WHEN WE ALL GET TO HEAVEN, WHAT A DAY OF REJOICING THAT WILL BE?

[StanJ]

Assuredly my brother at home with the Lord is heaven. Without question our Savior will be there!
As I have been able to I interpret we have the first heaven (our atmosphere), the second heaven (outer space), and the third heaven (God's domain). The word translated "heaven" has been used interchangeably depicting these three areas, perhaps referring to all three at once, as I am certain you know it is often rendered in Greek as plural. Stephan and John saw into this third domain. Then we have Paul's description.
2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven-whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows.
3 And I know that this man was caught up into paradise-whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows-
4 and he heard things that cannot be told, which man may not utter. - 2 Corinthians 12:2-4
οἶδα ἄνθρωπον ἐν Χριστῷ πρὸ ἐτῶν δεκατεσσάρων, εἴτε ἐν σώματι οὐκ οἶδα, εἴτε ἐκτὸς τοῦ σώματος οὐκ οἶδα, ὁ θεὸς οἶδεν, ἁρπαγέντα τὸν τοιοῦτον ἕως τρίτου οὐρανοῦ. 3 καὶ οἶδα τὸν τοιοῦτον ἄνθρωπον, εἴτε ἐν σώματι εἴτε χωρὶς τοῦ σώματος οὐκ οἶδα, ὁ θεὸς οἶδεν, 4 ὅτι ἡρπάγη εἰς τὸν παράδεισον καὶ ἤκουσεν ἄρρητα ῥήματα ἃ οὐκ ἐξὸν ἀνθρώπῳ λαλῆσαι.
Paul is using both paradise and third heaven in the same reference...

Yes, I think it is clear that Paul did NOT know, but some here think they know. The paradise Jesus referred to with the thief and with Lazarus cannot be heaven because Jesus said no man had been there. If no man had been there and Abraham is in paradise then the two can't be the same. Don't know why this is so simple yet so hard for some to comprehend? God was NOT with Abraham in paradise and Abraham was not with God in heaven. It is very very simple.

 

[StanJ]

justaname,

That's essentially my understanding. However, in this thread, I understood we were discussing the third heaven, the ultimate destiny of believers, which is known as heaven, Paradise, Abraham's bosom, and my Father's house.

As the OP, I can assure you that your perception was WRONG.

 

[justaname]

Yes, I think it is clear that Paul did NOT know, but some here think they know. The paradise Jesus referred to with the thief and with Lazarus cannot be heaven because Jesus said no man had been there. If no man had been there and Abraham is in paradise then the two can't be the same. Don't know why this is so simple yet so hard for some to comprehend? God was NOT with Abraham in paradise and Abraham was not with God in heaven. It is very very simple.

The point is Stan Paul uses third heaven and paradise interchangeably.

 

[OzSpen]

The point is Stan Paul uses third heaven and paradise interchangeably.

The some here who think they know would be you. It is because you insist on eisegesis.

Well said!

 

[FHII]

Hey... can we back up on that? Can someone verify for me that 3rd heaven =paradise?

 

[StanJ]

The point is Stan Paul uses third heaven and paradise interchangeably.
The some here who think they know would be you. It is because you insist on eisegesis.

The show it and don't just assert it, as it relates to heaven where God is and where Jesus said no one has been. You are big on accusations, but small on fact and exegesis.

 

[StanJ]

Hey... can we back up on that? Can someone verify for me that 3rd heaven =paradise?

No, the third heaven is heaven where God lives/resides, and is a Hebrew/Jewish concept to differentiate between sky, outer space and where God resides.
Gen1:1 combines them all as 'heavens', but it is not the same as Paradise, which is where the godly go to await the resurrection. It is not a place where God resides because Jesus said no man has seen God. If it was the same as heaven, then Jesus lied because He said Abraham was there. Luke 16.

 

[justaname]

Hey... can we back up on that? Can someone verify for me that 3rd heaven =paradise?

