend eternity in heaven. Just one will suffice.

Silly! You would be run completely out of the county.

Well J.Jump; You can look forward to spending eternity anywhere you want. I look forward to going to Heaven, where God is. Again please provide ONE Scripture which says that is where He's going to stay and then please tell me how that corresponds with this text:

And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them,

Again Silly! God is with His people.
Haven't you ever prayed to Him?

A man that does not believe that the saved will spend eternity in heaven, will not receive any scripture that is against his theory.

Rev 12:12Therefore rejoice, [ye] heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

 

[J. Jump]

Not true!...

Figures. I'm done with you Bob. If you can't even own up to your own mistakes there is no point in continuing a conversation with you. You know I actually did enjoy visting with you when you were at least sensible, but this childish act of yours is too much for me. Good day.

 

[Brother Bob]

Not true!... Figures. I'm done with you Bob. If you can't even own up to your own mistakes there is no point in continuing a conversation with you. You know I actually did enjoy visting with you when you were at least sensible, but this childish act of yours is too much for me. Good day.__________________

You not only lost the battle, you lost the war when you said we would not live in Heaven for eternity. I feel for you and hope that God will open your eyes to your mistaken beliefs.