• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Held over in Paradise????

Status
Not open for further replies.

McCree79

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You haven't refuted any of my commentary given within the OP, where I established my pov from the scriptures. Maybe go through it and show me where I am making mistakes.
If your content to believe in a "paradise " that is taught no where scripture than believe it. In no place in the NT was it referring to a separate place than Heaven. Whereever Jesus ascend to in 2nd Corinthians is where the thief and Jesus are.
You want something that refutes your theory, then address the thief on the cross. Jesus's work was done before the thief died. You used it to support your paradise claim. So, if Jesus was in fact referring to something other than Heaven, why?
In 2Kings Ch. 2, Elijah was taken into heaven. Why would he be allowed in Heaven and no one else?

In Revelation John presents a picture of Heaven, new Jerusalem, and the Heavenly court. Are believers in Heaven, but were kept out of the Heavenly court until atonement? I would think your argument would be better suited towards that suggestion than paradise. The word paradise means garden. So is he referring to a place outside the heavenly court? I do not see anywhere were a paradise and a heaven are taught. I do see heaven....I do see reference to a heavenly court. Possibility that you are right Steaver, but it isn't a "paradise & Heaven"pairing. I would think that it would have to be " Heaven & heavenly court " pairing. Both which are in Heaven, the 3rd Heaven that Paul referred to. Never did the apostles or Jesus refer to 2 different places.... 2 different plains of existence for the believers.

Then again that thought process is dependent upon ones view of Revelation. I know many people who think no one is in the presence of God, even today, until the day of transfiguration.

Chances are, our minds can't grasp Heaven anyway. John most likely spoke in away that our minds can understand, which was also the only way he could communicate what he saw.
 

McCree79

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Not sure you are reading the same post everyone else is. This is a debate room, correct? Unless you consider disagreement attacking. Please show a quote from me when I attacked her, or anyone else in any other thread for that matter. You may be confusing me with brother Icon....:smilewinkgrin:
It is a debate forum. Nothing is wrong with debate. But does it accomplish anything other than divide the forum. Posts on both sides get laced with underlying personal shots. It seems that we just try to be right and win....as opposed to growing. It is all about the tone of words. BW318 agreed with you and you jumped on her for a belief that was unrelated to the OP. This is covenant view or even eschatology view. Not Calvinist issue. Not a soteriology issue. Calvinist can believe either way on this. BW318 is free to her opinion without compromising her sotoriology view.
 

McCree79

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Hold tight Steaver....I got to get one of my sons to Preschool and run some errands. I will talk atonement when I get back. I feel that is the point of thread anyway.... Not necessarily the topic paradise.
 

blessedwife318

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Hold tight Steaver....I got to get one of my sons to Preschool and run some errands. I will talk atonement when I get back. I feel that is the point of thread anyway.... Not necessarily the topic paradise.

I agree the point was never about paradise. He was just trying to present a gotcha situation for Calvinist. I think that is why he jumped on me because I didn't play the part of the Calvinist like he wanted.
 

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
McCree79

So....
If one disagrees with Steaver, you get attacked
.

Correct...Now it is a debate board so this can happen....as opposing views do not mesh together.


If one agrees with Steaver, you get attacked as well???

This Also is CORRECT:thumbsup:
THE STEAVER HAS IT ALL COVERED:laugh:
he will also answer for you...projecting from his mind those things he thinks you might mean:thumbsup:

Didn't BW318, just agree with him and was basically told she wasn't allowed to agree with him???

YES:thumbsup: She had to be instructed on what steaver thinks she really believes or should believe....even if......she never suggested such a thing!

She appears to be openly accepting your point Steaver. Why attack her?

Well...I can not answer for steaver....but as a neutral observer it would seem that there was an agenda at work here.Steaver feels it is part of the good works that were ordained for him.
he said that in his thank you thread;
may not be posting quite as frequently for I feel my good works here which the Lord had prepared for me to do in advance may be coming to a close. Other good works He has for me to do I'm sure. Thanks again everybody
I am fairly new here, but what I see of BW318, she seems calm and very respectful.
yes...and welcome to the BB. You are new but already you noticed this trend.


*I don't see paradise being part of the "Calvinism" debate. Seems to be a separate issue to me.

That is also correct...but when an agenda is at work everything gets pulled into it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
How do you reconcile a believer coming into a holy union with a Holy God (regeneration) before the sacrifice of Jesus Christ taking away their sin? Hebrews makes it clear sin remained until Jesus Christ's sacrifice.

Could they go straight into presense of God before Jesus came and died and resurrected though?

