Who resurrected Jesus?

neologist wrote:

real life wrote:
neologist wrote:
real life wrote:
. . .
Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man. After their death, both were conscious and spoke of their situation (one in paradise, one in torment). His idea of death apparently doesn't mesh with yours, Neo.
. . .
You can't simply discount Solomon and the entire OT with an illustration. There is, after all, a condition of spiritual death. (Luke 9:60)

A good look at all the Pagan beliefs of trinity, immortal soul, etc. Would reveal much about the source of those beliefs.

And you cannot discount Paul's concise statement that to be 'absent from the body would mean that he was present with the Lord' with a misapplication of Ecclesiastes.
I can't find your exact quote. Was this it? "For though I am absent in the flesh, all the same I am with YOU in the spirit." (Colossians 2:5)
real life wrote:

btw Jesus story of the rich man and Lazarus is notable because He did NOT indicate it to be a parable. He told the story WITHOUT this important qualifier, which was used in nearly all His other stories/illustrations.
Really? And if it were not a parable, how is it possible for a conversation to take place between Hades and Abraham? Or, for that matter, what relief can a person in torment receive from a single drop of water?

Your question , 'how is it possible...?' assumes that what Jesus said took place, really didn't.

How is it possible for God to do many of the things He does?

Just because we cannot explain it, doesn't mean it is not possible, does it?

0 Replies

kate4christ03 wrote:

neo the verse rl is talking about is 2cor 5:8 . another good one is phil 1:23.

also, CHrist told the thief in luke that Today you will be with me in paradise. and there is no comma in the original translation. i believe the footnotes in the nwt even acknowledge that. and as for hell, christ spoke of eternal torment for the wicked (matt 25:41, rev 20:11-15)

I cited Colossians 2:5 to show how Paul often uses the word 'absent'.

I am most amazed at your citation of Luke 23:43, which I will quote here without punctuation or capitalization:

'truly I tell you today you will be with me in paradise'

You are right that no comma appears in the Greek text. But if you place the comma before the word 'today', it would mean that Jesus entered paradise on that very day, an event which could not have happened. Placing a comma after the word 'today' is the only way the sentence could make sense in English.

As far as eternal torment is concerned, this pagan idea deserves another thread.

Oh, I see while I have been composing in my Senior reverie, RL has chimed in with a few comments. One of which concerns the parable of Lazarus. Let me see if I can snatch his words without abandoning this work of stunning exposition:

real life wrote:

Your question , 'how is it possible...?' assumes that what Jesus said took place, really didn't.

No, I said it shows what Jesus spoke was a parable.

This is fun. But it is time for another thread on do our souls live forever, or something like that.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

RexRed wrote:
God is not the first or the last because God has no beginning or end.

God preceded the first and endures way beyond the last.

So the first would be the numeral one and God would be both zero and infinity.

Zero and infinity are the creator and the numeral one is creation.

So, when God says 'I am the First and the Last', he really didn't mean it?

Where does "God" say that?

A voice in revelations says that... But I am not sure that that is the voice of the true "God".

Just as in the beginning was the word...

It does not say in the beginning was Jesus... You are reading into it rather than letting it interpret itself.

The Bible does say God's kingdom has no beginning or end.

Revelation 22:6-19
6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done. 7 Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book. 8 And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things. 9 Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God. 10 And he [the angel] saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. 11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. 12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. 13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. 14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Comment: It would appear this was an angel talking not God...

Raul was right, Gabriel does play a large role in the workings of the Holy spirit. This angel may even be Lucifer...

Lucifer was also the first and the last.

The first after the beginning and the last before the end...

It would also say blessed are they that do MY (instead of HIS) commandments if God were doing the speaking...

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

real life wrote:
RexRed wrote:
God is not the first or the last because God has no beginning or end.

God preceded the first and endures way beyond the last.

So the first would be the numeral one and God would be both zero and infinity.

Zero and infinity are the creator and the numeral one is creation.

So, when God says 'I am the First and the Last', he really didn't mean it?

Where does "God" say that?

Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
IS 44:6

Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last. IS 48:12

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Oh, I see while I have been composing in my Senior reverie, RL has chimed in with a few comments. One of which concerns the parable of Lazarus. Let me see if I can snatch his words without abandoning this work of stunning exposition:

real life wrote:
Your question , 'how is it possible...?' assumes that what Jesus said took place, really didn't.
No, I said it shows what Jesus spoke was a parable.

How does your incredulity at this prove that it MUST have been a parable, Neo?

0 Replies

allegory metaphor and parable notwithstanding, are we any closer to answering the question who resurrected Jesus? Only asking.

0 Replies

Steve 41oo wrote:

allegory metaphor and parable notwithstanding, are we any closer to answering the question who resurrected Jesus? Only asking.

Jesus already answered it in John 2.

John 2:18 Then the Jews demanded of him, "What miraculous sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?"

19Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days."

20The Jews replied, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?"

21But the temple he had spoken of was his body

I would think that Jesus' word on the subject would settle it from a Biblical standpoint.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Steve 41oo wrote:
allegory metaphor and parable notwithstanding, are we any closer to answering the question who resurrected Jesus? Only asking.

Jesus already answered it in John 2.

John 2:18 Then the Jews demanded of him, "What miraculous sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?"

19Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days."

20The Jews replied, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?"

21But the temple he had spoken of was his body...

Did he make that clear to the Jews? How were they supposed to know Jesus was speaking in parables? Again?

0 Replies

Steve 41oo wrote:

real life wrote:
Steve 41oo wrote:
allegory metaphor and parable notwithstanding, are we any closer to answering the question who resurrected Jesus? Only asking.

Jesus already answered it in John 2.

John 2:18 Then the Jews demanded of him, "What miraculous sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?"

19Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days."

20The Jews replied, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?"

21But the temple he had spoken of was his body...

Did he make that clear to the Jews? How were they supposed to know Jesus was speaking in parables? Again?

Well, the next verse says:

22When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said

So, I guess some of the Jews did eventually understand it.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

RexRed wrote:
real life wrote:
RexRed wrote:
God is not the first or the last because God has no beginning or end.

God preceded the first and endures way beyond the last.

So the first would be the numeral one and God would be both zero and infinity.

Zero and infinity are the creator and the numeral one is creation.

So, when God says 'I am the First and the Last', he really didn't mean it?

Where does "God" say that?

Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
IS 44:6

Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last. IS 48:12

So then if the Angel in revelations is the first and the last ALSO, then there is a rub... Or maybe Lucifer was acting on the part of God in the OT?

The god (theos) of this world? So can we trust the usage of the word "god" in the OT?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

neologist wrote:
Oh, I see while I have been composing in my Senior reverie, RL has chimed in with a few comments. One of which concerns the parable of Lazarus. Let me see if I can snatch his words without abandoning this work of stunning exposition:

real life wrote:
Your question , 'how is it possible...?' assumes that what Jesus said took place, really didn't.
No, I said it shows what Jesus spoke was a parable.

How does your incredulity at this prove that it MUST have been a parable, Neo?

If it were not a parable, then Solomon would have been incorrect when he said "For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten. 6 Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they have no portion anymore to time indefinite in anything that has to be done under the sun." (Ecclesiastes 9: 5,6)

If Solomon was wrong, then Paul would have been wrong when he said in 2Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is inspired of God . . ."

If both Paul and Solomon were wrong, what use would be the bible?

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

real life wrote:
neologist wrote:
Oh, I see while I have been composing in my Senior reverie, RL has chimed in with a few comments. One of which concerns the parable of Lazarus. Let me see if I can snatch his words without abandoning this work of stunning exposition:

real life wrote:
Your question , 'how is it possible...?' assumes that what Jesus said took place, really didn't.
No, I said it shows what Jesus spoke was a parable.

How does your incredulity at this prove that it MUST have been a parable, Neo?
If it were not a parable, then Solomon would have been incorrect when he said "For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten. 6 Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they have no portion anymore to time indefinite in anything that has to be done under the sun." (Ecclesiastes 9: 5,6)

If Solomon was wrong, then Paul would have been wrong when he said in 2Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is inspired of God . . ."

If both Paul and Solomon were wrong, what use would be the bible?

There is no consciousness in the grave for those who are dead. There are no people in heaven floating around right now. All that have died are in the grave awaiting the gathering day/and rewards OR judgment day.

Jesus being NOT of the line of Adam in the "soul" category may have had some benefit of consciousness in the grave.

Irregardless it is an interesting thought. Other than the "possibility" of Jesus, Biblically, there is no consciousness or remembrance in the grave.

Even Jesus along with all of the saints will have their memories erased in "the end" anyway by God... There will be no remembrance of this world.

2Corinthians 5:17
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Revelation 21:5
And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

Revelation 21:4
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

Comment: In "the end" there will be no going through God's video collection to rehash old memories...

1Corinthians 13:8
Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

0 Replies

Don't be too certain that all memory of this rule by Satan will be erased. The entire universe will remember enough so that the next time (if there is a next time) there is a rebellion, the rebels will be dealt with immediately.

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

There is no consciousness in the grave for those who are dead. There are no people in heaven floating around right now. All that have died are in the grave awaiting the gathering day/and rewards OR judgment day.

Jesus being NOT of the line of Adam in the "soul" category may have had some benefit of consciousness in the grave.

Irregardless it is an interesting thought. Other than the "possibility" of Jesus, Biblically, there is no consciousness or remembrance in the grave.

You just make this stuff up as you go along. There is no meaning here. No substance. Just mystical rambling. Sorry.

