When we die do we go directly to heaven??

[Gershom]

Why would Paul be in a fix as to having a desire to depart if that meant he would go in to a dormant state? How is that far better (as he expressed)? If he were facing "soul sleep", he would surely consider remaining in the flesh the better of the two since he loved to minister.

Philippians 1:23-26

 

[DHK]

Bob (Ryan) [not Brother Bob], you still cannot get around the teaching that:
To be absent from the body iis to be present with the Lord.

No matter what you do that teaching still remains. Sllice it, dice it, butcher it, do what you like, it is not going away. That is what Paul taught.
Furthermore, when God created man he created him in his own image and likeness. What he did is he gave him an eternal spirit, somethng that the animals do not have. Both man and animals and man have a soul. That can be demonstrated from Genesis one, where the word "nephesh" is used for both. But only man has a spirit. As Paul explains in 2Cor.5 we are clothed in a temporary body. It is the body that is temporary not the spirit. We are created like the angelis--spirit-beings. Right now we have earthly bodies. At the resurrection we will receive our celestial bodies or glorified bodies. Our spirit will never die. It is eternal. It was created that way. The only thing that changes is the house that it is clothed in.
Thus, to be absent from this body is to present with the Lord. The spirit is immortal.

 

[BobRyan]

I notice you completely ignore the Story of Lazarus and Rich Man.
Both are awake and alive though not bodily in their respective places.

I do not use that parable (or story as you call it) for two reasons.

1. It shows Abraham as having absolute authority over the dead saints. There is no appeal at all to the authority of God in that story.

2. It shows prayers to the dead.

3. Christ shows at the END of that parable that "the POINT" is not to show that ghosts exist or that all dead saints are sitting in Abraham's lap and the wicked are praying to abraham for decisions on who will be resurrected -- but RATHER that those who reject the writings of Moses in the OT as doctrinally authorotative will also misunderstand the teaching and message of Christ.

(And so the POINT Christ was making seemed to introduce yet another topic).

Interestingly -- these key features of the "story" and even Christ's own statement about what it really means - were all ignored by your review of Luke 16.

Figuring out "why" is left as an exercise for the reader.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Yet Jesus said in John 6.47:

"Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life."​

The Greek word translated "has" is (I am told) in the present tense. The new life which Jesus came to bring begins in the here-and-now. Writing to the Christians at Colossae, Paul says in Colossians 2.13-15:

I agree with you of course -- that a good case can be made from John 6 alone that we "have" eternal life and we can ignore the bit about "by faith" if we agree not to look at texts that show this to be a future event when we actually get it.

Certainly it is true that we are "really" born-again now as Christians and not at some later point.

Which is WHY we do not see texts saying "and in the age to come - we will be born again".

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Eph 2 - "we are seated with him in the heavenly places" by faith now - even though in reality this does not happen until the Rev 20 event.

1. Mark 10:30
   but that he will receive a hundred times as much now in the present age, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and farms, along with persecutions; and in the age to come, eternal life.
2. Luke 18:30
   who will not receive many times as much at this time and in the age to come, eternal life."

Eternal life is not received until the 1Thess 4 and Rev 20 "event" of the age to come.

 

[BobRyan]

(Matthew 22:31) "But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." Which seems to point to the fact that they are alive.

The key point of your argument above shows why it does not work in Matt 22. In "your argument" you point to the solution for "God is not the God of the dead" being "Because the dead are not really dead" which is close to a self-conflicted argument.

By contrast Christ does NOT say "but regarding the fact that the dead are not really dead have you never heard that..." RATHER Christ shows that the SOLUTION for this statement is uniquely "the future RESURRECTION"

"But as touching the resurrection of THE DEAD"

The contrast could not be more glaring between the soluiton that you are seeking and the one that is actually listed in the text.

Also remember the mount of transfiguration when Moses and Elijah the prophet appeared with Jesus? (Matt 17:2)

#1. Elijah never died - he was taken bodily to heaven.
#2. Moses is reference in Jude 9 which indicates how it is that he is appearing along with the living.

