If A Man Die

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by vrblackwell

I have not been able to find anywhere in scripture where we immortal beings. Adam was created with immortality and lost it due to sin. I only see where immortality is something we are working toward receiving again at the resurrection.

Romans 2:7
He will give eternal life to those who keep on doing good, seeking after the glory and honor and immortality that God offers.

A good observation!

[mfblume]

I gave my general view of the Old Testament passages. The New Testament revealed more insight than the Old Testament saints knew about. This deals with 2 Cor 5, so I am interested in this response. Thanks.

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Paul said he was willing to be absent from his body and be present with the Lord Jesus. Lets examine the all important context of this statement he wrote.

1: For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2: For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
3: If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
4: For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.
5: Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit.
6: Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:
7: (For we walk by faith, not by sight
8: We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
9: Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.
10: For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. 2 Cor. 5:1-10

The "instant Heaven" doctrine would grant mortality being swallowed up of life at the moment of death.

Incorrect. I already addressed that allegation, but let me repeat it. Mortality and death being swallowed up of life applies to nothing except the BODY in the all-important context in which it is found in 1 Cor 15. It means something mortal becomes something immortal. The question begs to be asked if the soul is mortal already or not? Not changed. To be swallowed up of life, something has to first be mortal. Mortality applies to the body.

However the VERY SAME PAUL tells us EXACTLY when mortality will be swallowed up of life. Exactly when this MORTAL will put on IMMORTALITY
51: Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52: In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53: For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54: So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55: O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? 1 Cor. 15:51-55.

So Paul was giving his doctrine to the very same group of people. There could have been no misunderstanding on their part.

Exactly. But it is apples and oranges to speak of the soul and of the body while the body is in Paul's context. Paul is not speaking a generality that can apply to anything aside from the body in 1 Cor 15. He spoke SOLELY about the body when he wrote mortality is swallowed up of life. We cannot take what was said of the body and apply it to the soul. Therefore, it is illogical to apply a bodily reference to an accusation about the soul.

Immortality is given at the last trump at Christs coming.

And it regards the BODY ALONE.

When he says we are willing to be absent from the body and present with the Lord observe the context. He says "if our bodies are dissolved" we have another body eternal in the Heavens.

It is clear from his PREVIOUS TEACHING to them that the NEW BODY OF IMMORTALITY is given not at death but at the RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD taught by him in 1 Cor. 15.

Exactly. The mortal body died because it was mortal. Also, the body of the saints alive when the Lord comes is mortal and requires a change. CHANGE is the issue in 1 Cor 15's reference to mortality swallowed up of life. I AM NOT PROPOSING A CHANGE OF THE STATE OF THE SOUL FROM MORTAL TO IMMORTAL. In order for your accusation to stick, I must be proposing a change of soul from a mortal state to immortal at death. I am not doing that whatsoever. So, apples and oranges/

So when we are absent FROM THE BODY THAT IS DISSOLVED then (at resurrection) we can take on the new immortal body he speaks of that is eternal in the Heavens.

Agreed.

It cannot be overlooked that Pauls belief was that eternal life was synonomous with IMMORTALITY. To the Romans:

6: Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
7: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: Romans 2:6-7

Eternal life is the same as IMMORTALITY. Immortality is plainly given at the RESURRECTION.

Immortality of BODY is given when beforehand the BODY was MORTAL. Again, apples and oranges. You cannot say that my belief about how the soul continues to exist after physical death is requiring mortality to be swallowed up of life at the point of death because
I do not believe the soul is mortal and becomes immortal at death. the soul remains in the state it has always been before death but simply departs from the body to be with the Lord. The soul is rejoined to an IMMORTAL BODY at the resurrection, no longer being separate from a body. It was in a mortal body before death and leaves it to be present with the Lord. Upon resurrection it indwells a body again, but this time the body is no longer mortal but immortal.

52: In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53: For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54: So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55: O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? 1 Cor. 15:51-55.

So the "instant Heaven" doctrine disappears from 2 Cor. 5:8 when its CONTEXT is considered.

In your treatise here you have only presented a faulty case as to why the soul cannot leave the body to be present with the Lord. You erringly misrepresented our concept as though we believe the soul is mortal and changed to become immortal at death when you used the accusation that we propose death is swallowed up of life at the point of death. We do not believe the SOUL DIES at death like you do. The BODY dies. Not the soul.

You did not explain what Paul actually means in his reference to absence from the body. I wil see in your next post if you did that or not.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

And furthermore concerning Pauls statement that he was willing to be absent from his body and present with the Lord:

Some more context.

Did Paul not teach others that it was at the second coming they would be with the Lord?

Let us see.

4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 1 Thess 4:15-17

Paul made it clear to the Thessalonians in verse 17 when both the dead and the living will BE WITH THE LORD EVER. If he tells them THEN at that time they will be with the Lord obviously he did not teach the Corinthians that THEY would be with the Lord as soon as they died.

You overlooked a huge point here. Paul did not merely say we would be with the Lord at the resurrection, as though we are not with Him in any manner beforehand if we died beforehand. He said we would be "EVER" "WITH" HIM. We would be ALWAYS WITH HIM. The state of being in an immortal body would remain permanently with the Lord. Beforehand, we were only with Him in soul without body. But when the resurrection occurs we will forevermore be with Him in spirit, soul and body.

Jesus taught EXACTLY the same thing. After all Paul was merely a disciple, a servant minister of Jesus so he simply taught what Jesus taught.

Confirmation:

John 14:1-3

4:1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.
14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

Here Jesus tells us WHEN WE WILL BE WITH HIM. Does he not say that WHEN HE COMES AGAIN then at that time he will RECEIVE US TO HIMSELF?