2 Corinthians 12:2-4

Paul uses the terms interchangeably.

 

[justaname]

The show it and don't just assert it, as it relates to heaven where God is and where Jesus said no one has been. You are big on accusations, but small on fact and exegesis.

Stan it has been shown, you simply decide to deny the evidence. I have no responsibility to convince you, I can only present the truth of the Scriptures. If you choose to suppress the truth, what can I do?

 

[StanJ]

2 Corinthians 12:2-4
Paul uses the terms interchangeably.

No, Paul describes two SEPERATE occurances. V2 and then v3&4. Again your lack of understanding basic grammatical structure is sorely lacking, or you are deliberately eisegeting.

 

[StanJ]

Stan it has been shown, you simply decide to deny the evidence. I have no responsibility to convince you, I can only present the truth of the Scriptures. If you choose to suppress the truth, what can I do?

There has been NO evidence except maybe in your mind and Oz. As usual, when challenged, you back away and refuse to put your money where your words take you. I'm used to it. You pretty much only snipe at me.

 

[justaname]

No, Paul describes two SEPERATE occurances. V2 and then v3&4. Again your lack of understanding basic grammatical structure is sorely lacking, or you are deliberately eisegeting.

Conceptions of the number of “heavens” varied so much in Jewish circles that it is impossible to know why Paul selected the digit three but, in view of his description in v. 4, it appears that he considered the third heaven the ultimate in celestial experience.

3—The repetition in this verse contributes to the satirical tone by adding a note of feigned suspense at the threshold of the ultimate disclosure.

4—Paul picks up the thread of v. 3. Will he now break the code of silence that all antiquity imposed on initiates into mysteries?
The term Paradise suggests a king’s park. To be invited into “paradise” meant that one enjoyed intimacy with the royal household. Hence the significance of the promise that Jesus made to the malefactor (Luke 23:43): Jesus as king counts the outlaw one of his intimates. The other occurrence of the term is in Rev. 2:7, which echoes Gen. 2:9.

Danker, F. W. (1989). II Corinthians (pp. 190–191). Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House.

A bit of a note on the author from WICI...

(German: [ˈdaŋkɐ]; July 12, 1920 – February 2, 2012) was a noted New Testament scholar and the pre-eminent Koine Greek lexicographer for two generations, working with F. Wilbur Gingrich as an editor of the Bauer Lexicon starting in 1957 until the publication of the second edition in 1979, and as the only editor from 1979 until the publication of the 3rd edition, updating it with the results of modern scholarship, converting it to SGML to allow it to be easily published in electronic formats, and significantly improving the usability of the lexicon, as well as the typography.


Stan you have no reason to state "your lack of understanding basic grammatical structure". The fact that you used a double negative in your comment proves your ignorance.

 

[justaname]

Here is a different commentator on the same issue...

But why does he repeat himself? Thrall thinks that Paul “may be emphasizing his total lack of comprehension about how the event occurred. It was a wonderful happening whose mode of operation was known only to God.” This conclusion makes the best sense of Paul’s repetition.
The reference to “being caught up to the third heaven” in 12:2 and “caught up to paradise” in 12:4 presents another perplexing detail. “Paradise” was a Persian loan word used in the Hebrew Old Testament to refer to a park. In intertestamental literature it was used for the realm entered upon death or the realm where God is. Paul’s account raises several questions. Is the third heaven identical with paradise? If not, is paradise in a realm higher than the third heaven and was his ascension a two stage process?
Some argue that Paul ascended to paradise in two stages. It could perhaps explain the repetition, in the body or out of the body. In the Jewish tradition we can find the concept of seven heavens and even ten heavens. If Paul adopted this schema, the third heaven may have been a lower level of seven or more. It is then on the highest level, paradise, where Paul hears the unutterable words.
But what is the purpose of mentioning a stop in the third heaven if this were not understood as the ultimate heaven? In other stories of trips to the heavens, the seers give copious reports of what they observe in each celestial region. Paul, however, does not recount passing through other regions or seeing or hearing anything significant at this third level. The repetition of the same verb “caught up” (harpazo) in 12:4 for being taken to the third heaven and to paradise suggests that Paul refers to a single experience. A three-heaven schema is the most well established view in Jewish writings, and the “third heaven” would therefore be recognized as the highest. Thrall points out that Paul’s use of the two terms can be explained by Semitic synthetic parallelism “in which the second element takes up the first, carries it further, and intensifies its effect.” The second term, “paradise,” either gives “a more precise indication of the part of the third heaven to which Paul was transported, or else serves to clarify its character.” Calvin argued that the term “third heaven” is not literal but symbolic:
The number three is used as a perfect number to indicate what is highest and most complete. Also the word heaven by itself means here God’s blessed and glorious kingdom about all spheres and the firmament itself and all the framework of the world. But not content with the word heaven, Paul adds that he had reached the utmost height and its innermost chambers.
Lincoln is probably correct that “Paul has simply taken over the term ‘third heaven’ in a formal manner as a variant designation for Paradise.”