Also see Acts 23:8 where more of the beliefs of the Sadducees are seen. "For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both." Which might explain the words of our Lord in Matthew to the Sadducees.

Indeed this is one of the few times Christ "enters into debate" and his logic is irrefutable to a hostile opponent. The ONLY way they would be forced to concede to his point that "God is not the god of the DEAD" is PROOF of a future resurrection is that they do NOT even remotely accept "the option" of ghosts to start with.

Even the Pharisees in Matt 22 admit that Christ's proof to the Sadduccees using their own understanding of life and death was "irrefutable"

By contrast you propose that the Pharisees would seek 'another solution" than the resurrection of the dead - you assume they would simply ASSUME that the dead are not dead and that no resurrection is necessary to make this statement true "I am the God of Abraham" -- basically you merely "assume" that they found another way to avoid the resurrection as the proof of the resurrection! Truly a self-conflicted argument.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob (Ryan) [not Brother Bob], you still cannot get around the teaching that:
To be absent from the body iis to be present with the Lord.

DHK - it has been pointed out to you a few times already that there is NO such text in ALL of scripture that says

"TO BE absent from the body IS TO BE PRESENT with the Lord".

But I do agree with you on this one point - IF SUCH a text existed it would greatly help your argument -- in fact your argument really NEEDS such a text.

The fact that it is often "imagined" to exist SHOWS just how necessary it is to the view you hold.

Question. Why do people gloss over that fact time after time after time??

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

OK now here is an opportunity on this board for an experiment in honesty - that might be of interest to people on BOTH sides of this question.

Look at that post above - #26.

Surely "someone" on this board will freely admit that they have HEARD the 2Cor 5 text misquoted just as DHK statid it and such person would admit that they heard it soooo many times that they actually thought it actually "existed" in that form.

Come on people - I would like to get a witness that you believed it actually existed in that form!

And then part two - SURELY there is someone on this board that will freely admit that hearing it that way you thought the exact wording in that form was very VERY helpful in making the case that you are immediately present with the Lord as soon as you "leave this decaying body"??

Surely at least ONE person will admit this!!

And finally -- you have to admit to being surprised at some point (maybe even now) at discovering that the text did not actually exist in the form that you had so often heard it!



2 Corinthians 5:8New American Standard Bible (NASB)

8we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.


King James Version (KJV)
8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.


New King James Version (NKJV)
8 We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.


Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
8we have courage, and are well pleased rather to be away from the home of the body, and to be at home with the Lord.

POST #6 PAGE 1

BobRyan

In 2Cor 5 there are THREE states for mankind.

1. Clothed in this decaying tent and ALIVE
2. Unclothed - and dead
3. Clothed with the new body once death is destroyed

1Cor 15 tells us that death is destroyed at the coming of Christ,

In Christ,

Bob

Yes I know I know "all the more details to be ignore" say some --- but I thought I would point them out again.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Allan]

I do not use that parable (or story as you call it) for two reasons.

1. It shows Abraham as having absolute authority over the dead saints. There is no appeal at all to the authority of God in that story.

2. It shows prayers to the dead.

3. Christ shows at the END of that parable that "the POINT" is not to show that ghosts exist or that all dead saints are sitting in Abraham's lap and the wicked are praying to abraham for decisions on who will be resurrected -- but RATHER that those who reject the writings of Moses in the OT as doctrinally authorotative will also misunderstand the teaching and message of Christ.

(And so the POINT Christ was making seemed to introduce yet another topic).

Interestingly -- these key features of the "story" and even Christ's own statement about what it really means - were all ignored by your review of Luke 16.

Figuring out "why" is left as an exercise for the reader.

In Christ,

Bob

Ok, so in your world - Christ was a liar (the dead do not immediately leave their bodies and go to their respective places nor do those in hell plead for someone to tell their loved ones so they don't come TO this place of torments) and did not give God the glory due Him.

Now I understand better your view.

 

[Allan]

OK now here is an opportunity on this board for an experiment in honesty - that might be of interest to people on BOTH sides of this question.

Look at that post above - #26.

