But shun profane and vain babblings

[Zao is life]

Does your mum no your are online?

Your remarks are so childish it's clear whose mum needs to know he is online.

I don't like using this word, but your remarks have now gone from really foolish and ridiculous to PATHETIC.

Take your teddy and go to sleep.

 

[Stewardofthemystery]

Goodness sakes. I was trying to have a civil discussion with you and you obviously don't want any part of that. Pathetic.

I was just stating why you think that way.

Yes, exactly! That is what Amil teaches as well. We relate that to his binding as well.

From what I have gathered from you and other Amils is that you think Satan has already been bound and is even now loosed again for the short season. That is way off course. Satan has not been bound yet for the thousand years.

Was anyone in OT times delivered from the power of sin and death?

Sure

Did Satan not have the power of death until the death of Christ took it away as Hebrews 2:14-15 says?

That power has not yet been taken away though. It is evident that people are still sinning and they are still dying. When the last enemy is destroyed then The power of Death is destroyed.

Did it not change what Satan was formerly able to do when he had the power of death and when the vast majority of the world had "no hope" and were "without God in the world"?

It changed for believers, but not for those who are still of the unbelieving world. Sin is still reigning unto death in the unbelieving world.

But, you want to lump me in with them despite not knowing me at all.

The words that a man speaks is the overflow of the heart, thereby I know your heart.

There's no True...but. We are saved by grace through faith and not by works.

The grace of God is not a license to sin though. If someone can fall away from the faith by returning to a life of sin then works matter. A faith without righteous works is a dead faith.

 

[grafted branch]

31 But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read that which was spoken to you by God, saying,
32 "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.

What has "the resurrection of the dead" got to do with what Jesus was saying about people being found alive in the body (zao), in your opinion?

The Sadducees believed a person ceased to exist after they physically died, along with their belief that there was no resurrection. Jesus directly answered their question about the resurrection in Matthew 22:30, then in verse 31 Jesus used the phrase “regarding the resurrection of the dead” to show how the old testament indicated that dead people of faith did exist after they physically died, they were zao.


In Exodus 3:6 God told Moses “I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob”. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were physically dead when God spoke those words.

A question for you, were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob zao when God spoke the words in Exodus 3:6? Keep in mind that Matthew 22:32 says God is not the God of the dead, but of the living (zao).

 

[Zao is life]

A question for you, were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob zao when God spoke the words in Exodus 3:6? Keep in mind that Matthew 22:32 says God is not the God of the dead, but of the living (zao).

No, but God - the "I am" in the sentence - was zao when the words were spoken.

The Greek word zao as used in the New Testament is always used in reference either to the living God (the eternal "I am") or to humans who are alive in their bodies.

There are no exceptions. Neither of your references you have so far produced constitute exceptions.

 

[David in NJ]

Don't get thrown off by that. It should be firstfruit instead of firstfruits. The Greek word can mean either firstfruit or firstfruits and then there's nothing in the Greek which demands that it has to be plural. That's why there are a few translations that translate it as firstfruit instead of firstfruits. I assume the reason the KJV and other translations have it translated as "firstfruits" is because the firstfruits were the first of the season's crops that believing Jews would offer to God. So, it's relating that to Jesus being the first to rise from the dead unto bodily immortality. Regardless, it clearly says that Jesus Himself is the firstfruits or firstfruit. That is undeniable if you are actually objective about it. It doesn't say them that slept are the firstfruits with Christ, it says Christ is the firstfruits...of them that slept.

You are trying to say those who are Christ's are included in the firstfruits, but you are missing that Paul differentiated between "Christ the firstfruits" and "they that are Christ's at his coming".

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

This does not say Christ and they that are Christ's the firstfruits as you imagine. Paul gives the order. Christ the firstfruits is first. That's Christ Himself. Then next in order (AFTERWARD) are "they that are Christ's at his coming". Nowhere does it call them the firstfruits.

Don't get thrown off by that.

lol x100

This does not say Christ and they that are Christ's the firstfruits as you imagine.

lol x100,000,000

That's Christ Himself.

ABSOLUTELY TRUE

Then next in order (AFTERWARD)

ABSOLUTELY TRUE

"they that are Christ's

ABSOLUTELY TRUE

"at His Coming"

BINGO

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

There you go again, still lying about what I believe - even though I said nothing that could give you that impression.