0 Replies

Steve 41oo wrote:

RexRed wrote:

There is no consciousness in the grave for those who are dead. There are no people in heaven floating around right now. All that have died are in the grave awaiting the gathering day/and rewards OR judgment day.

Jesus being NOT of the line of Adam in the "soul" category may have had some benefit of consciousness in the grave.

Irregardless it is an interesting thought. Other than the "possibility" of Jesus, Biblically, there is no consciousness or remembrance in the grave.

You just make this stuff up as you go along. There is no meaning here. No substance. Just mystical rambling. Sorry.

Rex did not cite the verses, but the bible is clear about the fact that the dead are unconscious. But you are right that he is speaking from his elbow about the possibility of Jesus being conscious while he was dead.

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

real life wrote:
RexRed wrote:
real life wrote:
RexRed wrote:
God is not the first or the last because God has no beginning or end.

God preceded the first and endures way beyond the last.

So the first would be the numeral one and God would be both zero and infinity.

Zero and infinity are the creator and the numeral one is creation.

So, when God says 'I am the First and the Last', he really didn't mean it?

Where does "God" say that?

Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
IS 44:6

Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last. IS 48:12

So then if the Angel in revelations is the first and the last ALSO, then there is a rub... Or maybe Lucifer was acting on the part of God in the OT?

The god (theos) of this world? So can we trust the usage of the word "god" in the OT?

The angel in Revelation is not called 'the First and the Last'.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

real life wrote:
neologist wrote:
Oh, I see while I have been composing in my Senior reverie, RL has chimed in with a few comments. One of which concerns the parable of Lazarus. Let me see if I can snatch his words without abandoning this work of stunning exposition:

real life wrote:
Your question , 'how is it possible...?' assumes that what Jesus said took place, really didn't.
No, I said it shows what Jesus spoke was a parable.

How does your incredulity at this prove that it MUST have been a parable, Neo?
If it were not a parable, then Solomon would have been incorrect when he said "For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten. 6 Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they have no portion anymore to time indefinite in anything that has to be done under the sun." (Ecclesiastes 9: 5,6)

If Solomon was wrong, then Paul would have been wrong when he said in 2Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is inspired of God . . ."

If both Paul and Solomon were wrong, what use would be the bible?

Solomon wasn't wrong, but his point is that once a man is dead, he has no further knowledge nor dealings with anything 'under the sun'.

It is to this context that he refers repeatedly.

Jesus pointedly taught in the story of the rich man and Lazarus that they were conscious.

Also Jesus corrected the Saducees:

Luke 20:37Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.

38For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him

0 Replies

The first lie appeared in Genesis ch. 3, vs. 4: "YOU positively will not die."

If there had been any consciousness or punishment or reward after death, surely God would have informed Adam and Eve straight on. Their hope was to have lived forever on earth. Had they not sinned, they would still be here and we would not have war and crime and sickness and death.

The Hebrew words we read as 'Garden of Eden' could just have easily been translated as 'Paradise of Pleasure'. An interesting prospect for mankind, eh?

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

The first lie appeared in Genesis ch. 3, vs. 4: "YOU positively will not die."

You earlier suggested that one of Jesus' statements referred to 'spiritual death'.

Since Adam and Eve didn't drop dead the day they disobeyed God, could this be referring to the same?

Just asking.

neologist wrote:

If there had been any consciousness or punishment or reward after death, surely God would have informed Adam and Eve straight on. Their hope was to have lived forever on earth. Had they not sinned, they would still be here and we would not have war and crime and sickness and death.

The Hebrew words we read as 'Garden of Eden' could just have easily been translated as 'Paradise of Pleasure'. An interesting prospect for mankind, eh?

So your whole objection is based on what YOU think God shoulda done?

Isn't doctrine based on what the Bible SAYS and not what we THINK IT OUGHTA say?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

neologist wrote:
The first lie appeared in Genesis ch. 3, vs. 4: "YOU positively will not die."

You earlier suggested that one of Jesus' statements referred to 'spiritual death'.

Since Adam and Eve didn't drop dead the day they disobeyed God, could this be referring to the same?

Just asking.

neologist wrote:
If there had been any consciousness or punishment or reward after death, surely God would have informed Adam and Eve straight on. Their hope was to have lived forever on earth. Had they not sinned, they would still be here and we would not have war and crime and sickness and death.

The Hebrew words we read as 'Garden of Eden' could just have easily been translated as 'Paradise of Pleasure'. An interesting prospect for mankind, eh?

So your whole objection is based on what YOU think God shoulda done?

Isn't doctrine based on what the Bible SAYS and not what we THINK IT OUGHTA say?

My objection is based on what the bible actually says. They were told to live in the paradise and extend it over the entire earth, to bear children and have dominion over the animals. No mention of heaven or hell. After they sinned, they were told only that they would return to dust. That their physical death was preceded by a spiritual death should come as no surprise.

0 Replies

Who resurrected Jesus?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know