Truly, truly; The hour is coming

a reply to: DISRAELI

learn the words in their context and you will see there is a difference.

a reply to: ChesterJohn
You are bluffing. What "context" are you talking about?
Specify what the difference between the two words is supposed to be.

This discourse is about how the religious cannot “hear” understand the works of the Father (Yahweh) done through the Son (Yahoshua).Yahoshua clearly states he does nothing unless he “hears” of the father.The Greek word translated hear is akouo..which means to understand and do.

After Yahoshua states he has been given authority to judge.The word judge is the translation of the Greek word krisis (where English gets the word crisis) and which means a turning point.In this same chapter krisis is translated damnation.It is easy to see how these words are manipulated then twisted to fit a “theology” and do not bear the intent of what Yahoshua said.Then Yahoshua clearly states:

“Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which ALL that are in the graves shall hear his voice”.

This is the crux of the discourse.The Jews where railing on Yahoshua (and plotting to kill him) because he did things that were unlawful to Judaism.The instigator in this instance is the healing of the man at the pool of Bethesda.This triggered what Yahoshua said ……the cornerstone statement

“You search[study] the scriptures thinking that in them you have life yet you fail to come to me whom they testify of that I would deliver you”.

Yahoshua is speaking directly to the religious that think they believe and hear the creator God and think they “know” because they study the scriptures and practice their religion yet Yahoshua is proving they neither “hear”(understand and do) nor know the creator God.It is all religious rhetoric.

You focused in on “your” theology that those that hear Jesus and believe (trust) in him will be saved and all the others who don’t will be damned (judged).This is the cherry picking elitist religion of the pharisees.They alone are the special “chosen” because THEY search/study and believe the scriptures and the doctrines of men they create from the scriptures.

Yahoshua goes on to state he knows they do not love the creator God because they cannot hear.Their faith is in the scriptures(the law of Moses) not the creator God.Yahoshua goes on to state he has come in his fathers name yet the religious will not receive him..and this is the real crux that has been forming for century’s.

Yahoshua literally means Yahweh is deliverance/salvation.The Jews (and Christians) constantly “say” how they honor/believe in God yet they do not hear and know (akouo) his name at all.They believe they alone are special and chosen to believe/trust in God yet Yahoshua says they do not receive or honor the creator God at all.

The same is true today of Christianity born of the seed of Judaism.They are elitist that believe THEY alone are the chosen few(billions) yet they are deaf and blind because they do not know/hear Yahoshua.Yahoshua clearly stated there will come an hour when ALL who are in the grave (Hades..the realm of death and imperception) will HEAR the creator Gods voice.

“And they shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”

This is not a metaphor for being spiritually( which is a non word) dead then made alive(born anew).That is your theology and is not truth.This is the resurrection. The central theme of ALL life..the Good news!!Yahoshua clearly states ALL will be resurrected.The core meaning of spirit is life.It is not a mystical ephemeral essence state of a person.Spirit is LIFE with no death!All will be resurrected to LIFE(good).

This is where the religious elite draw hard lines of dualism and elevate themselves to special chosen status.THEY believe they are resurrected to life because THEY believe/trust in doctrines of their religion.Yet this whole discourse Yahoshua is stating their belief is meaningless because their belief/trust is in the scriptures (their religion) not the creator God they cannot hear. Yahoshua isn’t stating there are two types of people.Those that ONLY do good and those that are evil.He is saying there is resurrection of krisis…a turning point and resurrection to LIFE for ALL of mankind.

The elitist believe they are “good” because they “believe” doctrines of men religion of being forgiven and believe it is a full pardoning of guilt. Nothing could be further from the truth.ALL men are 100% accountable for ALL they do(by consequences).Forgiveness means freed from bondage it does NOT mean pardoning of guilt.Theology has twisted these words yet more importantly they have foisted their false doctrines of men meaning on them to fit their theology just as the Jewish religious leaders did.

The fact is Yahoshua(Yahweh is deliverance/salvation) is the savor of ALL of mankind..unequivocally..no matter what anyone believes.Trust in Yahoshua is not what “saves” anyone that act is 100% in the creator God’s hands.That trust causes a person to “hear” the creator God(faith comes by hearing and hearing by the creator God).That does NOT mean someone is then “born anew” and enters a “spiritual kingdom blah blah blah..that is meaningless religious rhetoric.It simply means the person “knows” the creator God and can hear (understand) them.It is a communion.

The construct man perceives as “time”(in eternity) has nothing to do with it.The word eternal(and world) is the translation of the Greek word aion(eon)…which means an age.It does not mean infinite time… an age in it’s essence is a realm…a perception of a state of being.

Even scientist like Einstein knew this basic truth.General relativity provided evidence that time is a dimension.Past,present and future time is only a perception.Mans perception of “their life” is ….life then death…past, present, future.Yahoshuas perception of LIFE does not see them as separate. They are all “parts” of one LIFE.

