Ok, when we die... One Judgment? Or Two?

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

Thank you for your reply to me.

Luke 23:43 is in your translation:

Luke 23:43 is

καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ• ἀμήν σοι λέγω, σήμερον μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.

I would translate this:
And he said to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise”.

In 1545 Rev Fr Luther OSA translated this verse as:

This agrees with all the other translations, including mine.

I enclose a number of English translations. Not one of them agrees with your translation and all agree with mine.
**What I said is that since punctuation was not done in the originals, who is to say where a comma should go?

And if you want to believe that the thief went to heaven that day then you can’t believe John 3:13.

John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.**

So you would rather believe speculation before you believe Scripture???
 
OS

Again thank you for your reply to me.

You never told me about St Antony. I see he has been fired.

You quote part of Edward Mote’s hymn:
My hope is built on nothing less
Than Jesus’ blood and righteousness.
I dare not trust the sweetest frame,
But wholly trust in Jesus’ Name.
On Christ the solid Rock I stand,
All other ground is sinking sand;
All other ground is sinking sand.
I am afraid you seem to imply that the Bible is the solid rock; in fact, it is not the Bible or Peter, but Christ.

Thank you so much for your wish that God will bless all of us and our families. May God also bless you and yours.

My own signature is also a bit misleading, as most think it is from St Augustine, but it is not.
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas is a Latin phrase commonly translated as “unity in necessary things; liberty in doubtful things; charity in all things”, or, more literally, “in necessary things unity; in uncertain things freedom; in everything compassion”.
It is often misattributed to St. Augustine of Hippo, but seems to have been first used in the 17th century by a German Lutheran theologian, Peter Meiderlin (also known as Rupertus Meldenius)…It is widely quoted in defence of theological and religious freedom.
(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_necessariis_unitas,_in_dubiis_libertas,_in_omnibus_caritas)
Again I think you miss the point. There is a distinction between translation and interpretation,

I consider your translation is based on eisegesis, not exegesis. You have a theological stance and you wish to use the Bible to agree with it. I have shown that no translation agrees with you. It does not matter what else appears in the Bible, the issue was the translation of Luke 23:43.

You wrote:
And if you want to believe that the thief went to heaven that day then you can’t believe John 3:13.
It is not a question of what I, or anyone else believes, it is a question of translating Luke 23:43. I think someone said something about *sola scriptura!! *

I am sorry to have to disagree with you. But as our mutual friend, Rev Fr Luther OSA, said:

“Hier stehe ich. Ich kann nicht anders”.
 
OS
You referred me to John 3:13 and you give the translation:
John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
I give below other translations (New American Bible, New Revised Standard Version, New American Standard Bible (1995) and the American Standard Version (1901). They all say essentially the same.
NAB John 3:13 No one has gone up to heaven except the one who has come down from heaven, the Son of Man.
NRS John 3:13 No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.
NAU John 3:13 "No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.
ASV John 3:13 And no one hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, even the Son of man, who is in heaven.
You ask me can I reconcile this verse with Luke 23:43.

I see no problem.

Heaven was closed to mankind until we were saved by the death of Jesus. Thus no son of Adam went up to heaven before mankind was saved by Jesus Christ. But on the day we were saved heaven was opened.
 
**After all—that’s what the Scriptures are for. That is how the heretics are contradicted and exposed. **This is not entirely true. They had Scriptures and Sacred Tradition.
We are told to “test the teachings” to be sure they are true by going to the Scriptures. That’s how Irenæus and others refuted the heretics of those days. They had nothing else with the truth but the Scriptures.
That’s what I was trying to warn her about, OS.
 
**What I said is that since punctuation was not done in the originals, who is to say where a comma should go?**OS, do you really think that someone who has hours or even minutes left to live is going to say, “I’m telling you this today…”? I mean. Really.
And if you want to believe that the thief went to heaven that day then you can’t believe John 3:13.
Your Scripture hasn’t proved anything.
 
**It would be interesting to see what Scriptures speak of the souls of dead men in heaven??? Don’t use Revelation for this either as it is apocalyptic and futuristic.**Where does it say that Revelation is futuristic. It seems to be past, present. and/or future and somtimes at the same time. For instance, the Child in Revelation 12 (you know the one that the Blessed Virgin Mary gave birth to) is obviously a past event.
In addition, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus is just that—a parable…
A parable is what? A lesson. Lazarus is in heaven while others are still on this earth, or else the rich man wouldn’t want to go back to tell the others.
 
