Heaven or Hell?

[bbyrd009]

From what I read, the Samaritans were considered "half breeds" and hated by the Jews. The Jews intermarried with the foreigners or something like that.

i guess the Samaritans were Jews, too, who believed that their Pentateuch was not corrupted by the Babylonian captivity? So it turns out that the Babylonian Jews who returned and were now running things were the half-breeds i guess, at least from the Samaritan pov. Don't go in the way of the Gentiles, and don't go to any Samaritan towns might be bc they didn't need it, they were likely not the "lost sheep" at least, put it that way. Jesus certainly seemed comfy enough around them to spend a week with them alone, huh?

 

[Nancy]

i guess the Samaritans were Jews, too, who believed that their Pentateuch was not corrupted by the Babylonian captivity? So it turns out that the Babylonian Jews who returned and were now running things were the half-breeds i guess, at least from the Samaritan pov. Don't go in the way of the Gentiles, and don't go to any Samaritan towns might be bc they didn't need it, they were likely not the "lost sheep" at least, put it that way. Jesus certainly seemed comfy enough around them to spend a week with them alone, huh?

I've often wondered about that...since they were "mixed" in their ancestry, maybe they weren't from the correct tribe?

 

[bbyrd009]

I've often wondered about that...since they were "mixed" in their ancestry, maybe they weren't from the correct tribe?

i guess it depends on which side we get the story from? Apparently their pov is that it is the Jews who returned from captivity that are mixed, and not themselves. Imo nothing has changed, we now have Ashkenazi Jews running Zionist Israel (Incorporated) right, and they pretty much hate the Sephardim

another perspective might be that they are considered to be "mixed" in their theology by the returning Jews, and i guess that was a chief complaint even before the captivity, but imo this requires a lot of...myopia or whatever at all of the Greek gods portrayed in our supposedly Holy Scripture?

granted, they married outside their race--which they were all from one of the tribes originally i guess--and some maybe even adopted pagan gods, but then our scribes are busily scribing out Jupiter and Dike and several other gods in our Bibles, so it isn't too hard to detect some hypocrisy going on there imo

iow it seems that maybe the Samaritans are just more amenable to adopting outside influences that produce good fruit, whereas the State Sanctioned types will always run toward stratification, and resist change

so the "mixed race" thing, while true, i am finding to be a red herring, seems like mostly a pot calling a kettle black to me. The whole point of practicing racial purity OT was to show that it would fail imo, not to promote it? i mean agreed, they married pagans early on, and this separated them from the rest of the Jews, the "lost sheep," let us not forget.

 

[larry2]

we do not yet know what we will become, Naomi,
No one has ever gone up to heaven except He Who came down from it . .

Hi dear brethren Byrrd009,

I’m with Sister Naomi25 on this one. Your quote of Joh 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, is speaking of Jesus’ pre-ascension when He went there to take all paradise to heaven with Him. Jesus needed to die first so that heaven was opened to us which believe.

Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive (all in Abraham’s bosom which was paradise), and gave gifts unto men.

Eph 4:9 (Now that He ascended, what is it but that He also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? (In Luk 23:43 Jesus said to the thief on the cross "Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise."

We have a hope in Christ that the world doesn’t. :)

 

[bbyrd009]

Hi dear brethren Byrrd009,

I’m with Sister Naomi25 on this one. Your quote of Joh 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, is speaking of Jesus’ pre-ascension when He went there to take all paradise to heaven with Him. Jesus needed to die first so that heaven was opened to us which believe.

Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive (all in Abraham’s bosom which was paradise), and gave gifts unto men.

Eph 4:9 (Now that He ascended, what is it but that He also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? (In Luk 23:43 Jesus said to the thief on the cross "Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise."

We have a hope in Christ that the world doesn’t. :)

wadr i would invest that hope in Life, more abundantly and trust that we do not yet know what we will become, rather than following the Cult of Sol Invictus that has been inferred into what we now call "Christianity." Then those vv will read differently wadr, once we have removed the perspective that the entire rest of the world also shares, not to put too fine a point on it i hope

i mean notice that i did not disagree with Naomi, bc i do not know; but you guys assure me you know, which disagrees with Scripture, in other places besides "Life, more abundantly" too. Bam pursue Death More Abundantly if it serves you ok, but maybe at least go and read where the RCC turned Christianity into the Cult of Sol Invictus via Constantine et al when no one was apparently looking.

No one can Quote a single instance of Christ Returning or a single soul ever going into heaven, right, and these are all supposedly "literalists" to boot? "Today shalt thou be with Me in Paradise" also does not stop to reflect on the fact that someone dying by crucifixion cannot even speak their last couple of days, ergo that was like day 1, and they would not have even died that day anyway, see

"Paradise," Thayer's
1. among the Persians a grand enclosure or preserve, hunting-ground, park,shady and well-watered, in which wild animals were kept for the hunt; it was enclosed by walls and furnished with towers for the hunters

!
so let's define Paradise a little better first maybe imo, see the thief maybe entered "Paradise" that day bc he entered the writings of the Gospels, and became a concept in others' salvation that day maybe, not that the concept of 3 and 2 is anything new or anything anyway, even then it was ancient i guess

 

[larry2]

No one can Quote a single instance of Christ Returning or a single soul ever going into heaven

Hi again BByrd009.

