Can someone explain the Trinity please...

[Unification]

"which is in heaven" is a spurious fragment at the end of the verse that makes no sense. It was Jesus, the Son of man himself, speaking while he was yet on the earth.

There is no time for God

 

[Unification]

"which is in heaven" is a spurious fragment at the end of the verse that makes no sense. It was Jesus, the Son of man himself, speaking while he was yet on the earth.

You yourself say of things as the angel of the Lord, Michael, etc.... Where could Gods dwelling place be with mankind besides inside of them?

 

[cataway]

There is no time for God

well when you get time let us know

 

[cataway]

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.

You're still looking at this from an earthly/literal perspective. To perhaps make this easier on you, when you think Father.... You can look up in the sky and see the literal heavens. When you think Son/the Christ, one needs to be looking within themselves and the heavens within and inside of them. No one can ever understand what spiritual "evening" is (the spiritual marriage) because all they see and are concerned with are physical,outward, earthly forms of everything, particularly marriage.

The serpent lifted up in the wilderness is the mind, and the Son of man must be lifted up too. Your veil and covering needs removed on your mind. Trust me, when the heavens are opened up within you, you'll know it. The resurrection and coming of the Christ is not something you'd miss.
Prior verse... You still don't even understand earthly things, what makes you think you can ever understand spiritual things? Lift up your mind.

you are likely stuck on the idea that Jesus could be in two places at one time . sorry but that's not possible . fact is Jesus was on earth when he said ''And no man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven''

 

[Kenny]

Actually it does... The bible tells us basically, when we are dead, we cease to exist. Period. We are dead until the resurrection. That's why Paul tells us that we have hope in the resurrection. He never mentions heaven going. Can you give us a verse that tells us that we are separted at death?

II Cor 5:8 is one: 8We are confident , I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

 

[Kenny]

A few problems here.


No it doesnt. There is no afterlife. My vereses were talking about what happens to you in death. Your bringing in something else. Your bringing in your afterlife. Are you afraid of death?

So you are in the viewpoint of the Sadducee and I am of the viewpoint of the Pharisees.

How can I be afraid of death? I have a hope, a certainty and a promise. I am a believer.

Again, your taking it out of context. Enoch did not go to heaven. No one will recieve a glorified body until Christ returns. No one has ever gone to heaven, only Jesus. Enoch was taken somewhere else on earth.

To my blessing, scripture says otherwise. The context is quite appropriate. If anything, your statement that Enoch was taken somewhere else on earth not only has no scriptural support, but is conjecture and is definitely out of context. I prefer staying with what scriptures say.

To say that no one has gone to heaven is to forget the martyrs spoken of in Revelation and it is in violation of other scriptures.

This just means that they died and are buried with their fathers.

We will have to agree to disagree since.

Ransom is redeemed. Soul is life. It's not talking about a "soul" that some people think it is. In the bible a soul can eat, die, sleep, weep, etc. There is no such thing as an "immortal soul". You will never find those two words together in scripture.

Since your soul is combined with your spirit (scripturally) it is also eternal.

Elijah never went to heaven. God took him into the "heavens", not heaven where God dwells. God transported him somewhere else. We know that he didn't die, because in 2 Chron, Elijah is writing a letter to the king seven years later.

You have your time-table incorrect, God took him into heaven.

When the bible talks about death, why cant you believe what it's saying? Why throw in things like, that's only talking about the body, but the soul goes to heaven. Show me a verses on that one!! Why does life have to go on in death? What hope of the resurrection would we have if that was the case? Doesnt make sense does it........ No one has ever gone to heaven, only Christ.

I guess I could ask you the same questions? Scriptures have already been provided.

Incidentally, do you believe in Romans 10:8-10? If you do, then let's love the brethren and preach the Gospel which is the power of God unto salvation.

 

[Kenny]

you need to try harder

It is as easy as believing what was written.

 

[Kenny]

The first resurrection does not occur all at once. These ones' whose life-blood was sacrificed for "bearing witness concerning Jesus", their blood cried out as did Abel's. (Re 12:17; Ge 4:10) They are given life (as symbolized by white robes.) And yet they do not begin ruling as kings and priests yet. They await the remaining ones of Christ's brothers to finish their faithful course as humans. (1 Thess 4:16,17)

But it still shows that though their bodies perished, they are still alive and certainly have not received their glorified bodies.

 

[Unification]

you are likely stuck on the idea that Jesus could be in two places at one time . sorry but that's not possible . fact is Jesus was on earth when he said ''And no man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven''

And this applies within your life how so? Or did Jesus come to stroke His own ego?

 

[Kolibri]

"which is in heaven" is a spurious fragment at the end of the verse that makes no sense. It was Jesus, the Son of man himself, speaking while he was yet on the earth.

