Check out some similar questions!

crmann · May 23, 2012, 07:22 PM

Originally Posted by galveston

Jesus gave us a clue in the account of the rich man who went to Hell.

He saw Abraham on the other side of an impassable void, but Abraham was not in Heaven, but in Paradise.

That appears to have been the place of the departed righteous before the resurrection of Jesus, with Hell being the place of the departed rebels.

Hell is not the Lake of Fire, because we are told that Hell will be cast into the Lake of Fire.

Incidentally, Satan has never been in Hell. He will be imprisoned for 1,000 years and then go directly to the Lake of Fire.

Hi, Galveston...

The parable of Lazarus and the Rich man has nothing to do with heaven and hell.

Yeshua was giving the Jews a prophecy concerning Israel and the Gentiles.

Lazarus was Abraham's steward, Eliezer... Eliezer was Lazarus's Hebrew name. Lazarus is his Greek name.

The Rich man represented the Jews.

And, you'll not find the word hell either in the Greek or the Hebrew.. The bossom of Abraham was a Hebrew Idiom for the abode of the dead, or She'ol. Or, if you like, Hades (Greek), which was also the Greek word for the abode of the dead.

Cleveland

PaulWalters · Jul 7, 2012, 10:02 AM

Sorry Fred I must disagree,
You must die first before you can go to heaven. Romans 6:3-5 says Jesus had to die first and then be resurrected before he could go to heaven He set the pattern for us. Also Psalm37:29 says the righteous will possess the Earth Forever. The Earth is our final destination. Everybody wants to go to Heaven but Jehovah made the Earth our home, not Heaven. Talk to JehovahsWitnesses,only then you will know the truth. David did not ascend to Heaven Acts 2:34. The dead are asleep! There will be a resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous! Acts 24:15.

Ryantheatheist · Jul 9, 2012, 04:12 AM

It's just a book folks, no-ones going to heaven.

Harry Potter didn't believe he was a real wizard, then he turned out to be... But go and find Daniel Radcliffe in real life and see if he can fly a broomstick.

It is fictional, don't get so high-rate about it... if nobody every went to heaven before jesus... then that means the hundreds and thousands of people who lived before him were just a waste... all those loving communities, sad children and weeping widows lost their loved ones with no chance of seeing them again... Sounds like a really loving and caring lord... oh wait..

Mugsmaster · Jul 9, 2012, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by Vox

Hello, can anyone help me?

Here, in John 3:13, it says that no one has gone to heaven except for Jesus.

I am confused because I know that in the old testament Enoch one day disappeared because God had taken him, and then Elijah as well, who was taken in a charriot of fire.

So what does Jesus mean in John 3:13?

Enoch and Elijah were taken to Abrahams Bosom(Luke 16) a place of paradise where the saved went until Jesus's finished work on the cross. Eph 4

Mugsmaster · Jul 9, 2012, 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by Ryantheatheist

It's just a book folks, no-ones going to heaven.

Harry Potter didn't believe he was a real wizard, then he turned out to be....But go and find Daniel Radcliffe in real life and see if he can fly a broomstick.

It is fictional, don't get so high-rate about it...if nobody every went to heaven before jesus...then that means the hundreds and thousands of people who lived before him were just a waste...all those loving communities, sad children and weeping widows lost their loved ones with no chance of seeing them again....Sounds like a really loving and caring lord....oh wait..

So when the Romans destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem in 70AD That didn't happen historically?

dwashbur · Jul 9, 2012, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by Mugsmaster

So when the Romans destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem in 70AD That didnt happen historically?

Where does the Bible mention the Romans destroying the temple in AD 70?

