Tasted Death for every Man !

[rogerg]

You're assuming they're different rather than the same. What in Scripture would indicate that to you?

Sorry Butch5, I don't understand your point

 

[Butch5]

Butch5
Think it was the heavenly holy city - heavenly Jerusalem

The earthly Jerusalem had its title as the holy city removed by God, instead, the heavenly Jerusalem became the new holy city.-- and there can't be two holy cities

[Rev 3:12 KJV]
12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, [which is] new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and [I will write upon him] my new name.

[Heb 12:22 KJV] 22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

While yet being alive physically , they, in the spiritual realm, were brought unto the holy city, the heavenly Jerusalem.

Rev 21:2
2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Roger,

It says they came out of their graves and people saw them. How is that heavenly?

 

[Butch5]

Sorry Butch5, I don't understand your point

You're assuming the present Jerusalem and the heavenly Jerusalem are two different cities. Heavenly is a adjective. It simply means Jerusalem with heavenly qualities.

 

[jaybo]

Hi jaybo

The way I understand your reply is that people can be justified by Christ(have had their sins paid) and yet not be saved? Is that your point?

Yes. All sins have been paid for by Christ's sacrifice. Everyone is potentially saved, but they must accept Christ's payment for their sins to actually be saved.

 

[brightfame52]

Not so. Jesus tasted death for all humanity. Everyone's sins have been "paid for" by His sacrifice. The tragedy is that many people cannot accept the fact that all sin has been forgiven for all people for all time.

That Jesus tasted death for all humanity is a falsehood.

 

[Butch5]

That Jesus tasted death for all humanity is a falsehood.

No, it's not. That He only died for certain people is what is false. It's demonstrably false.

 

[jaybo]

That Jesus tasted death for all humanity is a falsehood.

According to you, but not according to the Bible.

John 3:16-18 makes this perfectly clear...

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son."

What is it about "whoever" don't you understand?

 

[rogerg]

It says they came out of their graves and people saw them. How is that heavenly?

Same way as in 23: the names and spirits of justified men that had been written in heaven- heavenly Jerusalem -- even though alive in their physical bodies (at that time) they spiritually were in the new holy city.

[Heb 12:22 KJV] 22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
[Heb 12:23 KJV]
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

[

 

[rogerg]

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish

jaybo,
That is the verse we have been debating for several days now. First, which world? Is it this current one, or world to come? Second, who are the "whoever(s)"? The answers are not as straightforward as one might think

 

[rogerg]

What is it about "whoever" don't you understand?

"whoever" doesn't identify who is included in it. We need to analyze other verses to identify the "believes in him".

 

[Butch5]

Same way as in 23: the names and spirits of justified men that had been written in heaven- heavenly Jerusalem -- even though alive in their physical bodies (at that time) they spiritually were in the new holy city.

[Heb 12:22 KJV] 22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
[Heb 12:23 KJV]
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

[

Roger,

Paul writes in concepts. Sometimes he's hard to understand. Even Peter said that some things Paul wrote are hard to understand. When Paul said they came to the Heavenly Jerusalem, he didn't mean literally. How could men on earth come to a city in Heaven?

The "spiritually" argument doesn't work. Man is a physical being, not a spirit. Again, spiritual is an adjective. It just means having qualities of the spirit. It doesn't mean man is a spirit.

 

[rogerg]

Roger,

Paul writes in concepts. Sometimes he's hard to understand. Even Peter said that some things Paul wrote are hard to understand. When Paul said they came to the Heavenly Jerusalem, he didn't mean literally. How could men on earth come to a city in Heaven?

The "spiritually" argument doesn't work. Man is a physical being, not a spirit. Again, spiritual is an adjective. It just means having qualities of the spirit. It doesn't mean man is a spirit.

Butch5

Paul didn't write the Bible, God did - He wrote it exactly as He wanted it written and therefore, we are able to trust it/treat it as one integrated book. Were that not to be the case we (Christians) would be in a lot of trouble indeed. When the Bible tells us that no verse of scripture is of any private interpretation, that means a consistency exists between all books, paragraphs and verses so that we are reassured and don't have to second guess it or take the burden upon ourselves to figure out a writing style of any particular writer.

 

[rogerg]

Paul writes in concepts. Sometimes he's hard to understand. Even Peter said that some things Paul wrote are hard to understand. When Paul said they came to the Heavenly Jerusalem, he didn't mean literally. How could men on earth come to a city in Heaven?

