Chronology of Creation in the Bible... it doesn't start in Genesis!

reply to post by lostinspace


Indeed it does make for an impressive event. And yes, no one has yet entered heaven. Read John 3:13:

"No man has ascended into heaven except He who came down from heaven. That is, the Son of Man who is in heaven."


From this verse alone we can determine that no man has yet entered heaven. So the archangel shout would bring the saints to the clouds.... except, man has yet to enter heaven in this event. They have met Christ in the clouds and are on their way to earth with Christ in order to set up the Kingdom of God post armageddon.

Originally posted by lostinspace
reply to post by Locoman8

 

This future shout by Michael would imply that no one is in heaven yet. Paul said the dead in union with Christ would rise first

That's right when the bible was completed no humans had gone to heaven yet.
Yet, we know some had already died that had a heavenly hope, the martyred Stephen for example.

The interesting question is are they in heaven yet? My personal belief is that they are, but relatively speaking they haven't been there for very long.

Originally posted by Locoman8
reply to post by lostinspace

 

Indeed it does make for an impressive event. And yes, no one has yet entered heaven. Read John 3:13:

"No man has ascended into heaven except He who came down from heaven. That is, the Son of Man who is in heaven."

From this verse alone we can determine that no man has yet entered heaven. So the archangel shout would bring the saints to the clouds.... except, man has yet to enter heaven in this event. They have met Christ in the clouds and are on their way to earth with Christ in order to set up the Kingdom of God post armageddon.

How are you doing today? Personally, I find your post generally welldone and full of good information, but I have a great problem with what you have offered here.

Certainly John 3:13, taken in context and translated correctly, indicates exactly this.

AT THE TIME THE JOHN 3:13 IS BEING SPOKEN, and later scribed, NO ONE WAS IN HEAVEN.

This is clear and really a NO BRAINER

Now here's my problem, but it will flow out of my agreement that at this specific point of time, NO ONE, with maybe three exceptions, was in Heaven.

Christ died on the cross, correct?
It is noted He defeated DEATH, correct?

Well what does this mean??????????

In the Recreation of MAN (The 6th Day) and the creation of Adam, and later Eve (Post 7th Day), there was no noted evidence offered to indicate MANKIND was to pass, in respects to a Physical Death.

After the "Original" Sin, the days of MAN became numbered, but there was no mechanism established to in the grand scheme of things for MAN to enter heaven.

Adam and his family upto three sons of Noah, still lived an extremely long period of time. (500, 600, 900 Plus Years for some general figures) But they DID die. At this time, they had no chance of going to heaven, because Christ is the way, the truth, the life. No man enters Heaven except by accepting Christ as the Personal Sacrafice God gave MAN to do just this.

During those three days in the Tomb, what did Christ do again? Rest? Relax? Chill Out? Play Tittlely Winks? Now I accept these maybe STUPID questions, but they are such to emphasize the point.

CHRIST WAS BUSY during those three days. He defeated DEATH.

An explaination of what this implies.

He went to Hades

In Christian theology, the term hades refers to the abode of the dead. This is parallel to the Hebrew Sheol (שאול, grave or dirt-pit) and the English Hell (Old English, hel), which was derived from Norse mythology for the land of the dead (see Hades in Christianity below).

Hades

Hades in Christianity, according to the New Testament the place where the dead will be. See also Sheol.

Hell in Christian beliefs, In the New Testament, was written in the Greek language, Hades was not often used as a synonym for hell, but since the Middle Ages, has often been taken as a synonym for hell.

Hades-Disambiguation

This is where Adam, Eve, Lamech, David, Noah, Issac, Ishmael, etc......, went when they Physically died. They had no manner or mechanism inorder to enter Heaven. Christ went to this place, and had a "REVIVAL" and offered those who had died to same chance WE TODAY have. To accept Christ as their personal savoir. Thus, he defeated death.

Paul references this in his ignorance as the heathen letter. We are to know, the dead in Christ are already in heaven. We who are alive can not get there before them, because they are already there.

