Did "today" mean today?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sir_Knight
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.

Right.​

But consider that He did everything … including writing the laws of logic. Or is it that they existed before God? If they did it, that would go against the teaching of Christianity. But if God existed before those laws and the universe itself, we say that He wrote them. Or is it that god is object to something or that the laws existed before God? If they existed before God who created them? And if they came into existence simultaneously, then why? So God created the laws of logic.
True; and my teacher Socrates agrees:

Whereas, the truth is that God is never in any way unrighteous—he is perfect in righteousness. He of us who is the most righteous is of all things most like him. Herein is seen the cleverness of man, and also his nothingness and want of manhood. For, to know this is true wisdom and virtue, and ignorance of this is manifest folly and vice.

(Theaetetus, 176)
So what if He decides to erase them?

Food for thought. This blows your mind … imagining what would it be like without the laws of logic. Now I gave you something to think about while you’re in bed trying to sleep.

Happy thinking and happy Passover!​

God bless you and your family and your house, because what he blesses will be blessed forever* (1 Chronicles 17:27)!

*Unless He curses it again, but let’s don’t give Him reasons to curse our houses. 😃
I suppose that for God to erase logic, He would have to erase Himself. Now *that *would be a contradiction!

😃

Blessings to you and yours too, my friend Cristian!

🙂
 
(1) Yes. If Jesus was always on earth* and* in Heaven, then what’s the difference? If the Spirit was on earth and in Heaven, then why did He have to come down if He was already there? For someone to be sent somewhere, logically it means that that person isn’t where he is sent. If the Holy Spirit is sent to us (on earth) it means that it actually isn’t on earth.
(2)I don’t know.
I suppose what you say about (1) is true, if sent means sent. But as you and I admit, not every word means what it means–at least, it does not mean everything that it could possibly mean. *Nothing *does not mean nothing, and *all *does not mean all, and *everything *does not mean everything. So is it impossible that *sent *does not mean sent? I mean, when Jesus said this,

“I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.”

(John 5:24)

I can see at least two possible meanings of the word sent. How about you?
 
Cristian:

BTW, I enjoy thinking this through with you and hope that your blessing was not a good bye.

🙂
 
Jesus descended to the Abode of the Dead to release all souls from the beginning of time to enter Heaven. It was also known as the Bosom of Abraham and Paradise.
 
Jesus descended to the Abode of the Dead to release all souls from the beginning of time to enter Heaven. It was also known as the Bosom of Abraham and Paradise.
But isn’t it written…
Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. ~Acts 2:29
And it is also written:
For David did not ascend to heaven… ~Acts 2:34
If David wasn’t in Heaven when Peter said this, then how can this be? If they were in Abraham’s bosom until death, then how does it fit that Peter said David wasn’t in Heaven even after Jesus’ death and resurrection.

@spockrates: I believe we should keep on-topic.
 
I suppose what you say about (1) is true, if sent means sent. But as you and I admit, not every word means what it means–at least, it does not mean everything that it could possibly mean. *Nothing *does not mean nothing, and *all *does not mean all, and *everything *does not mean everything. So is it impossible that *sent *does not mean sent? I mean, when Jesus said this,
“I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.”

(John 5:24)I can see at least two possible meanings of the word sent. How about you?
And what are the two possible meanings?
 
Well said. But I don’t know that I would say that “once we die, we enter into eternity, where time is a meaningless concept.” This is because the dead are not yet united with their resurrected bodies, so in a way they are still tied to time. It’s as if they have one foot in eternity and one foot still in time.
How do you know the dead are not reunited with their resurrected bodies.

In a timeless eternity, though we die at different times, we arrive in the same instant in eternity. Christ is here in time like a thief in the night, and in a cloud of glory in eternity in the same instant. In a timeless eternity, you have your resurrected body already and this life is but a distant memory.

In a timeless eternity mountains would form over ages and radiation halos form in an instant, simultaneously. The end would be the beginning and the beginning the end.

The cross is like the black hole which ties time and eternity together. The kingdom is and it is to come. It is we who are tied to time and eternity waiting the day of the quickening to release our grasp on this world. At our death it looks like we have been taken from the field or the bed within time. But it looks like the rapture from the perspective of eternity.
 