The New American Commentary

 

[StanJ]

Conceptions of the number of “heavens” varied so much in Jewish circles that it is impossible to know why Paul selected the digit three but, in view of his description in v. 4, it appears that he considered the third heaven the ultimate in celestial experience.
3—The repetition in this verse contributes to the satirical tone by adding a note of feigned suspense at the threshold of the ultimate disclosure.
4—Paul picks up the thread of v. 3. Will he now break the code of silence that all antiquity imposed on initiates into mysteries?
The term Paradise suggests a king’s park. To be invited into “paradise” meant that one enjoyed intimacy with the royal household. Hence the significance of the promise that Jesus made to the malefactor (Luke 23:43): Jesus as king counts the outlaw one of his intimates. The other occurrence of the term is in Rev. 2:7, which echoes Gen. 2:9.
Danker, F. W. (1989). II Corinthians (pp. 190–191). Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House.
A bit of a note on the author from WICI...
(German: [ˈdaŋkɐ]; July 12, 1920 – February 2, 2012) was a noted New Testament scholar and the pre-eminent Koine Greek lexicographer for two generations, working with F. Wilbur Gingrich as an editor of the Bauer Lexicon starting in 1957 until the publication of the second edition in 1979, and as the only editor from 1979 until the publication of the 3rd edition, updating it with the results of modern scholarship, converting it to SGML to allow it to be easily published in electronic formats, and significantly improving the usability of the lexicon, as well as the typography.
Stan you have no reason to state "your lack of understanding basic grammatical structure". The fact that you used a double negative in your comment proves your ignorance.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary:
to the third heaven—even to, &c. These raptures (note the plural, "visions," "revelations," 2Co 12:1) had two degrees: first he was caught up "to the third heaven," and from thence to "Paradise" (2Co 12:4) [Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies, 5.427], which seems to denote an inner recess of the third heaven [Bengel] (Lu 23:43; Re 2:7). Paul was permitted not only to "hear" the things of Paradise, but to see also in some degree the things of the third heaven (compare "visions," 2Co 12:1). The occurrence TWICE of "whether in the body … I know not, God knoweth," and of "lest I should be exalted above measure," marks two stages in the revelation. "Ignorance of the mode does not set aside the certain knowledge of the fact. The apostles were ignorant of many things" [Bengel]. The first heaven is that of the clouds, the air; the second, that of the stars, the sky; the third is spiritual (Eph 4:10).

Two different places, the locations of which, cannot be determined by geographical references, as they are spiritual in nature. Paul states first "I know a man", and then he states, "this man". It does not show repetition, but continuity in his reflection. From one point to another. In heaven, Paul relates nothing, but in Paradise, he relates of hearing "inexpressible things, things that no one is permitted to tell".