Here's a hint: When you quoted scriptures that show souls as being conscious after death - i.e Jesus' parable of Lazarus and the rich man, and what Revelation says about the souls under the altar, did I argue against it?

Why did I not even comment about those scriptures? It's because what you were saying was implying that I was saying something I was not saying - see #92 again. What does what I said here have to do with "soul sleep"?

I said, "The human spirit that dies in Christ will go to be with Christ when the body of the person dies - but because spirit is spirit, it will have no limbs because its limbs will be in the grave until the resurrection of the body when it is raised a spiritual incorruptible body that cannot decay."

My mistake. I should have said "The human spirit (of the person) that dies in Christ when the body of the person dies",

but the fact that I said when the body dies and "the human spirit goes to be with Christ" should show that I did not mean that the human spirit dies, and that I was talking about the person who dies in Christ when the body dies.

The above is in itself making a distinction between body and soul or spirit, which you afterwards falsely accused me of not making distinction between.

I said, "Mankind was created to live on God's created earth, in a created body. We were not created to "go to heaven when we die and live forever in heaven". Death is the enemy of God."

What does what I said here have to do with "soul sleep"?

Who are you to demand an answer from me when I've made it clear when you have accused me of this before this thread that I do not believe that there will be no conscious awareness of the soul or the spirit who has died?

Who are you to repeatedly make false statements about what I believe and then still expect an answer from me just because you demand it?

I simply said that the Bible does not tell us any more, which is a fact. You have shown yourself up once again for the kind of thing you will do when you think the person you are deliberately lying about regarding what he believes, won't see.

@rwb @grafted branch

Are you just angry all the time? You should try to calm down before you have a heart attack. You are not easy to follow. I am not purposely misrepresenting your view no matter what you say. I know I am not. You are just not easy to follow because of your way of communicating. At least for me. I can't help that.

You referenced this comment that you had made: "Mankind was created to live on God's created earth, in a created body. We were not created to "go to heaven when we die and live forever in heaven"". How do you think that comes across? It comes across as if you were saying we don't go to heaven when we die. I guess that's not what you meant, but can you at least acknowledge that can be the impression someone can get from that statement?

Can you just clear it up for me then? Do you believe that people have consciousness in heaven after they physically die? It seems that you're saying you believe they do?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You are trying to say those who are Christ's are included in the firstfruits, but you are missing that Paul differentiated between "Christ the firstfruits" and "they that are Christ's at his coming".

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

This does not say Christ and they that are Christ's the firstfruits as you imagine. Paul gives the order. Christ the firstfruits is first. That's Christ Himself. Then next in order (AFTERWARD) are "they that are Christ's at his coming". Nowhere does it call them the firstfruits.

lol x100


lol x100,000,000


ABSOLUTELY TRUE


ABSOLUTELY TRUE


ABSOLUTELY TRUE


BINGO

Why are you acting so childish? It differentiates between Christ the firstfruits and those who are Christ's at His coming, right? Cleary, it does. So, why are you trying to act as if those who are His at His coming are the firstfruits when it says that only Christ Himself is the firstfruits?

 

[David in NJ]

Why are you acting so childish? It differentiates between Christ the firstfruits and those who are Christ's at His coming, right? Cleary, it does. So, why are you trying to act as if those who are His at His coming are the firstfruits when it says that only Christ Himself is the firstfruits?

Why are you acting so childish?

You have been granting the opportunity...........

So, why are you trying to act as if those who are His at His coming are the firstfruits when it says that only Christ Himself is the firstfruits?

Your statement here is failing the communicative process of the English language contained within the verse.


If you were to speak with a English Language instructor about this verse/sentence structure, he/she will tell you that the entire body of resurrected christians are INCLUDED and an INSEPARABLE Part of CHRIST as the Firstfruits of God = based upon the inclusive design of the sentence topic and body written by the Apostle Paul.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It's describing you too. You've made that much obvious by your repeated attacks when ...

Oh wait a minute. I get it now. @Spiritual Israelite is you - it's your other account here. That's why you keep responding to what is said to @Spiritual Israelite

And there I was thinking you were trying to start a new argument. My bad.