Surely "someone" on this board will freely admit that they have HEARD the 2Cor 5 text misquoted just as DHK statid it and such person would admit that they heard it soooo many times that they actually thought it actually "existed" in that form.

Come on people - I would like to get a witness that you believed it actually existed in that form!

And then part two - SURELY there is someone on this board that will freely admit that hearing it that way you thought the exact wording in that form was very VERY helpful in making the case that you are immediately present with the Lord as soon as you "leave this decaying body"??

Surely at least ONE person will admit this!!

And finally -- you have to admit to being surprised at some point (maybe even now) at discovering that the text did not actually exist in the form that you had so often heard it!



2 Corinthians 5:8New American Standard Bible (NASB)

8we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.


King James Version (KJV)
8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.


New King James Version (NKJV)
8 We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.


Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
8we have courage, and are well pleased rather to be away from the home of the body, and to be at home with the Lord.
Bob

Actually, you give added gun powder to DHK quote than he did.

The Greek here uses a continuous sense that from death to being in His presense is instantanious.

Much like Paul stated in Phil (but here it is seem with greater clarity and by the same author)

Phl 1:23 For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better:
Phl 1:24 Nevertheless to abide in the flesh [is] more needful for you.

You will note here in English (but it is seen in greater force in the Greek) Paul is contrasting being alive and here is more necessary (vs 24) than him to depart and to be with Christ which is far better. He is speaking in the present tense and contrasting two things regarding this moment and that is (1) be alive with them NOW or (2) to be dead and with Christ NOW.

Scripture is clear and specific that in death there is no Soul Sleep but an immediate placement with awareness and life.

What do you do with Moses and Elijah speaking with Christ on the Mount of Transfiguration BEFORE the Resurrection. Regardless of Elijah not being dead - MOSES WAS ! They were not is a dormant (Soul Sleep) state. And regardless of if you see Luke 16 as a 'story' or 'parable' it is still more specific than ANY OTHER parable regarding verb tenses and what happens AT death and the living awareness they are in.

Scripture is irrefutable on this, and places your theory (at best) in the catagory of a false teaching.

 

[Cutter]

The point is - the spirit of man departs and goes to God at death - but in that form it is dormant.

Soul sleep is not taught in the Bible. The spirit of man returns to the Father who gave it. What sleeps is the body, awaiting that time when it is resurrected a glorified body.

Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation [even] to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame [and] everlasting contempt.

I think you wold agree our soul is not asleep in the dust, of all places.

1 Corinthians 15:36 [Thou] fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other [grain]:
38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.
39 All flesh [is] not the same flesh: but [there is] one [kind of] flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, [and] another of birds.
40 [There are] also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial [is] one, and the [glory] of the terrestrial [is] another.
41 [There is] one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for [one] star differeth from [another] star in glory.
42 So also [is] the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

The spirit is with God, the body is asleep.
The dead in Christ shall rise first. Since our spirit is with the Lord there is no need for it to rise. The body is what will be raised, as scripture states above, to be reunited with the spirit.

 

[David Lamb]

OK now here is an opportunity on this board for an experiment in honesty - that might be of interest to people on BOTH sides of this question.

Look at that post above - #26.

Surely "someone" on this board will freely admit that they have HEARD the 2Cor 5 text misquoted just as DHK statid it and such person would admit that they heard it soooo many times that they actually thought it actually "existed" in that form.

Come on people - I would like to get a witness that you believed it actually existed in that form!

And then part two - SURELY there is someone on this board that will freely admit that hearing it that way you thought the exact wording in that form was very VERY helpful in making the case that you are immediately present with the Lord as soon as you "leave this decaying body"??

Surely at least ONE person will admit this!!

And finally -- you have to admit to being surprised at some point (maybe even now) at discovering that the text did not actually exist in the form that you had so often heard it!



2 Corinthians 5:8New American Standard Bible (NASB)

8we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.


King James Version (KJV)
8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.


New King James Version (NKJV)
8 We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.


Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
8we have courage, and are well pleased rather to be away from the home of the body, and to be at home with the Lord.