What Paul DOES repeat, is that he did NOT know in what state he was in, so it serves no useful purpose for us to speculate either. It is obvious that Paul's message here is about boasting, and not about defining what exactly happened. We can see it was a journey of sorts, but nothing much more than that. His intent was NOT to boast, but to rely on God's grace and mercy as he states in v9, and ends with his conclusion in v10.

If we rely on scripture to show us truth, we cannot read it with preconceived ideas of heaven and paradise, if even Paul didn't know.
Bottom line is, will you let scripture tell you, by the Holy Spirit, what it actually states, or will you only look for commentary that supports your preconceptions that you arrived there with?

 

[StanJ]

Here is a different commentator on the same issue...
But why does he repeat himself? Thrall thinks that Paul “may be emphasizing his total lack of comprehension about how the event occurred. It was a wonderful happening whose mode of operation was known only to God.” This conclusion makes the best sense of Paul’s repetition.
The reference to “being caught up to the third heaven” in 12:2 and “caught up to paradise” in 12:4 presents another perplexing detail. “Paradise” was a Persian loan word used in the Hebrew Old Testament to refer to a park. In intertestamental literature it was used for the realm entered upon death or the realm where God is. Paul’s account raises several questions. Is the third heaven identical with paradise? If not, is paradise in a realm higher than the third heaven and was his ascension a two stage process?
Some argue that Paul ascended to paradise in two stages. It could perhaps explain the repetition, in the body or out of the body. In the Jewish tradition we can find the concept of seven heavens and even ten heavens. If Paul adopted this schema, the third heaven may have been a lower level of seven or more. It is then on the highest level, paradise, where Paul hears the unutterable words.
But what is the purpose of mentioning a stop in the third heaven if this were not understood as the ultimate heaven? In other stories of trips to the heavens, the seers give copious reports of what they observe in each celestial region. Paul, however, does not recount passing through other regions or seeing or hearing anything significant at this third level. The repetition of the same verb “caught up” (harpazo) in 12:4 for being taken to the third heaven and to paradise suggests that Paul refers to a single experience. A three-heaven schema is the most well established view in Jewish writings, and the “third heaven” would therefore be recognized as the highest. Thrall points out that Paul’s use of the two terms can be explained by Semitic synthetic parallelism “in which the second element takes up the first, carries it further, and intensifies its effect.” The second term, “paradise,” either gives “a more precise indication of the part of the third heaven to which Paul was transported, or else serves to clarify its character.” Calvin argued that the term “third heaven” is not literal but symbolic:
The number three is used as a perfect number to indicate what is highest and most complete. Also the word heaven by itself means here God’s blessed and glorious kingdom about all spheres and the firmament itself and all the framework of the world. But not content with the word heaven, Paul adds that he had reached the utmost height and its innermost chambers.
Lincoln is probably correct that “Paul has simply taken over the term ‘third heaven’ in a formal manner as a variant designation for Paradise.”
The New American Commentary

This commentary is nothing more than an eisegesis of the text that uses the authors designed reasons and questions that lead one to his predetermined bias.
It is sad you cannot see that leading in his questions.
Do you really think Paul deliberately thought about using "Semitic synthetic parallelism" ?

 

[justaname]

The pertinent information is in the paradise word.

 

[justaname]

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary:
to the third heaven—even to, &c. These raptures (note the plural, "visions," "revelations," 2Co 12:1) had two degrees: first he was caught up "to the third heaven," and from thence to "Paradise" (2Co 12:4) [Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies, 5.427], which seems to denote an inner recess of the third heaven [Bengel] (Lu 23:43; Re 2:7). Paul was permitted not only to "hear" the things of Paradise, but to see also in some degree the things of the third heaven (compare "visions," 2Co 12:1). The occurrence TWICE of "whether in the body … I know not, God knoweth," and of "lest I should be exalted above measure," marks two stages in the revelation. "Ignorance of the mode does not set aside the certain knowledge of the fact. The apostles were ignorant of many things" [Bengel]. The first heaven is that of the clouds, the air; the second, that of the stars, the sky; the third is spiritual (Eph 4:10).