LOL. You have completely lost your mind at this point. You should probably take a break from this for awhile and get some help.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You have been granting the opportunity...........

Don't try to make excuses.

You statement here is failing the communicative process of the English language contained within the verse.


If you were to speak with a English Language instructor about this verse/sentence structure, he/she will tell you that the entire body of resurrected christians are INCLUDED and an INSEPARABLE Part of CHRIST as the Firstfruits of God = based upon the inclusive design of the sentence topic and body written by the Apostle Paul.

That's ridiculous. Is this all you have to offer? This is weak. Why do you ignore that Paul differentiated between Christ's resurrection and the resurrection of those who are His at His coming? He said there is an ORDER to it. There is no order to it in your view because you say both Christ and those who are His are the first resurrection. But, a first resurrection implies a second resurrection and that's why Paul talked about an ORDER to the resurrections. Christ's was first. The resurrection of His own at His coming is the second. Your attempt to make the resurrection of His people part of the first resurrection is based only on your doctrinal bias and nothing more.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Could have fooled me.

I was specifically referencing this post: But shun profane and vain babblings

Show me where I said anything insulting in that post.

 

[grafted branch]

No, but God - the "I am" in the sentence - was zao when the words were spoken.

The Greek word zao as used in the New Testament is always used in reference either to the living God (the eternal "I am") or to humans who are alive in their bodies.

There are no exceptions. Neither of your references you have so far produced constitute exceptions.

Well then God wasn’t the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob after they died. God would only become their God again after they are resurrected and become zao.

However in Exodus 3:6 God says he is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, meaning at the time He spoke those words He was their God.

 

[David in NJ]

Don't try to make excuses.


That's ridiculous. Is this all you have to offer? This is weak. Why do you ignore that Paul differentiated between Christ's resurrection and the resurrection of those who are His at His coming? He said there is an ORDER to it. There is no order to it in your view because you say both Christ and those who are His are the first resurrection. But, a first resurrection implies a second resurrection and that's why Paul talked about an ORDER to the resurrections. Christ's was first. The resurrection of His own at His coming is the second. Your attempt to make the resurrection of His people part of the first resurrection is based only on your doctrinal bias and nothing more.

That's ridiculous. Is this all you have to offer? This is weak

lol = i am not your enemy

Why do you ignore that Paul differentiated between Christ's resurrection and the resurrection of those who are His at His coming?

Did Paul differentiate???

If, Yes, then in what way(s) did Paul differentiate??? = Please use Paul's exact words = no ad lib = thank you Brother

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

From what I have gathered from you and other Amils is that you think Satan has already been bound and is even now loosed again for the short season. That is way off course. Satan has not been bound yet for the thousand years.

We have backed up our understanding of Satan's binding with a lot of scripture which talks about the effect that Christ's death and the preaching of the gospel had on Satan the past almost 2,000 years. Just because things are much worse in the world overall now does not minimize the tremendous impact that Christ's death, resurrection and the preaching of His gospel has had on Satan and on the world the past almost 2,000 years. It had formerly had "no hope" and they were "without God in the world" before Jesus died and rose again to bring the hope of eternal life to the world while taking the power of death away from Satan in the process (Hebrews 2:14-15).

Sure

That power has not yet been taken away though. It is evident that people are still sinning and they are still dying. When the last enemy is destroyed then The power of Death is destroyed.

That's the mistake you are making. You think it's talking about his power being completely taken away, but that isn't what it's talking about. Before Christ came the people of the world "had no hope" and were "without God in the world", as Paul said in Ephesians 2:11-12. Satan held "the power of death" at that time and was able to keep people in slavery to "the fear of death" in that time (Hebrews 2:14-15). But, that all changed after Christ came to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:8). Jesus is the strong man who came to bind Satan and spoil his goods and his house (Matthew 12:28-29, Mark 3:27, Luke 11:20-22).

Jesus Himself said He was going to bind Satan and spoil his house. Did He fail to do so? No, He did not.

Mark 3:27 No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house.

1 John 3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

Because He bound satan, it allowed for "a great multitude" of people to be saved (Rev 7:9) after there was previously no hope in the world.

