Name a really bad doctrine that needs retiring

[StanJ]

You'll have a very difficult task attempting to find biblical proof that heaven is constrained by time just as earth is. In fact, the Bible presents evidence of things that have happened that haven't happened yet, as I alluded too in the "cloud of witnesses" reference to the Old Testament saints. Was Abraham raised from the dead? Or Abel, Noah, or Sara? And yet they are said to have seen the promise from far off and confess they are pilgrims on earth. The two realities could not be clearer, the epiphany of the OT saints that couldn't possibly have occurred, and yet it has, because in heaven they've already been raised to eternal life. In the parable Jesus told of Lazareth and the rich man, we see paradise personified in the bosom of Abraham. He isn't dead, but alive. And if that wasn't enough, Jesus struck home when he refuted the Sadducees in their belief that the dead aren't raised, reminding them of the Scripture that God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as he told Moses in the burning bush; that he is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

So if the Bible clearly teaches us that the saints are living and not dead, how can that be if they are not yet raised from the dead? The only rational explanation is that they are both raised from the dead and waiting to be raised from the dead and both realities exist concurrently. To us it's an event yet to come, to heaven, it's already occurred. There's no other explanation that fits.

As I never advocated this why would I? The issue is heaven NOT being our destination and you haven't shown it is.
What Luke is referring to in Heb 12:1 is what he dealt with in Heb 11, which was faith. If you pay attention to the tenses used, Luke was using them in the PAST tense. When he says a "cloud of witnesses", it is metaphorical of how many from the OC believed in God promise. Jesus also talked about Abraham being in Paradise, which is NOT a place of the living.

I don't know what you think clear means, but it isn't Heb 12:1 is only clear about faith and how many of the OT saints went before us.
We will ALL be raised on that day of the Lord.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

As I never advocated this why would I? The issue is heaven NOT being our destination and you haven't shown it is.
What Luke is referring to in Heb 12:1 is what he dealt with in Heb 11, which was faith. If you pay attention to the tenses used, Luke was using them in the PAST tense. When he says a "cloud of witnesses", it is metaphorical of how many from the OC believed in God promise. Jesus also talked about Abraham being in Paradise, which is NOT a place of the living.

I don't know what you think clear means, but it isn't Heb 12:1 is only clear about faith and how many of the OT saints went before us.
We will ALL be raised on that day of the Lord.

Now I'm beginning to detect a pattern with you. Most people say "the author of Hebrews" because nobody is certain who wrote the book. But you seem to assert as fact what isn't established as such.

It is in fact my interpretation of Hebrews 12:1 that fits perfectly with what Jesus taught, that God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Christians have always believed in a glorious company of saints in heaven and for 2000 years have sought the prayers and interventions of those saints. This is nothing new to Christianity.

The caveat is that nothing you say is incorrect. From a linear perspective, they are not yet raised from the dead. It's only outside of time that waiting for such an event is not necessary. Jesus taught that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are alive, something you seem to willingly ignore. God is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him. Learn from the Savior.

 

[StanJ]

Now I'm beginning to detect a pattern with you. Most people say "the author of Hebrews" because nobody is certain who wrote the book. But you seem to assert as fact what isn't established as such.

It is in fact my interpretation of Hebrews 12:1 that fits perfectly with what Jesus taught, that God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Christians have always believed in a glorious company of saints in heaven and for 2000 years have sought the prayers and interventions of those saints. This is nothing new to Christianity.

The caveat is that nothing you say is incorrect. From a linear perspective, they are not yet raised from the dead. It's only outside of time that waiting for such an event is not necessary. Jesus taught that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are alive, something you seem to willingly ignore. God is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him. Learn from the Savior.

I guess it depends on what you read and how much you study Tears. IMO, it is pretty well established. You can research it and read the book David L. Allen wrote or continue not to know.

Because one you dead your fate is fixed. Jesus came only for the living and if a person does not confess Him before they die then they will never have Eternal Life and the only resurrection they will experience is the second on for the great white throne judgement. If the saints were alive today there would be no first resurrection. It's pretty simple.

Jesus didn't teach what you assert, and as you are unable to provide scripture to support your assertion, that's all it is. 1 Thess 4:13-18 is pretty clear.

What Jesus said in Mark 12 was “Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven."

