Are we divine ???

[bbyrd009]

and that Jesus went "to" and is "One" with the Father, and has entered into "the glory of the Father"

Christ plainly stated that He was One with God before then, wadr

 

[ScottA]

...and to be manifested in the earth, "on earth as it is in heaven."

But it is not heaven that becomes lower as the earth is lower, but the earth that becomes as heaven, meaning as God, whom is spirit.

 

[ScottA]

Christ plainly stated that He was One with God before then, wadr

Yes, and yet He did so having lowered Himself to be as a man, and at that time had not yet entered the glory of the Father, which He now has done. And if we follow Him we will do likewise, in "like manner."

 

[pia]

Many people, I believe, have been talked out of the best part of their faith, which was before they knew so much that men had taught them.

A huge Amen to that !

 

[Dcopymope]

You accuse me of picking out a small part of a verse, and then you do the same thing - yet, so did Jesus do likewise. But you call it wrong because of your own "translation."

....I used the whole scripture in context, unlike you only quoting a few words from a verse.

That is just you desperately defending the flesh, while I am desperately defending the spirit. How is it that you say you fear the Lord, when you do not even "see Him as He is?" No, what it is that you fear, is leaving behind the Egypt of your flesh.

You have completely refused to include the fact that "God is spirit", and that Jesus went "to" and is "One" with the Father, and has entered into "the glory of the Father", and that if we are in Him and He in us, we will also do likewise. This is the "like manner" (of the Father) that the men in white were referring to - which is the glory and perfection of God. For, "now the Lord is the Spirit."

....No, I am defending the word of God. As it pertains to prophecy, me "seeing him as he is" will have nothing to do with being turned into a spirit being anymore than it did for Adam and Eve. The creation, that is, the WHOLE creation will "see him as he is" because of the elimination of sin by Jesus Christ, the only "transformation" that matters. It has absolutely nothing at all to do with the nature of the "glorified body" or whether or not it will have flesh. God doesn't have to transform your body into the likeness of Jesus at all. It is not a requirement for your name to be written in the book of life, it is a reward given to you on account of your faith in him and nothing more than that.

If God really wanted to, he could have the saints fetching leaves off of a tree like the rest of the world will be doing to gain eternal life. This however is not what it says, the tree will be "for the healing of the nations" while he promises something more for the saints simply because of his love for us. He promises that our earthly tabernacle will be transformed or "further clothed" as Paul states into the tabernacle prepared for us from heaven, giving us immortality, no tree necessary. In fact, did you even know there will be a tree of life in New Jerusalem or is this something you just conveniently ignore because it flies in the face of your thinly veiled Gnosticism? Yeah Scott, we all know "God is spirit", and it doesn't mean much in itself, knowing that God himself will descend from heaven to dwell with his creation on the new earth.

 

[Dcopymope]

hmm. i agree with your premise, but i don't think that is what that v is trying to impart, exactly. Ok, or at all

"you will see Him come down the same way you saw Him go up"
seems to be the relevant concept there,
yet we read it differently, huh, like
"i will see Him come down the same way they saw Him go up"

Ok, and all you did was make minor changes between the two statements that changes nothing at all about the fact that they were promised to see him again descending the same way they saw him ascend. If the eye witnesses actually gave me a reason to believe there was a change of state, I would be singing a very different tune. It doesn't even imply such a thing so I would be putting words in their mouth, and henceforth adding onto the word of God, which is forbidden.

 

[GodsGrace]

GG,

In my view, that's exactly where we are in the church and especially with preachers - 2 Tim 4:3.

This may be too technical for many in explaining the Greek tenses. Please feed back what you don't understand. This is from my article, Consequences of screwing up meanings of New Testament Greek tenses.

Before I begin with the details, I need to mention the grammar known as the 'indicative mood'.



In Greek (except for the future tense), the tenses refer primarily to the kind of action (continuous, completed with continuing results, and simple occurrence) rather than the time of action (as with English). Therefore, the present tense in Greek is not equivalent to the present tense in English. The Greek present tense refers to continual or continuous action. The time factor is of minor importance.

NT Greek grammarians, Dana & Mantey, stated this important difference when compared with English tenses:



What is the meaning of the present tense in Greek? The aorist tense may be represented by a dot (•). It happened. The present tense by a line (_______________), and the perfect tense by a combination of the two (•_______________) [Dana & Mantey 1955:179].



You stated:

The problem is with the aorist tense and using it to prove eternal security.
IOW, they believed once in the past and it carries through into the future because the aorist tense was used.​

The aorist tense has the meaning of point action (generally); something happened. How do these people get on with verses like John 5:24 and the present tense of continuous action. This also is the case with John 3:16,

For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life (ESV).
​

What's the Greek tense of 'believes' and 'have'? Are they both aorist mean, 'whoever believes once ... should not perish but have eternal life'?