Foulboy518 · Feb 7, 2013, 11:43 AM

In order to really understand this verse you have to look at the original King James Translation. "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

Notice the words "man" and "he" are not capitalized, but the word "Son" is capitalized. When he says "No man hath acsended... ", he qualifies it with "except he... (man and he are the same person)" He's referring to human spirits in singular tense. All human spirits came from heaven and will return to heaven when we die. In a story (not parable) told by Jesus, this is the place where the rich man and Lazarus went when they died. Both went to the same place which had two sides separated by a great gulf. Remember, all who die will be judged at the same place. When Jesus said in the same chapter "we testify to that we have have seen", he is referring to the Word which was in Him, and the Holy Spirit that ascended and stayed upon Him when John baptized Him. The Word and the Son are the same Person. Remember this, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God... " . In the New Testament the Word was revealed to us through the man Jesus, but in the Old Testament the Word was revealed to Abraham through the man Melchizedek. Do you see were I'm headed with this.

Jesus told Nicodemus... "that which is spirit is spirit and that which is flesh is flesh". He was teaching him to make a distinction between the two. He also told the woman at the well that God is a Spirit. So, the Word (Son) is also a Spirit and since we were created in the image of God, we are also spirits. A spirit does not need a human body in order to exist. Another point... the same spirit that was in the body of Elijah in the Old Testament was also in the body of John the Baptist in the New Testament.

Summary: Jesus was saying that all spirit beings came from heaven and are embodied in human flesh at conception. And they will also return to heaven at the death of the flesh. That also included Him... that is why he said "even the Son of man. Jesus has already received His new glorified body, but we are still waiting to receive ours.

classyT · Feb 9, 2013, 07:20 PM

Foulboy,

Exactly what do you mean when you say that all spirit beings came from heaven? I believe the bible teaches we become spiritual beings at conception, in the womb.

In other words... I wasn't always a spiritual being until I was conceived. Jesus Christ WAS!! And IS and IS to come. Not mankind.

Are you in agreement? Because it sounds like you believe we always were.

dwashbur · Feb 10, 2013, 10:15 AM

I believe the bible teaches we become spiritual beings at conception, in the womb.

Actually, it teaches that we don't become spiritual beings or "living souls" until we take our first breath, Gen 2:7; Job 33:4.

And foulboy518, I do hope you're not trying to claim that the King James is THE original. Based on the manuscript evidence, the phrase "who is in heaven" probably started as a scribe's marginal note and found its way into the text. It's not what John originally wrote.

classyT · Feb 10, 2013, 05:55 PM

I will look those verses up because I don't know what they are off the top of my head. I DO know that John the Baptist leaped in his mother's womb over the news of our Lord Jesus Christ. Explain to me if you can, how he was able to do that if he wasn't already a spirtual being with a soul.

Having said that, I do get that we are all born spiritually dead to God... but we are spirit, soul and body even in the womb, from what I can understand.

classyT · Feb 11, 2013, 06:56 AM

Dave,

OK... I looked up your verses you listed. I do NOT believe that is what God is saying. God breathed into Adam life and therefore mankind became a spiritual being. It doesn't mean the minute someone breathes air for the first time they become a spiritual being.

On the contrary, we are loved, known, fearfully and wonderfully made, called out and very much alive with a soul, body and spirit in the womb.

Leviticus says: For the life of a creature is in the blood ( not in their first breath) just saying

dwashbur · Feb 11, 2013, 11:30 AM

I DO know that John the Baptist leaped in his mother's womb over the news of our Lord Jesus Christ. Explain to me if you can, how he was able to do that if he wasn't already a spirtual being with a soul.

John's example is meaningless for the question. We're also told that he was filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother's womb. No one else before or since has been described that way, so John was unique. It's lousy biblical exegesis to take a unique, once-in-all-of-history event like that and try to extract a general principle from it. The point isn't whether John shows that everyone has a soul before birth; the point is to show that the Messenger recognized the Message through the Holy Spirit that was already in him.

OK... i looked up your verses you listed. I do NOT believe that is what God is saying. God breathed into Adam life and therefore mankind became a spiritual being. It doesn't mean the minute someone breathes air for the first time they become a spiritual being.

What about the Job passage? Both say that the spirit/soul comes alive at that breath. You're welcome not to believe it, but that's what both verses say. And you really haven't given a reason to believe otherwise. All you're saying is "I don't believe it." That's your prerogative, but don't try to claim that it's what the Bible says, because it's not.