The fact is Jesus was dealing with Sadducees who did not believe in the resurrection, so He was telling them they were in error and that the dead DID rise. The point Jesus was making was that God didn't rule the dead, His rule was only for the living. That does NOT say they ARE living.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

What Jesus said in Mark 12 was “Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven."

The fact is Jesus was dealing with Sadducees who did not believe in the resurrection, so He was telling them they were in error and that the dead DID rise. The point Jesus was making was that God didn't rule the dead, His rule was only for the living. That does NOT say they ARE living.

Actually Jesus said specifically that they(Abraham, Jacob, and Isaac) are living, not dead. Now you're just blinding yourself favoring your misguided belief over the Bible. I can't deal with such volitional ignorance

 

[StanJ]

Actually Jesus said specifically that they(Abraham, Jacob, and Isaac) are living, not dead. Now you're just blinding yourself favoring your misguided belief over the Bible. I can't deal with such volitional ignorance

No Tears, Jesus SAID: Now about the dead rising—have you not read in the Book of Moses, in the account of the burning bush, how God said to him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!”
They obviously can't be alive if they will rise when Jesus returns.
If you refuse to accept what Jesus was teaching above and in Luke 16:19-31 then I can't help you. To quote Jesus, "You are badly mistaken."

 

[aspen]

If they were dead, Jesus would be guilty of necromancy during the Transfiguration. Jesus is not guilty of necromancy.

Everyone should get to see James White squirm over the Transfiguration......

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

The Transfiguration is another excellent example of the glorious and LIVING company of saints!

 

[StanJ]

If they were dead, Jesus would be guilty of necromancy during the Transfiguration. Jesus is not guilty of necromancy.

Everyone should get to see James White squirm over the Transfiguration......

That is a ridiculous statement. Do you even know what that event represented? BTW, only Moses was dead.

 

[aspen]

That is a ridiculous statement. Do you even know what that event represented? BTW, only Moses was dead.

Hmm...I view it as one of my better statements....what is your beef, Stan?

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

Hmm...I view it as one of my better statements....what is your beef, Stan?

The same beef every soul sleeper has, that nobody is buying it.

 

[StanJ]

Hmm...I view it as one of my better statements....what is your beef, Stan?

You saying what you did was my beef. That you would associate ANY sin with Jesus just to justify your stance is ridiculous. Also you didn't answer my question about what you thought the transfiguration was all about. Next you're going to tell me that what Jesus says in Matthew 17, supports reincarnation. Maybe you can cite the debate you say Dr. White squirmed in. I'm not a huge fan of his but I find him more than competent in Bible exegesis.

The same beef every soul sleeper has, that nobody is buying it.

I was RC Tears and I was delivered from that false teaching. Souls don't sleep, they wait for their resurrection as Paul clearly states.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

You saying what you did was my beef. That you would associate ANY sin with Jesus just to justify your stance is ridiculous. Also you didn't answer my question about what you thought the transfiguration was all about. Next you're going to tell me that what Jesus says in Matthew 17, supports reincarnation. Maybe you can cite the debate you say Dr. White squirmed in. I'm not a huge fan of his but I find him more than competent in Bible exegesis.

I was RC Tears and I was delivered from that false teaching. Souls don't sleep, they wait for their resurrection as Paul clearly states.

You have a funny way of being "delivered" from soul-sleep because you're defending it like I've never seen it defended before.

 

[StanJ]

You have a funny way of being "delivered" from soul-sleep because you're defending it like I've never seen it defended before.

Well then maybe you don't know what "soul sleep" actually is, otherwise you wouldn't say that. If that is not the case then you definitely have a problem understanding what I have posted, IF you have actually read and digested them.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

Soul sleep is the teaching that when a person dies, his soul "sleeps" until the time of the future resurrection. In this condition, the person is not aware or conscious. The Jehovah's Witnesses and the Seventh-day Adventists hold to this doctrine. But the Jehovah's Witnesses teach annihilation. This means that after death a person ceases to exist. At the future resurrection they maintain that the soul is made again. Basically, it is a re-creation of the individual. The Seventh-day Adventists teach at the soul is simply inert and resides in the memory of God.

The primary verses used to support soul sleep are found in Ecclesiastes:

• Eccl. 9:5, For the living know they will die; but the dead do not know anything, nor have they any longer a reward, for their memory is forgotten."
• Eccl. 12:7, "then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it."

http://carm.org/soul-sleep

Sounds like exactly what you're peddling. Sorry, but you haven't been "delivered" from soul sleep. Whatever nuance differentiates your beliefs from soul sleep is too subtle to actually matter.