But again, I am not picking on you and meaning this with some animosity against you. Like I noted above, your post do tend to offer valid considerations and your research to bring your thoughts forward for others to consider come with viable links supporting your views.

It's just this idea you have offered is not according to scripture, since it is very plainly seen, Christ was alive and had not taken part in the Sacrifice upon the Cross at that time. (John 3:13) I hope you understand what I am meaning here.

Ciao

Shane

P.S. Exceptions? noted above

Moses, Enoch (From the descendants of Seth) and Ezekiel
Just my opinion.

You are understanding the scripture you are talking about too impermanently/literally.

John 3:13 is referring to the idea that no one is able to establish a tower to reach heaven by carnal means. It is the provision of God from above which enables there to be a "permanent which began in the impermanent" (the Children of God).

There is much in the scriptures that mankind understands pridefully/chaotically. They are realities that are quite obvious when pointed out, though. This situation is one of the obvious ones. I can use hundreds of scriptures to establish this as true. I really hope that you will not require me to do so, as this should be easy to see without bringing up a single verse. Logically speaking, what can a person do with the dust of the world to increase their gift that is the breath of life? If you listen to common religion, there is much to do. If you listen to God, you will understand that understanding and manifestation is a gift. Even to desire and to accomplish.

In reference to my John 3:13 comments I just want to say something. Some of my critics (respectfully) have pointed out that these are the words of Jesus spoken in the book of John. I say, let's dissect the verse first and then some more supporting scripture in addition.

No man has ascended into heaven except He who came from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.

Okay, we know that John wrote this about a half-century after Christ had died and resurrected. Why was it necessary to mention "the Son of God who IS in heaven"? If Jesus was the one refered to as the Son of Man, which He was, and He was the one speaking these words then how can He say that He was in heaven while speaking on earth to the Jews? The only real conclusion is that John wrote these words to show that Jesus was in heaven and that as a man, He was and is the only man to have entered heaven. So in the life of Jesus, no man had yet entered heaven. After He died, decades later when John wrote this gospel, no man had still entered heaven except for Christ. The only reason why is because Christ was in heaven before He became flesh. His fleshly life was not the beginning of His existence.

Now how do you explain the fact that when Christ returns, those who died in Christ are resurrected in the first resurrection? If you are already in heaven when you die in Christ, why is there a need for any resurrection? I'm referring to the "rapture" verses of the bible which none support a pre-trib rapture.

1 Thessalonians 4
16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.

1 Corinthians 15
52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.


The dead in Christ rise AFTER the return of Christ which has yet to happen. At that point you can argue weather they came to heaven or set up the Kingdom on Earth although I find the latter to be more scripture based as Jesus is returning to earth to indeed establish the Kingdom of God on earth. 1000 years of peace and then the 2nd resurrection and judgement. After the white throne Judgement, a new heaven and new earth are created and as New Jerusalem falls from this "new Heaven" it creates "Heaven on Earth"... a Global Garden of Eden.

And Jesus was dead for 3 days and 3 nights. Nothing happened while He was dead. He was dead. God the Father resurrected Him. Nowhere in scripture does it explain Jesus doing anything but being dead within this 72 hour period. If this wasn't the case, He can't be the Messiah and I refuse to believe He wasn't the Messiah.

reply to post by Dasher


I think I would also like to say that my understanding of that verse leads me to say that the chronology is built within the construct of provision from the provider to the receiver rather than birth, death, after life. What and how we understand does not define Truth. Where we fail to judge as God, is where we fail to observe as God. We are not Truth, but rather, some have been made Truth. It is an important distinction from all other ways which lie and teach the attainment of the unseen by the seen. All understanding of attainment except God as the Provider and Provision is deception by Pride or Chaos (which lead to Death). The Father does not perish as does Their Adversary, Void (Death) which is also manifested evidently as Pride and Chaos.

reply to post by Locoman8


I am in complete agreement with you on that one. When Christ returns and accepts the kingship granted to him by God, the elect that are dead in union with Christ will rise first.