On the contrary, we are loved, known, fearfully and wonderfully made, called out and very much alive with a soul, body and spirit in the womb.

Show me a passage that SAYS "very much alive with a soul, body and spirit in the womb." You won't find one. Psalm 139, to which you refer, describes ONLY physical development. It says nothing about the incorporeal part of the human. Look a little more closely and you'll see that it's true.

Leviticus says: For the life of a creature is in the blood ( not in their first breath) just saying

So what? Why don't you quote the whole passage?

For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life. 12 Therefore I say to the Israelites, “None of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood.” Lev 17:11-12

So by your reasoning, the blood being put on the altar for atonement should be our own blood, because we're just like the animals, right? This passage has nothing to do with our topic. If we're just going to grab random statements out of the Bible, then anything goes. So:

Eber, Peleg, Reu 1 Chron 1:25. That proves I'm right.

Checkmate!

Just sayin'.

classyT · Feb 13, 2013, 10:22 AM

Dave,

I don't believe the verse in Job is implying that God physically breathes life into a baby each and every time one is born. He did it ONCE with Adam and he does give us life. He is the creator. That is all the verse is implying.

Speaking of once in all of history, Adam is not a good example because he was never in the womb. God physically breathed life into him. I DO think John the Baptist is a great example but if you don't think so.. consider Jacob and Esau. The two were fighting in Rebeckah's womb. The Lord gave her a prophecy concerning them.
Genesis 25:23-24. Before Jacob took take his first breath he already had his brothers heel in his hand. Those two little rascals were alive and fighting body, soul and spirit in the womb. I didn't say so... the bible does.

The reason I didn't finish the verse in Leviticus is because I didn't need to. The life of flesh is in the blood. That is where God says life begins.. when there is blood. The rest of the verse didn't pertain to what we were discussing. Either life is in the blood and it is a true statement or it isn't. This has nothing to do with atonement.

dwashbur · Feb 13, 2013, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by ;

I don't believe the verse in Job is implying that God physically breathes life into a baby each and every time one is born. He did it ONCE with Adam and he does give us life. He is the creator. That is all the verse is implying.

I didn't say "God physically breathes life into a bay." I said it indicates spiritual life begins when the baby takes that first breath. We're talking about spiritual life here; why would I suggest that it's a physical thing? Do you really believe that God took some kind of form and physically gave Adam mouth-to-mouth? That's absurd.

Speaking of once in all of history, Adam is not a good example because he was never in the womb. God physically breathed life into him. I DO think John the Baptist is a great example but if you don't think so..

Of course you do. Even though he's not. Once again, we're talking about a unique event. But the infusion of life into Adam gives us a hint about how/when it happens to the rest of us. Whether he was in the womb is irrelevant.

consider Jacob and Esau. The two were fighting in Rebeckah's womb. The Lord gave her a prophecy concerning them.
Genesis 25:23-24. Before Jacob took take his first breath he already had his brothers heel in his hand.

Yet another unique situation, predetermined by God for the formation of an entire nation. These are the only kinds of examples you can find, and they tell us nothing about the rest of us.

Those two little rascals were alive and fighting body, soul and spirit in the womb. I didn't say so... the bible does.

If the Bible really says it, show me where it says "body, soul and spirit in the womb." You're adding that yourself. It's not in the text. So don't try to claim the Bible says it when it's actually your own words tacked onto the Bible.

The reason I didn't finish the verse in Leviticus is because I didn't need to. The life of flesh is in the blood. That is where God says life begins.. when there is blood. The rest of the verse didn't pertain to what we were discussing. Either life is in the blood and it is a true statement or it isn't. This has nothing to do with atonement.