 

[StanJ]

Soul sleep is the teaching that when a person dies, his soul "sleeps" until the time of the future resurrection. In this condition, the person is not aware or conscious. The Jehovah's Witnesses and the Seventh-day Adventists hold to this doctrine. But the Jehovah's Witnesses teach annihilation. This means that after death a person ceases to exist. At the future resurrection they maintain that the soul is made again. Basically, it is a re-creation of the individual. The Seventh-day Adventists teach at the soul is simply inert and resides in the memory of God.

The primary verses used to support soul sleep are found in Ecclesiastes:

• Eccl. 9:5, For the living know they will die; but the dead do not know anything, nor have they any longer a reward, for their memory is forgotten."
• Eccl. 12:7, "then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it."

http://carm.org/soul-sleep

Sounds like exactly what you're peddling. Sorry, but you haven't been "delivered" from soul sleep. Whatever nuance differentiates your beliefs from soul sleep is too subtle to actually matter.

Like I said, if you think that then you have not read what I have posted or you have a comprehension problem.

 

[[email protected]]

1. The bad doctrine (one at a time please)
2. Your analysis on why it is bad

"Touch not My anointed." Chances are you’ve heard this weird doctrine based on 1 Chronicles 16:22. In an attempt to discourage any form of disagreement in the church, insecure leaders tell their members that if they ever question church authority, they are “touching the Lord’s anointed” and in danger of God’s judgment. Let’s call this what it is: spiritual manipulation. It creates worse problems by ruling out healthy discussion and mutual respect. Church members end up being abused or controlled—or even blacklisted because they dare to ask a question.

1. THE RAPTURE

2. "My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one."
- Jesus as recorded in the gospel of John 17:15

​Which part of NOT does the reader NOT understand?

The rapture ideology was invented in the mid-19th century by John Nelson Darby, a consort of witches. It then became immensely popular in America. It is, after all, an American invention - like hot dogs and baseball. You will not find it so popular anywhere else in Christendom. Following an initial surge of popularity, it was further legitimized by C.I. Scofield in his chain reference Bible.

But it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, gospel.

Which part of NOT does the reader NOT understand?

The Christian is called to walk by faith through the troubles of the world, not to hope in Star Trek evacuations when things get sticky. The Christian is called to walk by faith and in courage, not to wish the cowards dream of hiding elsewhere.

Which part of NOT does the reader NOT understand?

Choose wisely, pilgrim.

and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

 

[rockytopva]

Rapture... We have an event that will occur similar to Lot before Sodom was destroyed and similar to Moses before the flood.

Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh. - Matthew 24:44
Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not. - Luke 12:40

As for the timing...

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 Thessalonians 2:3

Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame. - Revelation 16:15

If this event was anything other than pre-trib we would be able to set our watches to it, meaning Christ would not come as a thief,

 

[StanJ]

1. THE RAPTURE

2. "My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one."
- Jesus as recorded in the gospel of John 17:15

​Which part of NOT does the reader NOT understand?

The rapture ideology was invented in the mid-19th century by John Nelson Darby, a consort of witches. It then became immensely popular in America. It is, after all, an American invention - like hot dogs and baseball. You will not find it so popular anywhere else in Christendom. Following an initial surge of popularity, it was further legitimized by C.I. Scofield in his chain reference Bible.

But it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, gospel.

Which part of NOT does the reader NOT understand?

The Christian is called to walk by faith through the troubles of the world, not to hope in Star Trek evacuations when things get sticky. The Christian is called to walk by faith and in courage, not to wish the cowards dream of hiding elsewhere.

Which part of NOT does the reader NOT understand?

Choose wisely, pilgrim.

and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

Ignoring what Paul teaches in 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15, simply negates any credibility for your assertions here.

 

[Tex]

What is 100,000 years dead compared to the eternity in a resurrected body? If I rest for 100,000 years, I am still resting in Christ.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

Ignoring what Paul teaches in 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15, simply negates any credibility for your assertions here.

And 2Thessalonians 2. The apostles didn't teach a magical rapture before we actually suffer for the faith, they taught what tribulation we would see before the Lord returns. And Paul's specific, direct refutation of the rapture teaching in the second Thessalonian epistle should, by all reasonable standards, lay the controversy to rest.