My comment I made earlier seems to be derailing your thread. It seems people want to comment on it. I have noticed threads get a momentum and then stop. People lose interest for some reason. Interpretation of scripture seems to strike a nerve with many people.


An number of religious institutions would kick you out for your reasoning on the first resurrection. I would not. I believe people are too biased, never testing the inspired record. Most just follow family tradition. This is both true with Christianity and Islam.


I personally see things deeper within the scriptures and take note of them. My religious institution which I belong to either has no comment on the subject or does not see it as I do. I guess that is just me.

If I spoke up I would probably be ex-communicated, but I do not because I let the established order take the lead. Remember the rival sons of Korah against Moses? God killed 250 men for trying to take the lead of Israel over Moses. David would not Kill Saul because God anointed Saul as king even though Saul was bad. David let God take matters in his own hands in that case.

When leaders of a Christian faith veer off from the healthful teaching, God leaves them. This happened to the Jews and it is happening with Christianity. Everyone needs to test God's scripture to make sure it produces fine fruit.

I believe God will reveal new understandings when the time is right. There are a number of scriptures that are still not understood.

For instance 2 Peter 3:5-13 has more meaning than what is being preached. I could do a whole thread on that scripture but I don’t want to because that would be presumptuous on my part. Saul got in trouble with God when he was presumptuous. All scripture will be revealed at the proper time and to those that are deserving.

reply to post by lostinspace


Cool man! I have a few churches for you to check out... churches that test their scriptures and the churches that helped me discover the truth about life after death. The United Church of God and the Living Church of God. They were once part of the Worldwide Church of God under the leadership of Herbert W. Armstrong. These churches among a number of others broke apart from the WCG due to the new leadership moving the church doctrine into "mainstream christianity" which goes completely against Armstrong's teachings. Basically after the death of Armstrong, the church started to separate into smaller branches of the same doctrine. A list of these churches are as follows:

1. United Church of God www.ucg.org
2. Living Church of God www.tomorrowsworld.org
3. Philadelphia Church of God www.pcog.org

There are a number of others but these three are the most reliable and closest to the teachings of Armstrong which were the teachings of the original Apostles. I hope this helps you discover that there are churches out there that seek the truth. God bless you.

reply to post by Locoman8


If you follw SOLA SCRIPTURA you have shown a great fault in the Protestant church.

As a Catholic I see you as simply trying to outsmart yourself.

reply to post by crmanager


I am neither catholic or protestant. And I feel sorry for you my catholic friend. If you think I'm in error, maybe you should test your church's doctrine with the literal scripture of the Holy Bible. This is why I left the Baptist Church. This is why many people leave the catholic church and become athiests. Either way, I don't want to start the subject on why the catholic or protestant faiths are hypocritical of what they teach.

Originally posted by NoamC
I'm just studying this. I'm afraid to say you are mistaken. The creation does begin and end in the book of Genesis in the first chapters. the Psalms, Isaiah and everything after the first five books are from completely different authors, and hundreds of years difference of the time they were written. All that is written in Psalms is just glorifying what god did in previous times, with a different narrative.
I liked the find though very nice.
The Bible is much more organized than you'd expect from such and old book

That pretty much sums up my problem with the Bible. If God had something to tell us why would he use a bunch of liars, thieves, and sodomites working hundreds of years apart from each other to make it so? God can tell me anything he wants to anytime he wants to. Ditto for everyone else. As a matter of fact a loving and just God would be able to see that not everyone would read the language the Bible was written in. He would also be able to see the wars that would be fought by zealots trying to force the Bible on people in other countries. No loving father would want his children slaughtering each other if he could prevent it.

It was mighty convenient of the Jews to declare themselves God's chosen when writing the Bible. It lets them slaughter the rest of God's children as they please.

The Bible was cobbled together from earlier creation stories of Sumeria and other ancient places. That is why it was not all written down at one time.

The Bible was organized by committee who deleted what they did not like. That is why it seems so organized.