And what are the two possible meanings?
Glad you asked! It seems to me that one can be sent from another, or one can be sent by another, or both. And one sent by someone is not necessarily sent from someone. Take John the Baptist, for example. He said:

"I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ "

(John 1:33)

John, of course, was *not *sent *from *God, though he was indeed sent *by *Him. So too, when Jesus says God sent Him, it’s possible He was saying He was sent by the Father, but not from the Father. If He was sent by the Father, but not from Him, then it is possible that the Son of God was still present in Heaven at the time that the body of Jesus Christ was present on earth. Do you think this is logically possible?
 
How is our discussion related with 'Did ‘today’ mean ‘today’?

By the way … good joke.
Thanks. I try to keep my sense of humor, and my wits, about me!

😃

Let’s see, how *does *talking about misunderstanding the meaning of Christ’s words relate to understanding the meaning of His words? Hmmm. Well, you and I appear to agree that when the angel says to Mary,

“… nothing is impossible with God.”

(Luke 6:18)

that *nothing *does not really mean nothing, but instead means no good thing. And we seem to also agree that when our Lord and Savior says,

“… with God all things are possible.”

(Matthew 19:26)

that *all *does not really mean all, but actually means all that is within the character of God is possible for Him.

And although you have not said so, I’m sure you ascent that the word *sent *does not always mean what one might think. For when Saint John the Baptist said,

"I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me … "

(John 1:33)

the word sent did not mean that he was sent *from *God, but only that he was sent *by *God.
 
You see, Cristian, paying careful attention to the meaning of the words used is necessary to gleaning the meaning of the ideas those words are meant to convey. As my mentor Socrates said to his good friend,

No matter what the subject, there is for those who wish to deliberate well upon it always one and the same starting point: You must know what it is you are deliberating about, or you will inevitably fail altogether. Most people, however, are not aware of their ignorance of a thing’s essential nature, and because they think they know all about it, they fail to secure agreement about the premises of their inquiry at its beginning. As they proceed, they reap the predictable harvest of this oversight: They disagree with one another and even contradict themselves! Now, you and I must not be guilty of this fundamental error that we condemn in others.

(Phaedrus, 237)

And you and I, Cristian must also not be guilty of this fundamental error we find in others. We must consider the essential nature of every word Christ uses if we are to have any hope of not contradicting ourselves, or each other, or (God forbid!) Him.

So when the Son of God says on the crucifix,

“I tell you the truth today you will be with me in paradise.”

(Luke 23:43)

you and I ought to not only pay attention to the punctuation, but also to the *meaning *of the words. Therefore I ask you for your sincere opinion, Cristian: When Christ said this on the cross, did *with *mean with? Think carefully before you answer, my new friend. I can think of at least two meanings of the word.

Are you with me?

😉
 
But isn’t it written…
Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. ~Acts 2:29
And it is also written:
For David did not ascend to heaven… ~Acts 2:34
If David wasn’t in Heaven when Peter said this, then how can this be? If they were in Abraham’s bosom until death, then how does it fit that Peter said David wasn’t in Heaven even after Jesus’ death and resurrection.

@spockrates: I believe we should keep on-topic.
To ascend into Heaven is to go there body and soul, and under ones own power. Only Jesus has done this.

To be assumed into Heaven is to be taken there, body and soul. See Enoch, Elijah, possibly Moses, and Our Lady.

But the experience of most of the faithful is for their souls to be in Heaven (either immediately upon death or after passing through purgatory) while they await the bodily resurrection. So denying that David had “ascended” doesn’t mean that he wasn’t in Heaven spiritually.

(There is also the experience of being taken to heaven in spirit, as both Paul and John reported, but that’s actually an unrelated discussion. . . )
 
Cristian:

If you have left the conversation, then perhaps you are not with me in both senses of the word?

😃
 
So, in conclusion, the only option left …
This is usually the sign of a false dilemma wherein the options are artificially narrowed to force a conclusion.

Another answer, which has not been addressed, is that eternity is not a timeline that goes on forever in each direction, but that it is a state of timelessness.

In this case, there are two sets of observers, just as in Einsteinian thought experiments. One observer is from within time, and the other outside of it.