The perceived life of man will be resurrected from it’s physical death into LIFE.To “enter” the LIFE there is a “turning point”/krisis/judgment.Yahoshua called this the eternal(age lasting) fire.John was given a vision of it and it is called the lake of fire.This is when imperception(false beliefs of religion) is destroyed and man is able to perceives LIFE as it truly is.

In it’s essence this Life is EVERYTHING…all at ONCE!! There is a good reason man does not perceive “reality” as it truly is.They would go insane.It’s “too much info”.The human brain is wired to perceive events sequentially as present which becomes the past (as memory) with no perception of a true future.It is the only way to make sense of life in it’s present form. In other words in essence….mankind is in a conception stage of LIFE.None have been “born anew” into LIFE yet.

Yahoshua said he was the son/seed of the creator God the father.This is what he meant that all authority has been given to him and all will receive LIFE through him.Yahoshua is the catalyst/seed that is causing ALL of LIFE to grow.It matters not what someone believes about Jesus but about what they know of Yahoshua.The scriptures are a testimony that testifies of Yahoshua.That is it’s sole function.It does not “cause” life in the least.That is the religious method of “salvation” which is completely futile.

“Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live”.

This is what that means.ALL of mankind(the dead) WILL hear the voice of the son and the father (they are one) and they ALL will LIVE.That is the Good news for all of mankind and creation.

originally posted by: Rex282
This discourse is about how the religious cannot “hear” understand the works of the Father done through the Son

More to the point, I think, they cannot hear directly, and can only know them by hearing the words of Jesus.

“You search the scriptures thinking that in them you have life yet you fail to come to me whom they testify of that I would deliver you”.
Yahoshua is speaking directly to the religious that think they believe and hear the creator God and think they “know” because they study the scriptures and practice their religion yet Yahoshua is proving they neither “hear”(understand and do) nor know the creator God.

You miss the point of the words "they testify of me". In other words, they would have found him in the scriptures if only they had looked properly.

You focused in on “your” theology that those that hear Jesus and believe (trust) in him will be saved and all the others who don’t will be damned (judged).This is the cherry picking elitist religion of the Pharisees.

You are trying to turn the passage into the opposite of what it says. That is not "my" theology, but the clear statement of Jesus. And it certainly isn't the religion of the Pharisees, because that is exactly what they are denying.

“And they shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”
This is not a metaphor for being spiritually( which is a non word) dead then made alive(born anew).That is your theology and is not truth.This is the resurrection.

You have read the OP very carelessly, because I did NOT use the "spiritually dead" concept with reference to that verse.
I used it about the previous words "The dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live".
Yes, the words you have quoted are about the final resurrection and judgement, and that's exactly what I said. I distinguished between the two events.

The OP was put together by careful reading of the words of the passage.
You have shown that you are not very good at reading what words say.

a reply to: DISRAELI

And what does the above poster think about Hebrews 11:35

35 Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:

Was that talking only about Mary and Martha? I don't think so, because by the time this was written, Christians probably were just at the beginning of being tortured.

The Shunamite woman had her son brought back as well as the woman of the city of Nain when Jesus passed by and said to her son to live again.

Maybe there were more that were not recorded, perhaps?

a reply to: WarminIndy
I think the answer to your question will be buried under a mountain of words.
The gist will probably be "That passage means the opposite of what it says".

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: WarminIndy
I think the answer to your question will be buried under a mountain of words.
The gist will probably be "That passage means the opposite of what it says".

And I forgot, the wife of Jairus, their daughter was brought back to life with two words "kumi ori".

Peter's mother-in-law..which means his wife's mother.

There is something special in the way the Bible actually does honor women, Eve (Chava) means life, and the MOTHER of all living. I hear Bible critics all the time saying the Bible treats women horribly, and sometimes it does seem that way, but if you read it from beginning to end, Chava in the beginning and the Bride in the end. And the Spirit and the Bride say come.

There must then be greater significance to Rachel crying for her children. Rachel was the mother of Joseph and Benjamin and died at a young age, only 36 years-old.

I tried to find both sides of Rachel weeping, but I found here a rabbi explains Rachel weeping

“A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation, bitter weeping, Rachel is weeping for her children; she will not be comforted for her children for they are absent. So says God, ‘Halt your voice from crying, and your eyes from tears, because there is a reward for your acts; says God, they will return from their enemies’ country. There is hope for your destiny, says God, and children will return to their borders

I want you to see how close they actually come, if they only understood

While Rachel cries for all her children, there is one specific child who she prays for the most. He is the son who is considered absent, or the most distanced from the fold of the Jewish people.

But then...

Nowadays, we tend to classify Jews into two main categories: “frum” or devout Jews and secular Jews. Although we might expect Mashiach to fall into the first category, Mashiach is in a class of his own; he is a “faithful” Jew.

When Jesus was being crucified, that was the very verse they used...

Matthew 2:18 In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.