Two different places, the locations of which, cannot be determined by geographical references, as they are spiritual in nature. Paul states first "I know a man", and then he states, "this man". It does not show repetition, but continuity in his reflection. From one point to another. In heaven, Paul relates nothing, but in Paradise, he relates of hearing "inexpressible things, things that no one is permitted to tell".

What Paul DOES repeat, is that he did NOT know in what state he was in, so it serves no useful purpose for us to speculate either. It is obvious that Paul's message here is about boasting, and not about defining what exactly happened. We can see it was a journey of sorts, but nothing much more than that. His intent was NOT to boast, but to rely on God's grace and mercy as he states in v9, and ends with his conclusion in v10.

If we rely on scripture to show us truth, we cannot read it with preconceived ideas of heaven and paradise, if even Paul didn't know.
Bottom line is, will you let scripture tell you, by the Holy Spirit, what it actually states, or will you only look for commentary that supports your preconceptions that you arrived there with?

Here is the pertinent information in the commentary you posted which I underlined for emphasis:

had two degrees: first he was caught up "to the third heaven," and from thence to "Paradise" (2Co 12:4) [Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies, 5.427], which seems to denote an inner recess of the third heaven [Bengel]

The idea of the reasoning of the author's repetition in the Scripture is unsatisfactorily settled by any of the commentaries, hence the numerous arguments concerning such. I do not intend to attempt to suggest reasoning. Where they all agree, including the JFB you posted, is the idea or concept of Paradise being a more specific location within God's domain of the third heaven.

What is being communicated is "Paradise" is in heaven. We are invited into the garden of God thru our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, the second Adam that restores us, all to the glory of the Father!

 

[StanJ]

Here is the pertinent information in the commentary you posted which I underlined for emphasis:
had two degrees: first he was caught up "to the third heaven," and from thence to "Paradise" (2Co 12:4) [Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies, 5.427], which seems to denote an inner recess of the third heaven [Bengel]

So you accept not the same place now?
Yes JFB says "seems to", but that is NOT evident in Pauls words, and not in the concept Jesus conveyed of Paradise. You choose to believe there are degrees of heaven, but unless you can demonstrate that FROM scripture, I choose to believe Paul was describing two separate domains. I see no reason to believe this was anything more than a vision, just as John experienced on Patmos, only he knew he was IN the spirit, and Paul did NOT.

 

[KingJ]

justaname,

Why don't you back quote so we know the content to which you are referring? I assumed it was to StanJ's post. Was that so?

There is enough evidence that at death the body returns to dust (whether in the grave or cremated) and the spirit returns to God. I'm indeed pleased about that as I get older and move towards the time of my elevation to Paradise, heaven, Abraham's bosom, my Father's house - whatever one wants to call it. All of these words are in Scripture and they apply to where believers went at death,

Blessings,
Oz

Hi Oz, I am wondering how Abrahams bosom can be the third heaven if it existed at a time before Jesus died?

I can agree that all there were en route to being with God. But only after Jesus died could any man be reconciled with God. That is why it was called Abraham's bosom and not heaven. A place on the other side of a divide in Hades.

 

[justaname]

So you accept not the same place now?
Yes JFB says "seems to", but that is NOT evident in Pauls words, and not in the concept Jesus conveyed of Paradise. You choose to believe there are degrees of heaven, but unless you can demonstrate that FROM scripture, I choose to believe Paul was describing two separate domains. I see no reason to believe this was anything more than a vision, just as John experienced on Patmos, only he knew he was IN the spirit, and Paul did NOT.

No Stan you misinterpret what I say. I said, "The idea of the reasoning of the author's repetition in the Scripture is unsatisfactorily settled by any of the commentaries, hence the numerous arguments concerning such."

It is interesting every commentary consulted suggest this is the same location, yet you disagree. Apparently we all agree it is demonstrated from Scripture including the pre-eminent Koine Greek lexicographer.

Again I am not compelled to convince you.