@Unification
spurious means that this part of the verse has no support in the older manuscripts. Meaning it was not in the originals. It was inserted at a later date.

We can not use this part of the verse to base our teaching on. Not that we can't learn the truth from these bibles that don't seem to care about authenticity, but it takes a bit more work.

 

[Kolibri]

But it still shows that though their bodies perished, they are still alive and certainly have not received their glorified bodies.

not really. Blood can figuratively speak but not literally. We saw that in the case of Abel. He was not literally alive, and yet his shed blood 'cried out for justice'. Only here the blood is given "words" to understand what justice is being cried out for. The value of their lives was personified. This is a vision made up of symbols, no?

 

[Unification]

@Unification
spurious means that this part of the verse has no support in the older manuscripts. Meaning it was not in the originals. It was inserted at a later date.

We can not use this part of the verse to base our teaching on. Not that we can't learn the truth from these bibles that don't seem to care about authenticity, but it takes a bit more work.

It makes sense to me. The originals don't exist, good thing the scriptures don't give life, or believing in that verse having much relevance. What's authentic is the Spirit only.

 

[cataway]

To my blessing, scripture says otherwise. The context is quite appropriate. If anything, your statement that Enoch was taken somewhere else on earth not only has no scriptural support, but is conjecture and is definitely out of context. I prefer staying with what scriptures say.

To say that no one has gone to heaven is to forget the martyrs spoken of in Revelation and it is in violation of other scriptures.

actually, moorea is correct

 

[Kolibri]

It makes sense to me. The originals don't exist, good thing the scriptures don't give life, or believing in that verse having much relevance. What's authentic is the Spirit only.

See that is where we differ.

"Now [the Jews from Be-roe'a] were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they accepted the word with greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so." - Acts 17:11

While we do not discount the spirit's influence in uncovering the meaning in the scriptures, we use scripture as the touchstone. You seem to be doing things in reverse.

You claim to carefully examine the Spirit to see if the Scriptures are so. That is getting the cart before the horse.

--------------------------------------
We can know the originals do not have that verse fragment because the oldest available manuscripts and fragments do not have it.

 

[cataway]

It is as easy as believing what was written.

not saying you cant read . problem is .................your reading misinformation which is taking you down a false path

 

[Unification]

See that is where we differ.

"Now [the Jews from Be-roe'a] were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they accepted the word with greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so." - Acts 17:11

While we do not discount the spirit's influence in uncovering the meaning in the scriptures, we use scripture as the touchstone. You seem to be doing things in reverse.

You claim to carefully examining the Spirit to see if the Scriptures are so. That is getting the cart before the horse.

Thank you for bringing that scripture up... Why was "the word" and "the Scriptures" used in two different words in two separate places. Why not it be "carefully examining the word daily" instead?

 

[Kolibri]

Thank you for bringing that scripture up... Why was "the word" and "the Scriptures" used in two different words in two separate places. Why not it be "carefully examining the word daily" instead?

When we read verse 10 we find out that it was the spoken word that was heard. Paul and Silas were speaking in the synagogue of the Jews in that city. So the Jews here took the time the time to check Paul's scriptural references. From daily we can infer that either Paul and Silas spoke for consecutive days or that the listeners, in being eager, were reexamining what they learned over and over. Perhaps both.

 

[Unification]

When we read verse 10 we find out that it was the spoken word that was heard. Paul and Silas were speaking in the synagogue of the Jews in that city. So the Jews here took the time the time to check Paul's scriptural references. From daily we can infer that either Paul and Silas spoke for consecutive days or that the listeners, in being eager, were reexamining what they learned over and over. Perhaps both.

Who spoke the words? There is a fine line between the meaning of the "word" and "scriptures." Which scriptural references... The OT? Is the gospel in the OT also?

 

[Unification]

When we read verse 10 we find out that it was the spoken word that was heard. Paul and Silas were speaking in the synagogue of the Jews in that city. So the Jews here took the time the time to check Paul's scriptural references. From daily we can infer that either Paul and Silas spoke for consecutive days or that the listeners, in being eager, were reexamining what they learned over and over. Perhaps both.

John 5:37-40. You should know by now that the letter kills but the Spirit gives life.

 

[Unification]

When we read verse 10 we find out that it was the spoken word that was heard. Paul and Silas were speaking in the synagogue of the Jews in that city. So the Jews here took the time the time to check Paul's scriptural references. From daily we can infer that either Paul and Silas spoke for consecutive days or that the listeners, in being eager, were reexamining what they learned over and over. Perhaps both.

John 10:35King James Version (KJV)
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

Why not, and "the word cannot be broken?" It's the same thing to you correct?

Who does the word of God come to?