**Neither of these have anything to say about judgment immediately after death but pertain to the resurrection day.

Read Acts 2:29 and 2:34

We are told David is dead and in the grave and has not ascended up into heaven. That alone tells us we stay in the grave until the resurrection.**
Please tell me you’re kidding.

" For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand”. Heaven was closed until Jesus opened up the Gates. David was a 1000 years prior. He would have been dwelling in Sheol during this time until Jesus preached to the dead during the 3 days (not 2 days, but 3) between his death and resurrection.
 
OS

Again thank you for your reply to me.

You never told me about St Antony. I see he has been fired.

You quote part of Edward Mote’s hymn:

I am afraid you seem to imply that the Bible is the solid rock; in fact, it is not the Bible or Peter, but Christ.

Thank you so much for your wish that God will bless all of us and our families. May God also bless you and yours.

My own signature is also a bit misleading, as most think it is from St Augustine, but it is not.

Again I think you miss the point. There is a distinction between translation and interpretation,

I consider your translation is based on eisegesis, not exegesis. You have a theological stance and you wish to use the Bible to agree with it. I have shown that no translation agrees with you. It does not matter what else appears in the Bible, the issue was the translation of Luke 23:43.

You wrote:

It is not a question of what I, or anyone else believes, it is a question of translating Luke 23:43. I think someone said something about *sola scriptura!! *

I am sorry to have to disagree with you. But as our mutual friend, Rev Fr Luther OSA, said:

“Hier stehe ich. Ich kann nicht anders”.
**I just hope and pray that, if faced with the same decision, I could make the same comment…and he perservered too!

Well which one do you want to believe? The questionable comma or John 13:13? I believe that you would admit that John 13:13 is true as God’s Word. However a question of punctuation can not exactly be considered God’s Word, can it? In addition to a punctuation problem, Christ was not in paradise that day in order to be with the thief—so where does that leave your thought?

Regarding St. Anthony of Padua, I didn’t look at the picture that close when I selected it for my signature but with my photo program, I blew it up and also saw Christ on the cross. I knew then it had to go. Thanks for pointing it out for me.**
 
OS
You referred me to John 3:13 and you give the translation:

I give below other translations (New American Bible, New Revised Standard Version, New American Standard Bible (1995) and the American Standard Version (1901). They all say essentially the same.

You ask me can I reconcile this verse with Luke 23:43.

I see no problem.

Heaven was closed to mankind until we were saved by the death of Jesus. Thus no son of Adam went up to heaven before mankind was saved by Jesus Christ. But on the day we were saved heaven was opened.
What are you basing that conclusion on? There must be some Scripture telling you that??? Wouldn’t Christ have raised the Old Testament patriarchs? Acts tells us that David is still dead and in the grave…
 
This is not entirely true. They had Scriptures and Sacred Tradition.

…and Sacred Tradition. BTW, Ireneaus refuted the heretical teaching that Jesus was not present in the Eucharist. You would do well to listen to him! 😉

That’s what I was trying to warn her about, OS.
Regarding Irenæus and the heretics, I believe I read some writings of his that stated that he relied on Scripture to refute the heretics. I will see if I can find that. If he did not, then how did he prove them wrong? Just by saying, I know you are wrong according to the oral tradition? That dog wouldn’t hunt with anyone!
 
OS, do you really think that someone who has hours or even minutes left to live is going to say, “I’m telling you this today…”? I mean. Really.

That was true. No one had gone up to heaven at the time of Jesus’ words. This is proof of nothing, for Catholics teach that the gates of heaven were opened up when Jesus ascended in His Glory.

Your Scripture hasn’t proved anything.
**But if we believe your version then we must also believe Jesus lied because we know He did not go to heaven or paradise that day…

You can teach that heaven was opened up that day but there is nothing to substantiate that teaching. **
 
Where does it say that Revelation is futuristic. It seems to be past, present. and/or future and somtimes at the same time. For instance, the Child in Revelation 12 (you know the one that the Blessed Virgin Mary gave birth to) is obviously a past event.

A parable is what? A lesson. Lazarus is in heaven while others are still on this earth, or else the rich man wouldn’t want to go back to tell the others.
**You are confusing Mary with Israel, the church, and it is a future event, not past.

Re: Lazarus, what makes you think he would be in heaven and the rich man in hell? What did the rich man do in order to go to hell?