Yes I know I know "all the more details to be ignore" say some --- but I thought I would point them out again.

in Christ,

Bob

I will "admit" (if that is the right word, since I have never denied it, nor to my knowledge been dishonest about it) that the exact English words, "To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord," are not to be found in the Scriptures. Who said they were? Certainly not DHK. He just used those words in his post. He didn't say they were a direct quote from Scripture, any more than you did when you wrote in a previous message on this thread: "Elijah never died - he was taken bodily to heaven."

DHK was not misquoting the bible, as people do when they say "Money is the root of all evil."

Apart from all that, the 2 Corinthians 5 text is not the only place where Paul says that when Christians depart this life, they go straight to be with Christ. Philippians 1.21-23:

21 ¶ For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain.
22 But if I live on in the flesh, this will mean fruit from my labor; yet what I shall choose I cannot tell.
23 For I am hard pressed between the two, having a desire to depart and be with Christ, which is far better.​

Why should dying be "gain" if it meant anything else than "departing and being with Christ"?

 

[Cutter]

What do you do with Moses and Elijah speaking with Christ on the Mount of Transfiguration BEFORE the Resurrection. They were not is a dormant (Soul Sleep) state. And regardless of if you see Luke 16 as a 'story' or 'parable' it is still more specific than ANY OTHER parable regarding verb tenses and what happens AT death and the living awareness they are in.

Amen. And how about Enoch. He walked with the Lord, and God took him, so he could go take a dormant nap.


I don't think so!

 

[Gershom]

Why would Paul be in a fix as to having a desire to depart if that meant he would go in to a dormant state? How is that far better (as he expressed)? If he were facing "soul sleep", he would surely consider remaining in the flesh the better of the two since he loved to minister.

Philippians 1:23-26

Bob Ryan, what do you say?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

I only know, that my life - on the Word of God through Paul - is "hid in Christ in God". And, that Jesus said, Himself, That he who has the Son, has life - eternal life! What cavil about it? Don't we trust God? Don't we believe Christ? Away with it! Dogma, dogma, dogma, where we could have believed and enjoyed, life and eternal security of salvation, in Him!

 

[Andre]

I admit that I have read none of the posts, not even the OP. I am simply giving my view re whether we go directly to heaven when we die.

I think that the answer is no. In my reading of the Scriptures, our ultimate destination (heaven) is a remade physical earth. That earth is not yet in existence - creation is still a-groanin'. Those who have died in Christ are either "sleeping" or in some other "non-heaven-ish" state of existence. Heaven is in the future when Christ redeems the created world (as per 1 Cor 15 and Romans 8).

 

[Andre]

Why would Paul be in a fix as to having a desire to depart if that meant he would go in to a dormant state? How is that far better (as he expressed)? If he were facing "soul sleep", he would surely consider remaining in the flesh the better of the two since he loved to minister.

Philippians 1:23-26

I think the answer lies in the very real possiblility that Paul is speaking phenomenologically when he makes his statement - what it will be like for him as a subject of experience. Even if Paul factually "sleeps" for thousands of years, he (Paul) will not experience that intermediate state of being "dormant" - there is no experience at all in a dreamless state of "sleep". From his perspective, he will go straight from this world into the re-created world (as per 1 Cor 15).

 

[DHK]

OK now here is an opportunity on this board for an experiment in honesty - that might be of interest to people on BOTH sides of this question.

I really would like to see that from you Bob--a little honesty would be a good thing.

Look at that post above - #26.

Surely "someone" on this board will freely admit that they have HEARD the 2Cor 5 text misquoted just as DHK statid it and such person would admit that they heard it soooo many times that they actually thought it actually "existed" in that form.

I never misquoted the verse Bob. If I have demonstrate it. If I haven't will you apologize for it? Probably not. Now look carefully what I said. I worded it very carefully because I knew that you would jump all over me as you have done. I knew what your typical reaction would be. Here is what I said:

you still cannot get around the teaching that:
To be absent from the body iis to be present with the Lord.