It has everything to do with atonement, that's what the passage is about. It says nothing at all about "where God says life begins." You are correct about one thing, though: none of that passage pertains to what we're discussing. WHY did he say the life is in the blood? Because the blood is what is used to make the atonement. That is the ONLY reason that statement exists, and it still has nothing to do with the present topic. This is the kind of cherry-picking of biblical materials, without regard to context or culture or anything else, that makes Christians look as though they don't know what they're talking about.

classyT · Feb 13, 2013, 12:35 PM

Dave,

I gave you two good examples of babies in the womb who appear to be alive spiritually and have souls. How many do you need until it becomes clear? My examples according to you are always obscure, rare, random, once in all of history.

What do you mean did God take on a form? It was the Lord Jesus Christ and yes I believe he physically made man and breathed into him. How is that absurd?

dwashbur · Feb 13, 2013, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by ;

I gave you two good examples of babies in the womb who appear to be alive spiritually and have souls. How many do you need until it becomes clear? My examples according to you are always obscure, rare, random, once in all of history.

No, you gave me two examples of babies in the womb that you inferred have souls. Both were unique steps in the history of God's revelation, so if you want to make such things normative for everyone, you have to give good reasons from the text and context. You haven't done that, you've just said "I believe they had souls, so there." That's not evidence. It's simplistic proof-texting, and it's not going to help here. The only thing we know for sure about John in the womb is, he had some kind of telepathy because he detected the presence of Jesus in another woman's womb. How many other babies can you name with such capability? Likewise with Jacob and Esau; if they knew they were going to be fighting over kingdoms, they were both clairvoyant beyond all comprehension, since they were still unborn babies who didn't even have language yet. Again, how many other babies in history have had such superhuman abilities? That's why they aren't normative for determining anything, because they ARE unique. If you can't see that, it's your problem, not mine.

What do you mean did God take on a form? It was the Lord Jesus Christ and yes I believe he physically made man and breathed into him. How is that absurd?

Where, in any of the biblical text, does anything ever imply that the God who created and breathed life into Adam was "the Lord Jesus Christ"? There's no hint of this in either testament. The truth is, we don't know what form God might have taken in the garden, so you're pulling that out of left field. We have to go by what the text actually says, not what you think you can read into it to support your ideas.

We've digressed enough from the original topic.

classyT · Feb 14, 2013, 05:52 AM

Dave,

John 1:1-3

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him and witout him was not any thing made that was made.

I think those verses are pretty clear. The Lord Jesus made Adam.

The babies had personalities and therefore we can conclude they had souls. It is hard to wrestle your brother and leap for joy without some kind of emotion.

I don't have a problem, I am not absurd and I don't pull things out of left field. I also don't have to put you down because you don't agree with me.

I do agree we have digressed.

dwashbur · Feb 14, 2013, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by ;

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him and witout him was not any thing made that was made.

I think those verses are pretty clear. The Lord Jesus made Adam.

Of course, if you cherry-pick a little more, you can find verses that indicate that all 3 members of the godhead were involved in creation. And you won't find a single indication anywhere that any of them took physical form to do so. This is the kind of reading-in that I'm talking about. It's the favored method of biblical interpretation among super-conservative Evangelicals, and it makes them look uninformed. The simple fact is, what you're looking for isn't there. So you have to find ways to insert it into texts that don't really say what you want. Again, you're welcome to do so, but that doesn't mean it's right. A few books on genuine biblical interpretation would do you a world of good, but that's on your head, not mine. I've done what I can. I'm out of this conversation.

classyT · Feb 14, 2013, 01:30 PM

Dave,

You have done what you can? LOL LOL that is too funny. Ok I will make a deal with you I will look into a books on genuine biblical interpretation but ONLY if you pick up your bible and read all about the fruit of the spirit. Being a nice guy is basic christianity 101. :P

Curtis Wilson · Feb 28, 2013, 09:50 PM

You have to read the entire scripture first, which is. Joh 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
Jesus lived in worlds at the same time, on earth and in Heaven. All born again Christians live in two different worlds at the same time also. Christ has raised us up from the dead,(past tense), not some day! When Jesus comes back he is coming to get our physical bodies so they can be changed. That is why its called the resurrection of the dead. Dead means corps (body) Jesus said out of his own mouth that he was on earth doing the will of his Father, and also in Heaven with his Father! Think about it
Curtis