You just don’t recognize a parable. I thought it was on this forum that I went into great detail about that parable.**
 
Please tell me you’re kidding.

" For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand”. Heaven was closed until Jesus opened up the Gates. David was a 1000 years prior. He would have been dwelling in Sheol during this time until Jesus preached to the dead during the 3 days (not 2 days, but 3) between his death and resurrection.
**You’re ignoring Scripture again:

Acts 2:29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.**

This was written long after Christ ascended…
 
Yes, I suspect OS is a JW (or borderline).

There are only weak arguments Scripturally for soul sleep and annihilationism.
Hi Catholic Dude,

I note that you point out that there are weak arguments for soul sleep…

What are they weak in comparison to?
Scripturally speaking, Is there a compelling case, otherwise?

Please note. I am an evangelical Christian. At present I don’t believe that we go straight to heaven. I think that occurs at judgment. I could be entirely wrong about the whole matter…I really don’t know.

I just wondered if you had a solid argument for an alternate position.

Respectfully,

Mudcat
 
Regarding St. Anthony of Padua, I didn’t look at the picture that close when I selected it for my signature but with my photo program, I blew it up and also saw Christ on the cross. I knew then it had to go. Thanks for pointing it out for me.
Why did that make it necessary? :confused:
 
Regarding Irenæus and the heretics, I believe I read some writings of his that stated that he relied on Scripture to refute the heretics. I will see if I can find that. If he did not, then how did he prove them wrong? Just by saying, I know you are wrong according to the oral tradition? That dog wouldn’t hunt with anyone!
That dog hunted, and hunted well, throughout the early Church. Sacred Tradition was so important that Scripture tells us to hold onto it.

St. Ireneaus, as the early Church Fathers, as St. Paul, knew the value of the two-pronged attack of Scripture and Tradition.
 
**You are confusing Mary with Israel, the church, and it is a future event, not past.**If you believe that Revelation is all about the future, then the confusion is in your camp, my friend.
Re: Lazarus, what makes you think he would be in heaven and the rich man in hell? What did the rich man do in order to go to hell?
A parable? I recognize that it is a parable. Parables teach, and they teach well. But as to your “great detail”, I don’t read everything you post on these forums.
 
After all—that’s what the Scriptures are for. That is how the heretics are contradicted and exposed. We are told to “test the teachings” to be sure they are true by going to the Scriptures. That’s how Irenæus and others refuted the heretics of those days. They had nothing else with the truth but the Scriptures.
Well…Actually, you see, Irenaeus ( and :)Co. ) had tradition as well. In fact, Tradition is older than the [Christian] Scriptures. So, often enough, Tradition was all they had…And yet they managed to refute heresy left, right, and center…
:hmmm: Sounds like they were managing just fine that way, too.

** In fact, if Zooey is not RCC, then I expect any refutations from there to be backed up with Scripture—not speculation.**
Nay, laddie; ye:nope: dinnae ken how this all works. It goes like this:
OS is giving us speculations mixed with cherry-picked verses from the Scriptures. This is a big:tsktsk: No-No, because OS is the one who is claiming that everything has to be word for word from Scripture.
The rest of us are pointing out, that it has been the consistent witness of the Church from the very beginning, before the Scripture even was written, that we are to “hold fast to the Traditions which you were taught, whether by [spoken] word or by our [written] epistle”.(2 Thessalonians 2.15).

Which is to say, yean, that:wink: Zooey can quote all the Tradition she pleases, because Zooey, following in the footsteps of Father John Wesley of blessed memory (:gopray: may he rest in peace), is continuing to declare that Tradition & Scripture are both part of one undivided deposit of faith.
Now, I know you don’t like that; in fact, it is probably driving you wild just to read a :coffeeread: Nice Methodist Girl saying that. But Sola Scriptura is NOT, no matter how much you may wish it were otherwise–SS is not, I repeat, sound Christian doctrine. It is not the “faith once delivered unto the saints”. (Jude 3).
Indeed, SS is unscriptural. The Bible never says that the Bible & only the Bible is the only rule of faith; it says just the opposite, in fact.
So, OS, you will need to find yourself some different ammunition to shoot in this direction. Zooey was reading her Bible, I suspect, when Old Scholar was toddling around in short pants yet. I know what it says. And what it does* not* say.
And one of the things that Scripture never ever says, is that the soul sleeps until some future date. Otherwise, who are the “so-great a cloud of witnesses” that the author of Hebrews cites as watching over believers?? And all that, after listing a whole panoply of names & faces, of those dear faithful followers of God, who have gone before us, signed with the sign of peace with God??
Hint: They are more alive than you & I.* And* they are in the Presence of their Saviour. That, OS, is what** the entire witness of Scripture **testifies to.
You can yank verses out of context to mean anything…like the man who every morning opened Holy Writ at random for a “message from God”, only to read: “Judas went out & hanged himself”, and then, wanting further clarity, tried again, only to find the words: “Go, and do thou likewise!”.
🤷 Sheesh. Some people’s children…
 