[edit on 1-24-2010 by groingrinder]

Originally posted by Locoman8
Now how do you explain the fact that when Christ returns, those who died in Christ are resurrected in the first resurrection? If you are already in heaven when you die in Christ, why is there a need for any resurrection? I'm referring to the "rapture" verses of the bible which none support a pre-trib rapture.

1 Thessalonians 4
16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.

1 Corinthians 15
52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

So, as is your right to believe, you are of the view of a "Rapture" occurance, and incorperate these scriptures to be directing this mindset towards this expected event, which if correct, could occur ANYTIME NOW.

This explains things a bit. Growing up Pentecostal, I understand your view, although I find that I no longer believe in this as a factual event to come in the near future, or anytime for that matter.

Paul expressed some concerns he has in the following.

2 Thessalonians 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2:2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
2:5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

It is clear, at this point the Thessalonians have misunderstood the implications laid out in the 1 Thessalonian letter. His return will follow the Antichrist, and so will the gathering of the saints here.

As for the Dead, we can not preceed them into heaven, because they are already there.

You did note something else, which I would also like to address, and that was my comments regarding Christ and his time spent in the Tomb.

YOU ARE 100% CORRECT, in noting this is NOT ADDRESSED SCRIPTURALLY. It is just common sense being expressed, and the imagination of what the defeating death implied.

You can not tell me that ADAM is not in Heaven. Or Abraham, or Deborah, or David for that matter. If GOD gave us the gift through HIS Son, that allows US the chance to be in his presence upon the Physical Death, there is no way I can comprehend Lot or Jacob or Daniel wouldn't be FIRST: Afforded a similiar GIFT, and SECOND: Be given this chance prior to US.

Afterall, in comparision, we are nothing compared to the likes of these persons. Secular, lazy humanity is offered what HIS Tools (The ones HE Used to be his Messengers/Scribes) are denied. I do not think so, but then again, I guess this is my right to believe, as your is in a Pre-Trib Rapture.

The only concern here truly revolves around the FATHER and his SON and the arrangements one has with them.

Thanks for responding to my first questioning, and I trust I offered you my reasoning in a polite and respectful manner.

Ciao

Shane

2 Thessalonians

Originally posted by Locoman8
reply to post by crmanager

 

I am neither catholic or protestant. And I feel sorry for you my catholic friend. If you think I'm in error, maybe you should test your church's doctrine with the literal scripture of the Holy Bible. This is why I left the Baptist Church. This is why many people leave the catholic church and become athiests. Either way, I don't want to start the subject on why the catholic or protestant faiths are hypocritical of what they teach.

You are in error. The Catholic Church DOES NOT believe in SOLA SCRIPTURA (The bible is the literal word of God.)

So do not feel sorry for me. I feel sorry for you who only seek to tear down and not build up.

reply to post by crmanager


Sola Scriptura actually means "Scripture Alone." It did come from the Protestant Reformation and is not practiced by the Roman Catholic Church in general. However, the books outside of "canon" are not often read by the laypeople. Furthermore, these are generally accepted as "iffy" and used for supporting research of things firstly "accessed" within canon.

I grew up in the RCC, became evangelical/non-denominational during Jr High, and after High School submitted to both a Reformed Baptist Church and United Reformed Church. Now I would not say that I am a Christian, but I would say that I follow a sect of dispersed and deconstructed Judaism that became apparent when Christ claimed to be the provision of God who is God himself.

Which brings us then to where I am currently, an even further point in the opposite of "Scripture Alone;" I believe that Truth is made known in all places and at all times. Truth does not rest in one book, but in all writings and people wherever their understanding or actions/fruit do not condemn themselves through pride or chaos. Even the bible itself recognizes that Abraham had faith and the scripture had not yet been written yet! The scriptures speak of Truth, they are not Truth itself. Truth will be true even when the bible passes away.

Well in Christian College there was alot of ideas like this and more being considered in Hermeneutics and Exegesis, but I've noticed that there's a propensity to uncertainty as to where we are in the manifold and volumous script concerning what is past and what is future...

