Featured Son of God

Luke 23:42-43, ". . . And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise. . . ."

I think you are confused. Paradise was not moved to Heaven until Jesus ascended to Heaven. Ephesians 4:8, ". . . Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. . . ."

 

You are very confused. The physical birth was NOT the 'begotten part.' You're speaking of things you know nothing about.

 

Begotten.

Given.

 

Then why did Jesus call it Abraham's bosom, and not Paradise?

When exactly was the angel removed from Gaurding the entrance?

There is literally no reason to think the tree of life sunk into sheol and all the saints were enjoying the fruit.

It was removed at the Flood, to become the third heaven. The only time the angel was removed, was when Jesus said, "It is finished." The veil was torn, so why not Paradise opened? That was the point of the thief going to Paradise. It was no longer guarded, because the Cross removed the reason to guard the entrance to Paradise. The tree of life does represent the Cross. At that point, Adam's offspring would no longer taste death in Abraham's bosom in sheol.

Why would entering Paradise be associated with entering and tasting death? The tree of life represents the physical act of eating forever. The Cross was both the physical act and spiritual point the physical tree of life represents. The Word is eternal life. The tree was just a tree planted by God. Does not mean Abraham's bosom was Paradise and the tree of life was in sheol. No one except perhaps, Enoch, Elijah, or Moses could enter Paradise until the Cross. The whole reason they were hanging out in Abraham's bosom until the Cross. Otherwise they would have already, all been up in heaven, in Paradise eating of that tree of life. No one would be hanging out in sheol in Abraham's bosom.

Sorry but Jesus called it Abraham's bosom, not Paradise. On the Cross, God said the thief could go immediately to Paradise. The debt was paid, the restriction lifted via the Cross. The Cross did not remove Paradise out of sheol. The Cross removed the reason why no one could enter Paradise. Sin and death would not allow entrance to Paradise.

Living as a sinner for ever eating the tree of life was the reason it was guarded. A soul would have no need to physically eat in Abraham's bosom. Unless you think they all had bodies, but they were still there by faith still looking for that Heavenly City, Paradise. If they were in Paradise, what Heavenly city were they looking for, and why not just stay there in sheol? They were in Abraham's bosom waiting for the Cross. At that point, Paradise would be opened.

They also were given a permanent incorruptible physical body that instant they walked out of their graves. They literally had to ascend with Jesus at that point. They were walking around Jerusalem. If Paradise went up physically like it will come down physically as the New Jerusalem, why were they on earth? Why not just all ride up in Paradise, like the church will ride down in the New Jerusalem? Since the physical body of Jesus was prophecied to remain in the tomb for a literal 72 hours, they had to wait those 72 hours to ascend with Jesus on Sunday morning. The reason why they were waiting for the Sunday morning ascension is because Jesus presented them along with Himself like He told Mary.

Paul was the one who recorded the order in Corinthians 15:20-25


"But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 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. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet."

Those in Abraham's bosom were the firstfruits on Sunday morning. John 20:17-18

"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. Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her."

At the Second Coming, the church will be glorified as one body.

At the end of the Millennium Jesus will hand back all of creation.

 

Adam was made "in the image of God".
As timtifly's quote says, "Adam lost the image of God and Adam's descendents we're made, "in his image", i.e., all of Adam's posterity had the Adamic Nature of his fall imputed to them.

 

Wow! There is so much here that is bizarre and wrong. I don't have time to begin before the thread is closed.

Suffice it to say Jesus did not ascend on Sunday morning.

You really need to understand there are idioms in biblical language. For instance, in today's lingo, if you say: "Hey, that was a real 'home run,'" it simply means you did a great job. In biblical language "Abraham's bosom" is another way of saying "heaven" for the Jew.

You are making many leaps in logic, and that has damaged your theology severely.

The Archangel

 

Going by Jesus' own Words.

I don't have time to prove that thousands of points of human theology are just wrong.

I don't have any theology. I understand that seems to be an issue with some people.

 

See,: Son of God

 

By Eternal Generation.

 

This is from Gill's work that I reposted on my blog:

1.2.1.2a: “Election” INCLUDES the Choice of the Human Nature of Jesus Christ to BE GIVEN the Grace of Union with the Son of God.

 

The problem here is that you do have a theology... everyone does. The problem is that yours is not anything close to orthodox.

And, if you're simply citing Jesus' words, do you expect yourself and others to remove your right hand and your right eye? Or do we understand he's making a comparison to show the seriousness needed in our response to our own sin? Do you hate your mother, father, wife, children, etc.? Those are Jesus' words. Or do we rightly understand, again, that He's making a comparison?

Saying "Going by Jesus' Words" is simply a cop-out for your bad theology.

The Archangel

 

I'm not really sure what you mean by this.

The Archangel

 

I put ", my theology", in writing.
There are 700, or so, blogs and they are mostly John Gill, placed in an easy to read format.

It is a work in progress.

Aware of The Godhead

 

Cool. Thanks for the link. Here's where I answered the post you quoted. (Link)

The Archangel

 

"And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:"

Seth was not Made in the image of God.

Seth was made in the image of Adam and, this, the entire posterity of Adam had his image imputed to them.

The Adamic Nature.

Sin.

 

Yes. That's essentially what I argued. The Image of God, however, is not lost. It is marred, but still present. Otherwise Genesis 9 would not have give the reason for capital punishment as "because man is in the image of God."

The analogy I use is that of a smudge on the glass of a copy machine (or a mark on the original document). That mark gets transmitted to each subsequent copy. But, the original document is not lost, it is damaged in some way.

The Archangel

 

The image of God is different in Genesis 9 than when Adam was made and "marred" and "damaged", cover it, as with "similitude", in the New Testament.

There are similarities, but no sinless Presence, as in Adam, and certainly no "SPARK OF DIVINITY".

Somehow that needs to be distinguished.

The Adamic Nature was imputed to all of Adam's posterity, as you know.

 

That is not a problem, since the point is to show the error in all theology is the human mind set that is flawed to reach that theology.

At least you admit that all theology comes from humans and not God's Word.