That means that Rachel had her dead returned to her, because according to this rabbi, Jesus was the son. Matthew verified it. He seemed to be the one most distanced, because they rejected Him. However, Rachel was weeping. I believe she heard the voice of the Lord and her dead was returned to her, and He will one day be embraced by them.

a reply to: WarminIndy
There is also a respectable body of evidence for God giving prophecy to women. I come to that late in the year.
The signficance of Rachel to Jeremiah is as the ancestress of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, who has just been taken into exile. Hence the importance of the words of hope, that the exiles will return.The people will come back to life.
You have misremembered the Matthew application, though. He quotes it at the massacre of the children around Bethlehem. There too Jeremiah's message of resurrection hope needs to be included in our understanding of what's happening.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: WarminIndy
There is also a respectable body of evidence for God giving prophecy to women. I come to that late in the year.
The signficance of Rachel to Jeremiah is as the ancestress of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, who has just been taken into exile. Hence the importance of the words of hope, that the exiles will return.The people will come back to life.
You have misremembered the Matthew application, though. He quotes it at the massacre of the children around Bethlehem. There too Jeremiah's message of resurrection hope needs to be included in our understanding of what's happening.

Yes, that was what I thought also about Joseph and Benjamin, but according to Judaism, Rachel is counted the mother of all Jews. From my above post link

Although Rachel is the mother of only two of the twelve tribes of Israel—Joseph[1] and Benjamin, in the above verses, Rachel is considered the mother of the entire Jewish people. Whenever we need something, we travel to her Tomb in Beit Lechem (Bethlehem) to beseech God there. There are many stories of prayers that have been answered there, all in Mother Rachel’s merit.

I think you are right, I may have misapplied Matthew's verse. Thank you for correcting me on that.

And this is what Paul says in Romans

11:15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

a reply to: DISRAELI

Of course he is talking about himself but that still does not mean that the term Son of Man is Specific to Jesus, you will need to understand this to appreciate the thrust of what I have said so far.

a reply to: leadean
The title is specific to Jesus when Jesus is using it, and most certainly in this passage.
In other words, when he says "the Son of Man" has been made judge he is talking about himself, and that is confirmed in the passage when he explains why the Son of Man has been made judge.
It's all there in vv26-27; the Son of Man who is made judge is the same Son who gives life to others and summons them out of the grave because he has life in himself granted by the Father, a unique gift.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Does this not come down to interpretation? Are you not really just saying your interpretation/understanding is correct and mine is wrong?

a reply to: leadean
Interpretation is better if it keeps close to what the words say.
In this passage, it's just a question of following the words through from the beginning.
It begins with a complaint from the Pharisees about what Jesus is doing, and he defends himself; by identifying the God who gave the commands as his Father; by explaining what rights the Father gives to the Son, obviously identifying the Son as himself; by extending briefly the designation "Son" to "Son of Man", and explaining that AS Son of Man he receives the same powers of judging and giving life that he has already received under the designation "Son".

Yes, my interpretation will be better than yours if I am reading the words and you are not. That's what exegesis is all about. Reading the words.

a reply to: DISRAELI

ha! Thank you for the laugh but I seriously did read your post I just don't think the fact that Jesus was referring to himself when he speaks (who else would he refer to?) means that he is the one and only Son of Man

I often refer to myself as a musician, a sales person, a pacifist/pussy, but it does not mean I am the only one right? other people are these things too!

a reply to: leadean
The original issue was "Who is the Son of Man doing the judging?", and there is no doubt, from this passage, that Jesus meant himself.

a reply to: DISRAELI

There is only One life evolving One awareness, it is better in life to start with the broadest view and work your way in to more detail. To start in the thick of the detail will always leave one with the feeling that pieces are missing.

a reply to: leadean
Ah, another one of those.
No, I stick to the subject of Christian Theology. Once people wander off that topic, I cease to take part.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Fair enough, sorry to be one of those : )

The human body has all the necessary mechanisms to defy aging, but sinning disassociates us with that potential:

"(sinning) is why you become sick and die, for you are deprived of the one who can heal you." (Gospel Mary Magdaelene 4:28)

also see John 8:51-58. Jesus says those who obey his words will not taste death. This was the true destiny for humankind, but people choose sin (meaning to miss the point of life) and die (Ezekiel 18:4, Matthew 25:45, Romans 5:12).

originally posted by: leadean
a reply to: DISRAELI

Of course he is talking about himself but that still does not mean that the term Son of Man is Specific to Jesus, you will need to understand this to appreciate the thrust of what I have said so far.

I think you are correct. Son of Man, literally that which is birthed from the human, is within all of us. Jesus was the epidome of the expression of the Son of Man. We know this to be true from this passage:

"No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man." (John 3:13)

If the Son of Man were unique to Jesus, this passage would not hold true, because we know Enoch and Elijah ascended to heaven in their lifetime. Moses lifted up the Son of Man, and the Son of Man is that part of us which perceives/participates in heaven:

"Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him."