In this scenario, many scriptures are reconciled. How can Jesus be here as a thief in the night yet upon his return, all will see him in the clouds? When we die we transition from time to eternity.

So we die at different times, but arrive simultaneously in eternity. The rapture happens at the moment of death, and therefor every generation is ‘this generation’ which will not pass away before the fulfillment of Christ’s sayings.

When one dies in the field, or in his sleep, Jesus snatched them away like a thief. What did they see?, Christ coming in the clouds.

When we get to eternity and start brushing off the dirt (figuratively), we look to the left and Adam is just brushing off the dirt. We look to the right and our great grand children are brushing off the dirt.

So false dilemmas rarely lead to truth. The Socratic method was not designed to discover truth, merely to display ignorance.

When Jesus spoke to the thief, he could very well have entered into eternity with him ‘Today’, but from the perspective of time, not have ascended to the Father.

We would not have the concept of Trinity if we bought into the false dilemmas created by our inability to comprehend God.
 
spockrates, how do you know when words mean something different? How do you decide what do they mean?
 
spockrates, how do you know when words mean something different? How do you decide what do they mean?
Knowing the *possible *different meanings of a word is as easy as consulting a dictionary. Knowing the *actual *meaning of a word spoken by Christ, or anyone, is not so easy. My mentor Socrates had this to say about the written word:

I cannot help feeling, Phaedrus, that writing has one grave fault in common with painting. For the creations of the painter stand there true as life, and yet if you ask them a question they maintain a solemn silence. And the same may be said of written words. You would imagine that they had intelligence, but if, out of a desire to learn, you ask for an explanation of something that has been said, they produce the same unvarying meaning, over and over again. And once they have been written down, they promiscuously knock about the world anywhere at all, among those who understand them, and equally among those for whom they are completely unsuitable. They do not know to whom they should or should not speak; and if they are mistreated or unjustly slandered, they always require the author of their being to rescue them. For the book cannot protect or defend itself.

(Phaedrus 275)

You see, if some of the written words of Christ are ambiguous, then they can be taken to mean two different things (as you and I have seen in the previous examples). It’s all to easy for someone like you or me to get the wrong idea about what He meant. And that’s understandable, for it’s not as though Jesus is available for us to ask Him what He meant (although, we might receive some guidance by praying for answers). Concerning ambiguity of the words of Jesus, consider the word *with *in this quote:

“… with God all things are possible.”

(Matthew 19:26)

Now if you and I think *with *means in the same location as then we might be mistaken. Take Judas, for example. He was with Christ *locationally *at the Last Supper, but he was in no way with Christ relationally. Rather than being with Him, he was against Him and made up his mind to betray Him. So it is reasonable to say that all good things were not possible for Judas, nor for any enemy of our Lord and Savior, because only “with God all things are possible.” With, in this case, as nothing to do with proximity of space, but everything to do with proximity of heart and mind. The person who is with God is not the one who was in the same room and about to betray Him, but the one like you yourself, who is not at the Last Supper, but is still with Christ in that (like David of the Old Testament) you have a heart like the Son of God’s.

🙂

To answer your question, then, which is, “How do you decide what do they mean?” The answer is that I first consider all of the possible meanings, and then I pray for wisdom, for Saint James tells you and me:

If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him.

(James 1:5)

And then I use the reason God gave me, and the help of others like yourself, to rule out as many of the possible meanings as I can. For God tells you and me:

“Come now, let us reason together,”
says the LORD.
“Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.”

(Isaiah 1:16)

What ever is left at the end, are the only possibilities. And if only one possibility is left, *that *is most likely the truth.

So I ask again, my new friend, are you with me so far?

🙂
 
How do you know when a word of the Bible might have a different meaning than what someone believes it does, Cristian?

🤷
 
Cristian:

Will you be with me today at the Forum? If so, what do you think I mean by the word with?

🙂
 
Dude! Four days with no answer? You’re NOT wimping out! Are you? You can’t be serious! Don’t bail on us now that we’re so close to the truth! C’mon! Get a pair and get with the program! (And if that’s good with you, please tell me what the word *with *means when I say “get *with *the program.”)

😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top