Oz

Works consulted

Dana, H E & Mantey, J R 1927/1955, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament. Toronto, Canada: The Macmillan Company.

I've read everything and I just wish I could copy and paste this on so many threads. In fact, that's what I'm going to do, sourcing your site.
This seems to sum it up for me:

We can apply this understanding of the Greek present tense to John 5:24 (ESV): ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears [present tense] my word and believes [present tense] him who sent me has [present tense] eternal life. He does not come into judgement, but has passed from death to life’.
Therefore the verse means that those who hear Jesus’ word and continue to believe him continue to have eternal life. The verse does not teach that a person who once believed and no longer believes has eternal life. Eternal life is for those who continue to believe. That’s what the Greek teaches because the Greek present tense is not equivalent to the English present tense.

​

John 5:24 is in harmony with Matthew 24:9-14 (ESV),

Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake. 10 And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. 11 And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. 12 And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But the one who endures to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come (emphasis added).

Conclusion
I urge every Christian who reads English, NOT to make the English verb tenses in an English translation of the Bible to have the same meaning as the Greek verb tenses. English verbs generally indicate time of action while the Greek verbs the kind of action, such as: continual action; action now with continuing results, point action, etc.

So when it comes to examining the verses mentioned above relating to once-saved-always-saved, the continuous action (unbroken action) of believing indicates one has continuous salvation as long as one continues to believe (Greek present tense). It does not teach that if one believes once only (aorist tense) and does not continue to believe, that one continues to have eternal life.

Here, the Greek verbals help to clarify that once-saved-always-saved is not a biblical way of looking at salvation, but perseverance of the saints is biblical teaching on salvation: ‘But the one who endures to the end will be saved’ (Matt 24:13 ESV).

source: Consequences of screwing up meanings of New Testament Greek tenses

 

[bbyrd009]

Ok, and all you did was make minor changes between the two statements that changes nothing at all about the fact that they were promised to see him again descending the same way they saw him ascend. If the eye witnesses actually gave me a reason to believe there was a change of state, I would be singing a very different tune. It doesn't even imply such a thing so I would be putting words in their mouth, and henceforth adding onto the word of God, which is forbidden.

well, my meaning was that the v had a certain intent, "what you will see," and that you are using it to show that Christ's Body cannot have changed, bc ppl are seeing the same thing, at least supposedly (in truth no one is seeing anything with their eyes here, right) which does not necessarily = the same thing right. The eyewitnesses to Jesus' resurrected body gave you no reason to assume a change of state either right, He even had to tell someone not to touch Him etc

 

[bbyrd009]

(in truth no one is seeing anything with their eyes here, right)

see, what is happening is that a passage was written specifically to be misinterpreted by ppls desires

 

[ScottA]

...and to be manifested in the earth, "on earth as it is in heaven."

What is the point if I point out that God's intent for the earth is to make it like heaven, if you just turn around and want heaven to be like the earth? Is that really what you want?

 

[ScottA]

....I used the whole scripture in context, unlike you only quoting a few words from a verse.



....No, I am defending the word of God. As it pertains to prophecy, me "seeing him as he is" will have nothing to do with being turned into a spirit being anymore than it did for Adam and Eve. The creation, that is, the WHOLE creation will "see him as he is" because of the elimination of sin by Jesus Christ, the only "transformation" that matters. It has absolutely nothing at all to do with the nature of the "glorified body" or whether or not it will have flesh. God doesn't have to transform your body into the likeness of Jesus at all. It is not a requirement for your name to be written in the book of life, it is a reward given to you on account of your faith in him and nothing more than that.

If God really wanted to, he could have the saints fetching leaves off of a tree like the rest of the world will be doing to gain eternal life. This however is not what it says, the tree will be "for the healing of the nations" while he promises something more for the saints simply because of his love for us. He promises that our earthly tabernacle will be transformed or "further clothed" as Paul states into the tabernacle prepared for us from heaven, giving us immortality, no tree necessary. In fact, did you even know there will be a tree of life in New Jerusalem or is this something you just conveniently ignore because it flies in the face of your thinly veiled Gnosticism? Yeah Scott, we all know "God is spirit", and it doesn't mean much in itself, knowing that God himself will descend from heaven to dwell with his creation on the new earth.

Go ahead, call names and lash out at my person - shows just how desperate you are and how your understanding of the scriptures is failing you. Go ahead and act as if you have the upper hand, which you obviously do not, for you don't even know what the tree of Life is.

This is why the scriptures often refer to what a person will or "can receive", and what they will not or cannot receive...and it is a pattern. Very typically those who refuse what God has up next (and why they killed the prophets) is a desire to hold on to the past with arguments that cannot reconcile every word of God. But you have only begun to lash out, so I don't feel threatened.

Your loss.

 

[Dcopymope]

Go ahead, call names and lash out at my person - shows just how desperate you are and how your understanding of the scriptures is failing you. Go ahead and act as if you have the upper hand, which you obviously do not, for you don't even know what the tree of Life is.