It changed for believers, but not for those who are still of the unbelieving world. Sin is still reigning unto death in the unbelieving world.

Satan's binding is not about that. You said it changed for believers. Yes, exactly. It bought about many more believers in NT times than in OT times. Again, you can't ignore how Paul described the state of the world before Jesus came. He said they had "no hope" and were "without God in the world" (Eph 2:11-12). Jesus came to offer hope and eternal life to the world which they previously did not have and in order to bring that message to the world, Satan needed to have the power of death taken away (Heb 2:14-15) so that those who fear death can be set free by the hope of eternal life.

The words that a man speaks is the overflow of the heart, thereby I know your heart.

So, I hope you saw what I said about how Jesus is everything to me. I don't claim to be perfect, but He is and I rely on Him completely for everything. Apart from Him I am nothing and can do nothing (John 15:5).

The grace of God is not a license to sin though.

I never said it was. I appreciate your concern about that, but you know I have never said that, so you don't need to tell me this. Paul said as much here:

Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? 3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

If someone can fall away from the faith by returning to a life of sin then works matter. A faith without righteous works is a dead faith.

Yes, I understand, but they are not done by our own righteousness. We can only do what God has for us to do by submitting to the Holy Spirit.

 

[Stewardofthemystery]

Your attempt to make the resurrection of His people part of the first resurrection is based only on your doctrinal bias and nothing more.

They are ALL a part of the same BODY of Christ.
Romans 11:16
For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.

Hebrews 11:40
God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

Ephesians 4:13
Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

lol = i am not your enemy

I didn't say you are. I'm only commenting on the childish way you are responding to me such as responding with "lol x100,000,000" instead of actually addressing what I said.

Did Paul differentiate???

If, Yes, then in what way(s) did Paul differentiate??? = Please use Paul's exact words = no ad lib = thank you Brother

I can't believe you are being serious here. I've already shown you this multiple times.

Who does Paul say is the firstfruits in this verse?

1 Cor 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

It's saying that Christ Himself is the firstfruits, right? Christ was the first to rise from the dead, right? As is explicitly stated in Acts 26:23, as well.

Then he goes on to talk about the order of resurrections and gives the order as "Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.". So, Christ's was first in order. Next or AFTERWARD in order are "they that are Christ's at his coming". So, the order is Christ's resurrection first and next is "they that are Christ's at his coming" second.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

They are ALL a part of the same BODY of Christ.
Romans 11:16
For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.

Hebrews 11:40
God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

Ephesians 4:13
Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

You're not addressing the point. Please read the post I just made to David in NJ (post #236).

 

[Zao is life]

Well then God wasn’t the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob after they died. God would only become their God again after they are resurrected and become zao.

However in Exodus 3:6 God says he is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, meaning at the time He spoke those words He was their God.

What you clearly do not understand - that even the Sadducees understood who were challenging Jesus about the resurrection of the body from the dead (which they did not believe in), is that Jesus was telling them that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob would rise again from the dead and be seen alive again in their bodies (zao), reminding them that the ever-living (zao) God had told Moses that He was the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, and He was not the God of the dead (nekros) but of those who are living - as in alive in their bodies (zao).

Though like you they still would not believe scripture and what it's telling us, THEY at least understood that Jesus had torpedoed any argument they may have had about the resurrection of the body from the dead by telling them that of necessity what God told Moses meant that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob would rise again from the dead because the ever-living (zao) God is not the God of the dead (nekros) but of those who are alive in their bodies (zao).

The Saduccees at least had the sense to know that they had been refuted by Jesus, and did not try to argue the point with Him anymore after that.

Unlike you - because you have already brushed the context of Jesus' words aside and tried to use a Sadducee-type of argument which denies scripture.

With respect as to your person (but not to all your beliefs), I'm not going to debate this point about the meaning of the word zao with you or any other Amillennialist anymore because - forget about only myself who is of absolutely no significance in comparison to Jesus - it's already clear that like the Sadduccees, you would attempt to argue even with Christ against scripture, were He to be the one talking to you. And this is why you will remain blinded by your own beliefs - because as in the case of the Sadduccees, some of them are based on your refusal to believe scripture.