[2Ti 3:16-17 KJV] 16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[Butch5]

Butch5

Paul didn't write the Bible, God did - He wrote it exactly as He wanted it written and therefore, we are able to trust it/treat it as one integrated book. Were that not to be the case we (Christians) would be in a lot of trouble indeed. When the Bible tells us that no verse of scripture is of any private interpretation, that means a consistency exists between all books, paragraphs and verses so that we are reassured and don't have to second guess it or take the burden upon ourselves to figure out a writing style of any particular writer.

Roger,
I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I don't understand where you get some of these ideas. When Peter said no verse is of private interpretation he was referring to false teachers. Paul wrote letters to the churches. Peter said some things Paul wrote were hard to understand. I find it amazing that an apostle, who had his understanding of Scripture opened by Jesus Himself said that some things Paul wrote are hard to understand and yet Christians today claim to understand perfectly. I'm mean serious. I'd bet Peter had a better grasp of the Gospel than Christians today. How is it then that Christians today claim to understand Paul with no difficulty?

I don't think that's that's the case. I think many, if not most, don't really understand much of what Paul wrote. They're just not willing to admit it.

The Bible was written by men. It was inspired by God, but written by men.We can see their different writing styles in the Bible. Paul even makes mention in Corinthians of where what he writes is from God and what is from him personally.

Paul tends to use figurative language and writes in abstracts a times. One example is when calls Sarah and Hagar the two covenants. He's using allegory. He not literally saying that Sarah was a convenant and that Hagar was a convenant. It's figurative. Likewise, the heavenly Jerusalem is figurative for the restored Jerusalem. Look at the passage. He says they came to mount Sion. That's where Jerusalem is now. When Paul wrote that Jerusalem was the holy city.

 

[Butch5]

[2Ti 3:16-17 KJV] 16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Yes, all Scripture is inspired by God. Paul didn't say all Scripture was written by God.

 

[rogerg]

he "spiritually" argument doesn't work. Man is a physical being, not a spirit. Again, spiritual is an adjective. It just means having qualities of the spirit. It doesn't mean man is a spirit.

Man definitely has a physical component and a spiritual component.
We can discuss more tomorrow if you'd like.

 

[rogerg]

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I don't understand where you get some of these ideas. When Peter said no verse is of private interpretation he was referring to false teachers.

No disrespect taken. These are complicated issues we're discussing and we all want to get to the truth. Anyway, is that how what I said sounded? Didn't mean that at all (if I've understood you correctly, regarding my comparing Scripture comment. What I meant was that for us to come to a correct interpretation of biblical doctrine, we need to follow the rules the Bible sets forth for doing that. Otherwise, we run great risk of misunderstanding. God did not write the Bible in such a way as to be easily understood. I did not have false teachers in mind at all. When you have a chance, if you would, would you please post what exactly gave you that impression so I can learn from my mistakes - thx

 

[rogerg]

Yes, all Scripture is inspired by God. Paul didn't say all Scripture was written by God.

well, yes, His hand didn't come down and pick up a quill, but, it's the same thing. They wrote EXACTLY what He wanted written. Otherwise, had it not been written with complete precision, we could never trust it. That's what makes it such a mindboggling and wonderful book - that we get to hear God's very thoughts (think of that, the thoughts of God), of things past, t current and future - that which He loves, that which He hates, that which leads to sin, and that which leads to eternal life.

 

[Butch5]

Man definitely has a physical component and a spiritual component.
We can discuss more tomorrow if you'd like.

The spirit or breath in man is the breath of life. Gen 2:7 tells us that God created the man from the dust of the earth. So, man consists of the elements of the earth. We're then told that God breathed the breath, or spirit same word, of life into the man and the man became a living soul. So, the breath or spirit in man is something of God. Man isn't a spirit.

 

[Butch5]

well, yes, His hand didn't come down and pick up a quill, but, it's the same thing. They wrote EXACTLY what He wanted written. Otherwise, had it not been written with complete precision, we could never trust it

You're imposing your own thoughts here. Maybe you could never trust it. I understand that God inspired those men. However, we can clearly see the influence of these men in their writings.

Let me ask you a question. How do you know the Bible you're reading is the Bible God inspired? There were many epistles written early on. How do you know you're reading the corrects ones?