**But if we believe your version then we must also believe Jesus lied because we know He did not go to heaven or paradise that day…

You can teach that heaven was opened up that day but there is nothing to substantiate that teaching. **
Matthew 26:29*
I tell you, from now on** I shall not drink this fruit of the vine until the day when I drink it with you new in the kingdom of my Father." **
John, 19:28 -30
After this, aware that everything was now finished, in order that the scripture might be fulfilled, 12 Jesus said, “I thirst.”
29
There was a vessel filled with common wine. 13 So they put a sponge soaked in wine on a sprig of hyssop and put it up to his mouth.
30
14 **When Jesus had taken the wine, he said, **B]“It is finished.” *And bowing his head, he handed over the spirit.

What happened? Jesus drank the wine and the gates of Heaven were opened. The Kingdom of Heaven is on Earth now. Even the Lord’s prayer says “Thy Kingdom come.”

That is unless you don’t believe Heaven is the Kingdom of His father. 😊
 
**Neither of these have anything to say about judgment immediately after death but pertain to the resurrection day.

Read Acts 2:29 and 2:34

We are told David is dead and in the grave and has not ascended up into heaven. That alone tells us we stay in the grave until the resurrection.**
That is a bad misreading of Acts 2
25"For David says of Him,
‘I SAW THE LORD ALWAYS IN MY PRESENCE;
FOR HE IS AT MY RIGHT HAND, SO THAT I WILL NOT BE SHAKEN.
26’THEREFORE MY HEART WAS GLAD AND MY TONGUE EXULTED;
MOREOVER MY FLESH ALSO WILL LIVE IN HOPE;
27BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT ABANDON MY SOUL TO HADES,
NOR ALLOW YOUR HOLY ONE TO UNDERGO DECAY.
28’YOU HAVE MADE KNOWN TO ME THE WAYS OF LIFE;
YOU WILL MAKE ME FULL OF GLADNESS WITH YOUR PRESENCE.’ 29"Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.
30"And so, because he was a prophet and knew that GOD HAD SWORN TO HIM WITH AN OATH TO SEAT one OF HIS DESCENDANTS ON HIS THRONE,
31he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that HE WAS NEITHER ABANDONED TO HADES, NOR DID His flesh SUFFER DECAY.
32"This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses.

This passage is talking about pre-Resurrection times. The text shows upon death the body decays in the ground and the soul enters into Hades. In the case of Jesus, His soul was NOT abandoned in Hades but taken out, and His body did not decay, there was no soul sleep here.

As for the talk about Ascension, only Christ ever ascended into Heaven, that is taken up through his own power. Everyone else is assumed (taken up) by the power of God.
Hi Catholic Dude,

I note that you point out that there are weak arguments for soul sleep…

What are they weak in comparison to?
Scripturally speaking, Is there a compelling case, otherwise?

Please note. I am an evangelical Christian. At present I don’t believe that we go straight to heaven. I think that occurs at judgment. I could be entirely wrong about the whole matter…I really don’t know.

I just wondered if you had a solid argument for an alternate position.

Respectfully,

Mudcat
Weak in comparison to the testimony of Scripture, for example:
Philip 1: 21For to me [Paul], to live is Christ and to die is gain. 22But if I am to live on in the flesh, this will mean fruitful labor for me; and I do not know which to choose. 23But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better; 24yet to remain on in the flesh is more necessary for your sake.

Rev 6: 9When the Lamb broke the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God, and because of the testimony which they had maintained; 10and they cried out with a loud voice, saying, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, will You refrain from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?
11And there was given to each of them a white robe; and they were told that they should rest for a little while longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brethren who were to be killed even as they had been, would be completed also.
Quite simply, if the concept of an immediate judgment is false (in favor of soul sleep), then passages like these are illogical (if not heretical).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top