In the New Testament the word záō (alive | living) is always referring either to the living God, or to humans who are alive in the body. The word is never used in reference to anyone who has died | fallen asleep | is not alive and living in the body. That is why the word appears where Jesus said what He said to the Saduccees about God not being the God of the dead, but of the living (zao), because the Sadduccees were arguing with Him about the resurrection of the body from the dead:-

|| Matthew 16:16; Matthew 22:32; Matthew 26:63; Matthew 27:63; Mark 5:23; Mark 12:27; Mark 16:11; Luke 2:36; Luke 4:4; Luke 10:28; Luke 15:13; Luke 20:38; Luke 24:5; Luke 24:23; John 4:10; John 4:11; John 4:50; John 4:51; John 4:53; John 5:25; John 6:51; John 6:57; John 6:58; John 6:69; John 7:38; John 11:25; John 11:26; John 14:19; Acts 1:3; Acts 7:38; Acts 9:41; Acts 10:42; Acts 14:15; Acts 17:28; Acts 20:12; Acts 22:22; Acts 25:19; Acts 25:24; Acts 26:5; Acts 28:4; Romans 1:17; Romans 6:2; Romans 6:10; Romans 6:11; Romans 6:13; Romans 7:1; Romans 7:2; Romans 7:3; Romans 7:9; Romans 8:12; Romans 8:13; Romans 9:26; Romans 10:5; Romans 12:1; Romans 14:7; Romans 14:8; Romans 14:9; Romans 14:11; 1 Corinthians 7:39; 1 Corinthians 9:14; 1 Corinthians 15:45; 2 Corinthians 1:8; 2 Corinthians 3:3; 2 Corinthians 4:11; 2 Corinthians 5:15; 2 Corinthians 6:9; 2 Corinthians 6:16; 2 Corinthians 13:4; Galatians 2:14; Galatians 2:19; Galatians 2:20; Galatians 3:11; Galatians 3:12; Galatians 5:25; Philippians 1:21; Philippians 1:22; Colossians 2:20; Colossians 3:7; 1 Thessalonians 1:9; 1 Thessalonians 3:8; 1 Thessalonians 4:15; 1 Thessalonians 4:17; 1 Thessalonians 5:10; 1 Timothy 3:15; 1 Timothy 4:10; 1 Timothy 5:6; 1 Timothy 6:17; 2 Timothy 3:12; 2 Timothy 4:1; Titus 2:12; Hebrews 2:15; Hebrews 3:12; Hebrews 4:12; Hebrews 7:8; Hebrews 7:25; Hebrews 9:14; Hebrews 9:17; Hebrews 10:20; Hebrews 10:31; Hebrews 10:38; Hebrews 12:9; Hebrews 12:22; James 4:15; 1 Peter 1:3; 1 Peter 1:23; 1 Peter 2:4; 1 Peter 2:5; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 Peter 4:5; 1 Peter 4:6; 1 John 4:9; Revelation 1:18; Revelation 2:8; Revelation 3:1; Revelation 4:9; Revelation 4:10; Revelation 5:14; Revelation 7:2; Revelation 7:17; Revelation 10:6; Revelation 13:14; Revelation 15:7; Revelation 16:3; Revelation 19:20 (cast alive into the lake of fire); Revelation 20:4. ||

Copy @Stewardofthemystery @Spiritual Israelite @David in NJ

 

[Stewardofthemystery]

We have backed up our understanding of Satan's binding with a lot of scripture which talks about the effect that Christ's death and the preaching of the gospel had on Satan the past almost 2,000 years.

The timing of your Amil doctrine is off by a couple thousand years. This shows when Christ ascended to heaven and WHEN Satan was cast down to the EARTH (not bound as your false doctrine promotes)

Revelation 12

King James Version

​

12 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.
3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne. ( this is Jesus ascending to heaven )
6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. ( notice Satan is not bound)
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.
12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.”

So Satan was not bound for a thousand years when Jesus Christ was resurrected and ascended to heaven. But Satan was cast down to earth to deceive the whole world, including the Amils who think he is already bound.

 

[WPM]

Satan was cast down to earth to deceive the whole world, including the Amils who think he is already bound.

Why are you so vicious, and embittered? Why can you not engage in a Christian manner? That normally occurs when someone is frustrated at not being able to refute an opposing view.