Some who are calvinists would see God as somehow remitting their sins, not holding them against them, just as he does infants and mentally challenged even today, and that they were regenerated but not filled with the Holy spirit as all of us now under the mew Covenant are in christ..
 

McCree79

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Their sins were not yet forgiven, they remained until Jesus Christ was sacrificed. God could not yet dwell in them, they could not yet enter into the holies. Hebrews makes this crystal clear, but you will have to remove the Calvinism glasses and allow the Spirit to teach you if you want to make an honest effort to understand....

Heb 10:1
For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
Understand that the "shadow of things to come" is not sufficient to allow a person to enter into a union with God, nor enter into the holy of holies with God. If it were sufficient then there would be no necessity of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Heb 10:2
For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshipers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
Heb 10:3
But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
Notice it is a "remembrance", a teaching that you are a sinner and you need a sacrifice.

Heb 10:4
For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
Pay close attention! The sacrifices of bulls and goats did NOT take away sins. They were merely a shadow of the Messiah to come, a teaching to prepare Israel to understand their Messiah's purpose. These believers were still in their sins, unable to go into the presence of the LORD.

Heb 10:5
Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
Heb 10:6
In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
"No pleasure". They were NOT sufficient!

Heb 10:7
Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
Heb 10:8
Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
Heb 10:9
Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
Heb 10:10
By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
How are we scanctified? Through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ, once for all.

Heb 10:11
And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
Understand, those sacrifices made by the priest NEVER took away sins.

Heb 10:12
But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
Heb 10:13
From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
Heb 10:14
For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
Heb 10:15
Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,
Heb 10:16
This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
Now, and only now, after the actual sacrifice of Jesus Christ for sins, is the NEW covenant enforced, which is, Christ In You!

Heb 10:17
And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
Heb 10:18
Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
Heb 10:19
Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
Now, one can enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus.

Heb 10:20
By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
Now, by a "new and living way".

Heb 10:21
And having an high priest over the house of God;
Heb 10:22
Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
Now, we have been washed with pure water.

Heb 10:23
Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised)

A Holy God could not dwell within a sinful man UNTIL the atonement was made. There is no such thing as regeneration before Jesus Christ was glorified. John even makes this clear John 7:39. Jesus makes this clear when He speaks of Peter being converted. Conversion is regeneration. Except ye be converted, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of God.

True believers pre-cross awaited the cross in a place referred to as Paradise. Jesus said to the thief on the cross, today you shall be with me in paradise. When Mary met Jesus after His resurrection what did He say to her? "Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father". Where did He go while His body lay lifeless for three days? Where did Jesus tell the thief he would be "with Him" that very day? Answer, Paradise. Not Heaven, Not with the Father.
Alright sir.....

Atonement did occur in the OT, however imperfect it was. Lev 16:3-6....all of Christ 16 in fact is a good read. Lev 17:11 refers to OT blood atonement as well. This system was far from imperfect, and was just a shadow of the atonement Christ would provide.... But it was an atonement none the less. It was limited, narrow, and provided no lasting effect. Which is why it had to be repeated. However, it doe not change the fact that this sacrificial system was God's gracious gift to his people. A shadow of the final and perfect sacrifice of Christ. God himself ordained the procedure whereby his people where reconciled to him.

* One more point to add. The law assumes atonement and forgiveness occur by means of legislated sacrifice; however last years sacrifice does not cover this year's sins. Thus a permanent sacrifice was needed to permanently deal with sin.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

McCree79

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Where did Enoch & Elijah end up after being taken up?
Very good point though. I brought Elijah up in post #21 as well. I haven't looked at Hebrew words, but the ESV translated it as Heaven. So, does the NLT, HCSB, NKJV and KJV(1900)
 

steaver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I agree the point was never about paradise. He was just trying to present a gotcha situation for Calvinist. I think that is why he jumped on me because I didn't play the part of the Calvinist like he wanted.

Oh my goodness! You people are paranoid or something, "jumped on you"....really......do I have such power to get you all so worked up this way? I believe you guys are just frustrated because I expose all the contradictions of Calvinism...and there are plenty...

And of course you all will notice Icon has not yet provided a quote for quote from me and another where I misrepresented what was said....no....not one.....cause there are none. Just another sin of false witnessing....
 

steaver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Alright sir.....

Atonement did occur in the OT, however imperfect it was. Lev 16:3-6....all of Christ 16 in fact is a good read. Lev 17:11 refers to OT blood atonement as well. This system was far from imperfect, and was just a shadow of the atonement Christ would provide.... But it was an atonement none the less. It was limited, narrow, and provided no lasting effect. Which is why it had to be repeated. However, it doe not change the fact that this sacrificial system was God's gracious gift to his people. A shadow of the final and perfect sacrifice of Christ. God himself ordained the procedure whereby his people where reconciled to him.