For example looking forward to a "tribulation" that pre-dated the foundation of America (Foxe's) missing key dateable prophecies, and seeing the Hebrew "YeUM" (a heat) as just a 24hr 'day' also! There was mention then that the words in Genesis also in Jeremiah maybe pointed at a Primordial Destruction (like the KT boundary 'extinction event')...

That's fine and even internally and externally verifiable, but going too far with the fall of Satan as lightning foreseen (Lk.10:18) which also foresees "our" names being written in heaven... you can see in the Revelation (12:7-13) that this is a future absolute -and Satan (then tempting Christ) is yet the one actively accusing all before GOD in heaven. There is better still a way the Creation Chronology fits!


The word for "God" EL (To/Toward) is an early Ligature phase Hebrew Icon Glyph found on 6-continents, it's also a Time-period as a "round" a full rotation or Day (as the Earth on its Axis -being tilted!) thus "God" is time or the 'granter of continuance' and to understand its greatness requires some consideration as to when and why this "meant to be" particular would have especially signified a vast period of time (known to Moses?)...

The Earth is part of a Solar System having a plane (we see as about E-W) that is shared with 11 other Suns rotating through every 25,000 years approximately -contrary to the Galactic plane that is the "Milky Way" (we see about N-S), and to notice this and begin to plot it from a transition- only takes being there for the phenomena of a global magnetic reversal happening about every 12,500 years having a compass.

A weighty rock on a Hematite rock heated in a fire built on another rock produces a strong Magnetite which breaks nicely into needles that simply poked through a chip of wood or (just a leaf) and floated marks N-S.
Still that's only a 25,000 year concept (like the Maya plotted), that view though thought of as a "Day" multiplied to Years then plotted on a mapping of Galactic level "Jubilees" would have the comprehension needed to see Geological time.

It is not generally known that the Hoshen was a Calendar each Gemstone inscribed with the Alphabet connected Zodiac, and the Pocketed Oracle had an Urim (our Uraninite but having Primordial Radium locked in its Gold) and a Tumim (Silver bearing Galena -the great Radio crystal), one of those stones -the 7th- was a Zircon (the Kabba black stone type) which is the great 'atomic clock' by which we know the Earth to be 4.56 Billion Years old. In the Biblical Epic is much Scientific knowledge only as yet just being rediscovered!

I can see that there's a few christians here, that would like to prove the existence of God, but if you could prove it what would the value of faith be?

reply to post by The Reader


We're not proving the existence of God here. We are merely speculating on the interpretation of scripture. Faith is a prerequisite for this kind of discussion. Speculation is good for faith. It's like searching for treasure.

reply to post by Locoman8


Thanks for the Church leads and your faith searching background. I am just fine where I am right now. Actually it was my Church who opened my eyes to certain interpretations that were kind of different. I guess in my mind I want to suggest my ideas to them so they can see it as I do. That's where I stop. I am not a revolutionary and have no right to start my own Christian sect with my own views in mind.

In reality there should only be one true faith. The darkness in the air blurs the clarity that should be evident.

Faith is not 'blind' so be not therefor groping as in darkness for feelings aren't where it's at... it is 'Pistis" a noun (as proven sure -to be trusted believed) not "Pisteu" a verb, and not just Fides either, if it were taken back to Hebrew it is in the line of "continuity" from having born one (em'm Mother 'carrying') to it shall be (emen Amun/Amen 'continuance') to a quote/promise (emer 'affirmation') believe (emin 'trust/enaction') to faith (emunah 'constant/reliant') to the end being truth (emet factual/evident).

reply to post by crmanager


I do believe the Holy Bible is the written and inspired Word of God. The bible says this. The RCC believes to have authority OVER the bible and it's words. Things like changing the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday just to cave in and allow the pagans to still worship on their day of sun worshipping. Yeah, I'm really gonna follow a church that SOLD documents to allow people into heaven. That sounds like a real reliable organization. Or how about all the idol worshipping and the changing of the Ten Commandments that takes away the 2nd and divides the 10th into 2. Yeah, have fun believing a corrupt organization like the RCC. If I'm wrong and that's right, I think I'd rather be wrong because I refuse to be part of a church that's hypocritical.