I never quoted any statement from the Bible, Bob. I called it a teaching, which it indeed is. Next time, before you throw out the false accusations, read carefully what is being said.

Come on people - I would like to get a witness that you believed it actually existed in that form!

And then part two - SURELY there is someone on this board that will freely admit that hearing it that way you thought the exact wording in that form was very VERY helpful in making the case that you are immediately present with the Lord as soon as you "leave this decaying body"??

Surely at least ONE person will admit this!!

As you can see, they don't have to admit to anything except that you were wrong.

And finally -- you have to admit to being surprised at some point (maybe even now) at discovering that the text did not actually exist in the form that you had so often heard it!

2 Corinthians 5:8New American Standard Bible (NASB)

8we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.


King James Version (KJV)
8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.


New King James Version (NKJV)
8 We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.


Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
8we have courage, and are well pleased rather to be away from the home of the body, and to be at home with the Lord.

Every verse you quoted strengthens my argument--the teaching that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. That is what Paul was teaching. It was a desire that he expressed. He knew that if he departed he would immediately be with the Lord. There is nothing difficult to understand in those verses. As you quoted: "to be absent from the body and to be home with the Lord," (almost identical to what I summarized). That was the NASB. There is no difference.

Yes I know I know "all the more details to be ignore" say some --- but I thought I would point them out again.

Good for you. I am glad now that you can agree with the teaching that I have set forth that is 99% identical with the Scripture that you posted. A paraphrase isn't so bad after all, is it?

 

[Andre]

Every verse you quoted strengthens my argument--the teaching that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord.

This is only true if you can mount an argument as to why we cannot consider the possibility that Paul was speaking as to what his experience would be, rather than making a "third-party" statement about the factual state of affairs about his transition from this life to the next. What is your specific argument as to why this statement from Paul cannot be taken in a "phenomenological" manner, i.e. what things will be like for Paul as a subject of experience?

If I say "to be in my bed at midnight is to hear the alarm clock ringing at 8 AM", I can legitimately be seen to be expressing the view that one second my head is on the pillow and the next, from my perspecitve, I am hearing the alarm clock.

 

[DHK]

If I say "to be in my bed at midnight is to hear the alarm clock ringing at 8 AM", I can legitimately be seen to be expressing the view that one second my head is on the pillow and the next, from my perspecitve, I am hearing the alarm clock.

The argument makes no sense in the context in which it is given. Paul was explaining to the believers at Corinth his desire, and his choices. One choice was to remain with them, and the other (his personal desire) was to be with the Lord. There was no inbetween position. It was one or the other. If you could go back and time and ask any one of those Corinthians if Paul was teaching "soul sleep" they would look at you as if you were from planet mars, astonished that you would even think such a thing! Paul was describing only two choices to them. He would like to remain with them, but at the same time his real inward desire was to be with the Lord. There is no inbetween situation even thought of or considered in the text. No Corinthian would have even imagined such a thing.

 

[BobRyan]

DHK in post #22

Bob (Ryan) [not Brother Bob], you still cannot get around the teaching that:
To be absent from the body iis to be present with the Lord.

No matter what you do that teaching still remains. Sllice it, dice it, butcher it, do what you like, it is not going away. That is what Paul taught.

Bob refutes that -- but then adds a post asking people to admit that they often think of the above statement as though the Bible actually said it. AS IF such a text actually exists as DHK states it.

To which

I will "admit" (if that is the right word, since I have never denied it, nor to my knowledge been dishonest about it) that the exact English words, "To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord," are not to be found in the Scriptures.

Great that you admit to what is actually there. But the point of the question was to ask peopel if they had heard this man-made phrase so often that they had come to "Believe" that scripture actually SAID IT.

David Lamb
Who said they were? Certainly not DHK. He just used those words in his post. He didn't say they were a direct quote from Scripture,

I guess that's what they call "spin doctoring" or is it double-speak?

I am simply asking if anyone has heard this soooooo many times from the pulpit that at some point they were befuddled into thinking that the BIBLE actually said it.

And of course you admit that it does not.


in Christ,

Bob