* One more point to add. The law assumes atonement and forgiveness occur by means of legislated sacrifice; however last years sacrifice does not cover this year's sins. Thus a permanent sacrifice was needed to permanently deal with sin.

With all due respect brother, you totally ignored all of the scripture I posted and all of my comments I made pertaining to those scriptures. Hebrews makes it perfectly clear, the bulls and goats did not take away the sins. Not only did it not have a lasting effect, it had NO effect. It's only purpose was to point towards the Messiah and the necessity of the shedding of His blood.
 

steaver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You want something that refutes your theory, then address the thief on the cross. Jesus's work was done before the thief died. You used it to support your paradise claim. .

I already addressed the thief on the cross, he was part of my argument for Paradise not being in the presence of God (heaven).

The atonement was finished, the resurrection and glorification was not.

John7:38-39, "He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)"

John20:17, "Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Question for you, where was Jesus at, and the thief He said would be with him that very day, if they were not with the Father? We know Jesus said to the thief he would be with Him in Paradise that day, and Paradise obviously was not in the presence of the Father......
 

steaver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Very good point though. I brought Elijah up in post #21 as well. I haven't looked at Hebrew words, but the ESV translated it as Heaven. So, does the NLT, HCSB, NKJV and KJV(1900)

How many levels of heaven are there? It appears one of them was called Paradise. The scriptures make it very clear, no one could enter the presence of God, the holy of holies, apart from Jesus Christ's atonement, resurrection and glorification having been accomplished.
 

blessedwife318

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oh my goodness! You people are paranoid or something, "jumped on you"....really......do I have such power to get you all so worked up this way? I believe you guys are just frustrated because I expose all the contradictions of Calvinism...and there are plenty...

And of course you all will notice Icon has not yet provided a quote for quote from me and another where I misrepresented what was said....no....not one.....cause there are none. Just another sin of false witnessing....

Paranoid? No
Frustrated? Now that is just funny.
I find this whole exchange amusing. You come on here with what you thought was a gotcha question or point, I cone along tell you I agree with your point and am still a Calvinist and then you get all worked up since you can't seem to believe you could have any common ground with a Calvinist. Are we really so horrible in your mind that there can be no common ground?
I also find it amusing that you declare you have pointed out all the supposed contradictions of Calvinism in this tread when all you have really done is try to get me to reconcile the 2 points you presented that I agreed with, meaning there was nothing for me to reconcile much to your annoyance it would seem.
 

steaver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Paranoid? No
Frustrated? Now that is just funny.
I find this whole exchange amusing. You come on here with what you thought was a gotcha question or point, I cone along tell you I agree with your point and am still a Calvinist and then you get all worked up since you can't seem to believe you could have any common ground with a Calvinist. Are we really so horrible in your mind that there can be no common ground?
I also find it amusing that you declare you have pointed out all the supposed contradictions of Calvinism in this tread when all you have really done is try to get me to reconcile the 2 points you presented that I agreed with, meaning there was nothing for me to reconcile much to your annoyance it would seem.

lol, annoyance? No. what is strange sister is that you don't realize that when you agree that regeneration does not happen prior to belief, Calvinism is destroyed. Yet you are still a Calvinist????
 

blessedwife318

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
lol, annoyance? No. what is strange sister is that you don't realize that when you agree that regeneration does not happen prior to belief, Calvinism is destroyed. Yet you are still a Calvinist????
No what you don't understand is that the idea of Paradise does not affect my soteriology. Now I will admit I'm a weird one with having my dispensationalists leanings and also being a Calvinist but I'm OK with that. Although I will admit that I think over time I will lean less and less dispensationalists and more and more Convenient as that seems to be the Journey I'm on. Just like I started Wesleyan and have moved completely out of that camp.
 

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
lol, annoyance? No. what is strange sister is that you don't realize that when you agree that regeneration does not happen prior to belief, Calvinism is destroyed. Yet you are still a Calvinist????

She understands very well. She rejects your man centered theology for the biblical one.
You are a legend in your mind, but have not proven anything in here at all.

:laugh::laugh: really destroyed:laugh:
 

steaver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
She understands very well. She rejects your man centered theology for the biblical one.
You are a legend in your mind, but have not proven anything in here at all.

:laugh::laugh: really destroyed:laugh:

Maybe you missed the part where she agrees with me :smilewinkgrin:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top