Psalms 51:5

[ccrobinson]

There is absolutely no indication that Enoch will see death in the future that I know of. If you have such a verse you might share it with us.

There's no specific verse in the Bible that says that Enoch will not die.

Q. Will Enoch be in Heaven?
A. Yes.

Q. Will he have his human body in Heaven?
A. No.

Therefore, I think we can safely say that Enoch either has died and has a glorified body, or he will die and will have a glorified body.

Job had his miserable comforters as well.

So you have no answer to the question about Elijah.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

CCR: Therefore, I think we can safely say that Enoch either has died and has a glorified body, or he will die and will have a glorified body.

HP: And you stand in direct contradiction to the verse in Hebrews.

And I did comment on your remark concerning Elijah. You make a fine miserable comforter. You may in the end be told to offer a sacrifice to Elijah and have him pray for you, just as Jobs miserable comforters were told to do for Job. You have no right to attribute sin to Elijah where Scriptures and God are silent.

 

[ccrobinson]

And you stand in direct contradiction to the verse in Hebrews.

Here's the verse in Hebrews.

By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

Since you're so much smarter than I am, please show me where it says Enoch was sinless.

And I did comment on your remark concerning Elijah. You make a fine miserable comforter. You may in the end be told to offer a sacrifice to Elijah and have him pray for you, just as Jobs miserable comforters were told to do for Job.

What are you talking about? The more you post, the more nonsensical your posts become.

You have no right to attribute sin to Elijah where Scriptures and God are silent.

Oh please. Spare me your "righteous indignation".

You chastise others about their reading comprehension skills, but seem unable to understand what happened in 1 Kings 19.

 

[DHK]

HP: And you stand in direct contradiction to the verse in Hebrews.

And I did comment on your remark concerning Elijah. You make a fine miserable comforter. You may in the end be told to offer a sacrifice to Elijah and have him pray for you, just as Jobs miserable comforters were told to do for Job. You have no right to attribute sin to Elijah where Scriptures and God are silent.

Scriptures are not silent.
All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.
There is none righteous no, not one.
These Scriptures include Elijah, and the only exception to them is Jesus Christ alone--He alone is sinless; He alone qualifies to be the sinless sacrifice for our sins. To suggest that there is another borders on blasphemy.

Despair or discouragement is a sin. And that in and of itself is a sin that is described in detail in the Bible. It can't be missed.

 

[RAdam]

I assume we are all in agreement that when a child of God dies their soul and spirit enter heaven while their material body stays here on earth. Flesh and blood cannot enter the kingdom of God, neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. There is a necessity of a change in our bodies in order to enter into the prescence of God. Apparently what God did in translating Enoch was He took his soul and spirit into heaven without him having to die. I don't know what God did with his body at that time, but I do know that it will be raised again and changed into the likeness of Christ's body, just as ours will, when Jesus raises the righteous in glory.

 

[RAdam]

Concerning Elijah, to try to say he was sinless is ridiculous. Now he was a better man than I'll ever be, but he was a sinner too. There's I Kings 19, where Elijah was complaining to God. Notice that after he complains the second time God tells him to go annoint Elisha to be prophet in his stead. In other words, you are replaced. Then there's James saying he was a man subject to like passions as we are.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

According to Scripture, death passed upon ‘all men’ for all have sinned. Death did not pass upon Enoch or Elijah. Let me reiterate. Death did NOT pass upon ‘all’ men even though Scripture states that death passed upon ‘all’ men. This makes the point as clear as crystal that ‘all’ can indeed have exceptions to the rule, especially in the common parlance Scripture is written in.

As far as either Enoch or Elijah being sinless, read my lips carefully. ANYONE THAT SAYS I HAVE CLAIMED THEY ‘WERE’ SINLESS IS BEING LESS THAN TRUTHFUL and as such is clearly misrepresenting what I believe, have stated, or implied. Believe as you will. It makes absolutely no difference to me. If some of you cannot accept the fact that where I admit to a ‘possibility,’ that in no wise constitutes making a firm judgment, who cares. Get a life. I make no doctrine out of this issue and require no one to agree with me. Make anyone sinful you so desire. Go ahead and be the eternal judge of another mans servant. I can indeed warn you that you may well end up being chastised by God much in the same manner Job’s miserable comforters were, but for now, with the ability of some so arrogantly profess to having, the ability to see into the heart of Elijah and Enoch and divine sin where Scripture and even God Himself are silent, judge on. Knock yourselves out. Instead of derailing this thread with your rants, why not start a thread on the sins of Enoch and Elijah where you can pontificate and judge others all day long as to what constitutes sin in anothers life that lived a few thousand years prior.

It is high time for some on this list to investigate Scripture as to what constitute sin following the set guidelines of Scripture and reason our judgment should be bound within those stated guidelines, but that will have to be another thread.