As to your mentioning Catholicism, I came out of it when another Christian asked If I was saved, and I didn’t know what they were talking about. Of course I argued with them much prior to me reading my bible.

Stating that there is no reference to anyone caught up into heaven seems to be shown different by Paul’s statement in 2Co 12:2. I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

Were there others? How about Jesus’ angel of Rev 1:1? What of the Apostle John caught forth to heaven in Rev 4:1 and shown things to be hereafter? I can only go by what I believe, and prayerfully give scripture as evidence. Thanks.

 

[bbyrd009]

As to your mentioning Catholicism, I came out of it when another Christian asked If I was saved, and I didn’t know what they were talking about. Of course I argued with them much prior to me reading my bible.

ok, so now you're a Protestant then i guess? Only you still believe that you will go to heaven when you die (Mithraism, CofSI), and you still go to what you surely still call "church" on "Sun"day, and you still embrace the idea of "worshipping" Christ, right.

and i have done all these too, ok, i'm not suggesting that they are condemned necessarily--for children--and even heirs--under servants until they inherit--but i can say that there are more rungs on that ladder, and they are going to make knowledge brings sorrow come more into focus imo.

Your understanding of "breaking up Nehushtan," since you now recognize that you are The Priest, might be instructive here also

 

[bbyrd009]

Stating that there is no reference to anyone caught up into heaven seems to be shown different by Paul’s statement in 2Co 12:2. I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

seems to be, yes, but we have just recently dissected this one, and i can say with some confidence that Paul is likely not being understood by the wise there either.

But i'm glad of a chance to ask someone who is not fam with the dissection, if you would could you state the point of Paul's rapture scenario there, what was the point to your mind? i mean was "was caught up to paradise and heard inexpressible things, things that no one is permitted to tell" the whole point, in your opinion? ty

 

[bbyrd009]

God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

well, but Paul has already plainly stated that he might have been dreaming too right,
Whether he was in the body or out of the body, I don't know, God knows.

Were there others? How about Jesus’ angel of Rev 1:1?

ok well we haven't verified a first one yet, let's not forget; but Rev 1:1, The revelation of Jesus Christ that God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John you would have to point out any souls that went to heaven there for me, sorry, and...

What of the Apostle John caught forth to heaven in Rev 4:1 and shown things to be hereafter?

"hereafter" what, may i ask? Why do we assume "hereafter physical death?" i see no "hereafter" in Rev at all, and if you do find one i would read it in the context of Rev 1:1, where John has already made plain that he was having a vision? And that would have been a great spot to put "hereafter," had it been intended? "What must soon take place in the hereafter," like that?

Would i argue that he did not go up to the third heaven, even though he was right here the whole time? Heck no, i agree that he did that, and we should too!

my premise here is that we are deceived when we come to believe like the RCC teaches and the whole rest of the world already more or less believes, in this life that supposedly begins only after we have literally died, forgetting that we were supposed to "die" in baptism, right, our New Life is supposed to be in Christ, right now, and Christ is revealed in us; that i can Quote, this Jesus Returning thing, this big planet-wide miracle that every "believer" is pretty much seeking, i can understand how ppl got the impression, but i can't support it with Scripture, except maybe in English see

but even many "lost" ppl have no probs plainly spouting this party line thing, stating that they are surely "going to hell," etc.
someone else surely sees the hypocrisy in this, i hope

 

[bbyrd009]

I can only go by what I believe, and prayerfully give scripture as evidence. Thanks.

ok, well fwiw i would pick you for a judge over me any day lol, and i mean that the nice way, the 1 Samuel 8 way iow
we can all only go by what we believe, and we are all going to be judged only for our works, not our beliefs, near as i can tell anyway. Weird huh

 

[larry2]

ok, well fwiw i would pick you for a judge over me any day lol, and i mean that the nice way, the 1 Samuel 8 way iow
we can all only go by what we believe, and we are all going to be judged only for our works, not our beliefs, near as i can tell anyway. Weird huh

Thanks my friend. Long ago I determined to search for answers to my beliefs, and found me wanting in many areas of scripture to my own satisfaction. It became a passion, and determined effort. I came to find the meaning of word upon word, and precept upon precept to guide me.

I like all believers start as babes in Christ. I came from Catholicism and now believe I was as saved there as I am now, but without understanding any of it. I entered Evangelic Free teachings, joined a local Bible Church until it broke up, went to First Baptist and entered their Bus Ministry, taught the teen group, and was led to pray to receive the Holy Spirit due to one of my students questions of it.

Me, my family, and all the students but the one questioning, and one other friend of hers received the Holy Spirit evidenced by speaking in tongues. Could I now accept something I formally preached against? No, not in good conscience, but I soon began attending that new non-denominational Christian assembly. In fact they have no church membership as they consider all who have called upon the name of the Lord to be in Christ, and that includes even Catholics that do.

Do we as children of God all believe the same? Of course not, but it is not my understanding that justifies me, but my faith in God's provision for me. I have often used the following scripture to explain such differences, and that is Rom Rom 14:1-4.
Rom 14:1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
Rom 14:2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
Rom 14:3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

Blessings in Christ Jesus. :)

 

[Willie T]

All this confusion I am seeing is one of the reasons I was so thrilled to find that book, "How to Read The Bible For All Its Worth", years ago... and why I so vehemently recommended it to Sean to read.