This is why the scriptures often refer to what a person will or "can receive", and what they will not or cannot receive...and it is a pattern. Very typically those who refuse what God has up next (and why they killed the prophets) is a desire to hold on to the past with arguments that cannot reconcile every word of God. But you have only begun to lash out, so I don't feel threatened.

Your loss.

............."name calling"? Ok, so be it, I call it like I see it. How about you actually give a real response to my charge? How does your Gnosticism explain the existence of the tree of life in New Jerusalem?

 

[ScottA]

............."name calling"? Ok, so be it, I call it like I see it. How about you actually give a real response to my charge? How does your Gnosticism explain the existence of the tree of life in New Jerusalem?

I wouldn't know. I would have to look up the meaning of Gnosticism.

 

[Dcopymope]

I wouldn't know. I would have to look up the meaning of Gnosticism.

Sure you don't, but...ok, you wouldn't know. To get down to brass tacks, What is a "glorified body" to you? Will it be pure spirit? Will the new earth be pure spirit?

 

[ScottA]

Sure you don't, but...ok, you wouldn't know. To get down to brass tacks, What is a "glorified body" to you? Will it be pure spirit? Will the new earth be pure spirit?

You answer first:

If and when "thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven", what shall it be, as it is on earth, or as in heaven?

 

[Dcopymope]

You answer first:

If and when "thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven", what shall it be, as it is on earth, or as in heaven?

Since you want to use more one liners, I might as well just take this out of context as you have done time and again. "Thy will be done on on earth as it is in heaven" can literally mean anything. His will could be to take a dump on earth for all you know since this is all you want to go on. If you want it to mean make everything pure spirit, its fair game. You will have to go a lot further to actually prove this is the intention though. I should advise you that the Gnostic's haven't faired well though. Why is there a tree of life since you apparently believe everything will be pure spirit anyway??

 

[ScottA]

Sure you don't, but...ok, you wouldn't know. To get down to brass tacks, What is a "glorified body" to you? Will it be pure spirit? Will the new earth be pure spirit?

You answer first:
If and when "thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven", what shall it be, as it is on earth, or as in heaven?

Since you want to use more one liners, I might as well just take this out of context as you have done time and again. "Thy will be done on on earth as it is in heaven" can literally mean anything. His will could be to take a dump on earth for all you know since this is all you want to go on. If you want it to mean make everything pure spirit, its fair game. You will have to go a lot further to actually prove this is the intention though. I should advise you that the Gnostic's haven't faired well though. Why is there a tree of life since you apparently believe everything will be pure spirit anyway??

Classic - just as I thought.

 

[Dcopymope]

Classic - just as I thought.

....OK, so in other words you can't acually give a real answer just as I thought. Typical folks, you see this is what happens whenever certain 'believers' prattle on at length about their borderline gnostic beliefs and I bring up the tree of life on the new earth. It throws a huge monkey wrench in their entire belief system concerning what they claim to know about the nature of the "glorified bodies", of heaven and the spirits thereof. They take a few words of a small verse and base their entire doctrine off that. But It just does not compute for them when the tree of life is brought into the picture. Some of these people didn't even know there was a tree to start with. I rest my case, God is not a weakling, and you don't know jack spit about heaven.

 

[ScottA]

....OK, so in other words you can't acually give a real answer just as I thought. Typical folks, you see this is what happens whenever certain 'believers' prattle on at length about their borderline gnostic beliefs and I bring up the tree of life on the new earth. It throws a huge monkey wrench in their entire belief system concerning what they claim to know about the nature of the "glorified bodies", of heaven and the spirits thereof. They take a few words of a small verse and base their entire doctrine off that. But It just does not compute for them when the tree of life is brought into the picture. Some of these people didn't even know there was a tree to start with. I rest my case, God is not a weakling, and you don't know jack spit about heaven.

No, it all broke down when you didn't actually know what the tree of Life was...and therefore even what you were talking about.

Would you like to try again with another guess, more conjecture, more theories?

 

[Dcopymope]

No, it all broke down when you didn't actually know what the tree of Life was...and therefore even what you were talking about.

Would you like to try again with another guess, more conjecture, more theories?

Spare me the foolishness, I've seen enough of it. Anybody with eyes to see and ears to hear knows why its called the tree of life. If it wasn't obvious to you just reading Genesis, then it's been revealed in Revelation, which is, you know, why its called Revelation. There is no mystery to it, its not rocket science, no matter how much you try and make it so. Its called the tree of life because Jesus Christ is the life giving source of the tree itself. When he called himself "the life", he meant exactly what he said. Once again, YOU and I and rest of those calling themselves saved won't need it, because for us, Jesus is the life. Our mortal flesh will be made immortal like the second Adam. He never mentions a tree because it doesnt concern us. The tree will be for the rest of the world, for THEIR healing, because they don't get the "glorified body".