This thread is about Psalms 51: 5 and whether or not the sin mentioned proves anything in regards to a sinful nature from birth or if in fact it addresses the circumstances of the physical union that occurred between his mother and father that in the eyes of the law constituted sin. If you have nothing to add on the topic of this thread, again, why not start one that will be in line with your obvious desires to pontificate and judge concerning? :thumbs:

 

[DHK]

This thread is about Psalms 51: 5 and whether or not the sin mentioned proves anything in regards to a sinful nature from birth or if in fact it addresses the circumstances of the physical union that occurred between his mother and father that in the eyes of the law constituted sin. If you have nothing to add on the topic of this thread, again, why not start one that will be in line with your obvious desires to pontificate and judge concerning? :thumbs:

In absence of any evidence brought forth by you that it doesn't teach original sin, it remains another timeless truth of David's repentance of his own confession of his sinfulness and even his sinful condition right from his conception onward.

 

[ccrobinson]

HP, I love how you make all manner of inferences and implications and complain when you're called out on them. Ridiculous.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Refusal on the part of DHK to fairly examine the evidence that ‘has been’ clearly set forth in this thread in no wise mandates the necessity (or wisdom) in swallowing the Augustinian notion of original sin as DHK and others assert. :thumbs:

 

[DHK]

Refusal on the part of DHK to fairly examine the evidence that ‘has been’ clearly set forth in this thread in no wise mandates the necessity (or wisdom) in swallowing the Augustinian notion of original sin as DHK and others assert.

What evidence? I haven't seen any. If there is, I suppose you will have to repost it. That shouldn't be hard for you considering the paucity of it (zero).

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

http://www.pinpointevangelism.com/libraryoftheologycom/writings/originalsin/Psalms_Fifty_One_Five-WilliamMurray.pdf


I could reiterate some of the points he makes in my own words as I have done on many occassions, but Mr. Murray does a much better job. Take his opening remarks in the first four paragraphs or so. Refute them for the list and then we will critque your comments.

 

[DHK]

http://www.pinpointevangelism.com/libraryoftheologycom/writings/originalsin/Psalms_Fifty_One_Five-WilliamMurray.pdf


I could reiterate some of the points he makes in my own words as I have done on many occassions, but Mr. Murray does a much better job. Take his opening remarks in the first four paragraphs or so. Refute them for the list and then we will critque your comments.

That has already been commented on and refuted.
It is your evidence I want, not another's.

 

[RAdam]

Death did pass on Elijah and Enoch. Both men would have died had not God intervened. As I have before stated, this is clearly stated when Hebrews said Enoch was translated that he should not see death. No flesh shall be justified by the works of the law, for by the law is the knowledge of sin. The only person to keep the law without spot was Jesus Christ, which is why he had to come. If righteousness comes by the law, Christ is dead in vain. If Enoch and Elijah could do it, then theoretically you and I could. Enoch and Elijah aren't up in heaven because of what they did, but because of what Jesus did.

 

[DHK]

http://www.pinpointevangelism.com/libraryoftheologycom/writings/originalsin/Psalms_Fifty_One_Five-WilliamMurray.pdf


I could reiterate some of the points he makes in my own words as I have done on many occassions, but Mr. Murray does a much better job. Take his opening remarks in the first four paragraphs or so. Refute them for the list and then we will critque your comments.

The whole argument is based on the fact that David had "half-sisters. So what. Jesse could have married after his wife died. Then David would have had half sisters. It says nowhere that his brothers that were presented before Samuel were not his real brothers. That cannot be proved. It says nowhere that the wife of Jesse at that time was not David's mother. The article is all guess work based on a presupposition that original sin does not exist. There is no objectivity in it.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: The whole argument is based on the fact that David had "half-sisters.......

HP: Your premise is wrong. The interpretation of the verse does NOT start off concerning his half sisters. The interpretation starts off as I read him from a direct and careful examination of the subject spoken of in the verse itself. The half sister notion certainly adds credence to evidence that David was conceived in illegitimate circumstances, but was not where he started from. It is supportive evidence only.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

RAdam: Death did pass on Elijah and Enoch.

HP: Absolutely false and at direct antipodes with the plain words of Scripture.

 

[DHK]

HP: Your premise is wrong. The interpretation of the verse does NOT start off concerning his half sisters. The interpretation starts off as I read him from a direct and careful examination of the subject spoken of in the verse itself. The half sister notion certainly adds credence to evidence that David was conceived in illegitimate circumstances, but was not where he started from. It is supportive evidence only.

The introduction starts out with a biased presupposition which he is going to "prove" with biased evidence even if it is wrong.

The subject of this verse is NOT the state or constitution of David's nature as a sinner at, or before, his birth.

He has already set forth a premise that is biased and cannot be proven because it is false.

 

[DHK]

HP: Absolutely false and at direct antipodes with the plain words of Scripture.

They were somehow taken into heaven in a supernatural way. As to their physical bodies we don't know exactly what happened. The Scripture is silent. One thing we can be fairly certain of: They don't have their resurrection bodies yet. That is still a future event.

 

[RAdam]

There will be children of God who won't die because Jesus Christ will return and change their bodies. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed. That does not mean death has not passed upon them. God will intervene, not because they are righteous in themselves, but rather because it pleases Him.