You have made a very common mistake in assuming Jesus spoke of our future. Jesus was not speaking about our future but of the point in time from the resurrection and ascension of Jesus into Heaven and onward.

Notice Jesus said, "That where I am..." He was somewhere RIGHT THERE AT THAT MOMENT 2000 years ago. Though they stood right there with Him, He said "Where I am there ye may be also." He was saying that He was somewhere at that moment where they were not. He did not say "That where I will be..." as though He was not talking about that moment.

How can Jesus say they were not in the place He then was, and yet He would go away so that they would be where He was at the moment He spoke to them? There is only one answer. As Son of God He was speaking about HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE FATHER.

Notice He said the FATHER'S HOUSE was the subject. "IN MY FATHER'S HOUSE ARE MANY MANSIONS." Keep reading.

4And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know. 5Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? 6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Where was Jesus going? TO THE FATHER. What is the way to the Father? JESUS IS THE WAY. How was JESUS THE WAY? THE CROSS!!!!

Jesus is speaking about going to the cross in death and then rising again to go to the Father. He said THE WAY FOR THEM TO GO TO THE FATHER is BY HIMSELF. Whither He went was to the FATHER. THE WAY they would go is BY JESUS.

This is speaking of the cross.

And who lives in the Father's house? Who lives in mfblume's house? Mfblume! Who lives in the Father's House? THE FATHER!

People have this all messed up. They think the SAINTS live in the FATHER'S HOUSE. They are wrong. The FATHER lives in the Father's house. And that is the reason Jesus then says:

10Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

So when Jesus said He was in a place at that moment He was talking that they were not in, and that they would BE IN after He went away was A HOUSE FOR THE FATHER. In other words, THE MANSIONS Jesus spoke of WOULD BE THOSE DISCIPLES! They are not mansions like movie stars live in, but ROOMS THE FATHER LIVES IN.

When we look at the term MANSIONS, here is the Greek meaning:

“Mone (mon-ay); Word Origin: Greek, Noun Feminine, Strong #: 3438 1) a staying, abiding, dwelling, abode 2) to make an (one's) abode.” (Strong’s Greek/Hebrew Lexicon)
“mone: a staying, abiding, dwelling, above: Jn. xiv.2,” (Thayer, p. 417).
The Greek term was used to refer to soldiers using temporary tents as they traveled. The English term “was first a place that held soldiers overnight, on their marches” (Joseph T. Shipley, Dictionary of Word Origins, 300).
Many of the newer translations do not use “many mansions,” but “many rooms” or “many dwelling places”:
“In my Father’s house are many rooms...” (English Standard Version)
“many rooms;” (New International Version)
“many rooms” (Revised Standard Version)
“many dwelling places.” (New American Bible)
“ many resting_places.” (Weymouth’s N.T.)
“ many rooms” (International Standard Version)
“rooms enough” (BBE: Bible in Basic English)
“many rooms” (Montgomery Translation)
“many rooms” (Goodspeed Translation)
“many rooms” (Contemporary English Version)
“many dwelling places” (New American Standard Version)
"many dwelling places" (New American Standard Version)

THE SAME GREEK WORD IS USED LATER IN THE SAME CHAPTER, but is translated as ABODE.

23Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

You can read it like this: 23Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our MANSION with him.

So if the Father makes HIS ABODE IN US, then we are the ABODE. The MONE. THE MANSION! The many Mansions in the Father's house are US! Jesus said He would prepare a place for us so that the FATHER WOULD DWELL IN US! That PLACE is the body of Christ.

Woops! Why are so many willing to overlook what Jesus the Lord and Savior and his Apostle both said about this matter? Being charitable because I used to do the same thing.

Problem is they "lock into" certain Biblical statements at the expense of other Biblical statements.

We must bring ALL the scriptures of a topic to the table and then "rightly divide".

We have to get the biblical statements right first!

Now, what was Paul talking about when he said absence from the body is presence with the Lord. You said what you think it DOES NOT SAY, but you have not yet said what it DOES SAY.

Thanks!

I will check your next post to see your response there.

[mfblume]

I see you provided your interpretation for what Paul meant in this post.

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Let us look at yet MORE context concerning Pauls writing that he was willing to be absent from the body and present with the Lord.

2 Corinthians 5:8-11

5:8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
5:9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.
5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
5:11 Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.

Note the word WHEREFORE in verse nine. That means the thought from verse eight is being carried over into verse nine.

Right. That means that he laboured in his work in order to be with the Lord.

As to the statement we are willing to be absent from THIS PRESENT BODY and to be present with Jesus Christ the very next Holy Spirit inspired thought Paul brought was the day of judgment!

He tied the two thoughts together!

Being present with Jesus and getting a new body and LABORING TO BE ACCEPTED BY HIM AT JUDGMENT! Obviously if (not so dead) saints had went to be with Lord at their death in conscious bliss and happiness they would have ALREADY BEEN ACCEPTED BY HIM would they not?

And yet Paul ties the two things together. We must labor now to be ACCEPTED by Jesus Christ THEN! WHEN?
At the judgment day.

Paul was saying the same thing Jesus said. Jesus told the thief on the cross "TO DAY THOU SHALT BE WITH ME IN PARADISE." Whoops -- as you might say -- what about Jesus' words that cannot be neglected? Did Jesus like when he said the thief would be with him THAT SAME DAY and actually mean the thief would not be with Jesus until the judgment thousands of years later? It does not say IT WOULD SEEM that the thief would be with Jesus that day, as though he would sleep and it would be like waking up the next moment of the same day to see Jesus at judgment when in actuality it would be thousands of years later.

Paul did not say that he would be with the Lord at judgment day thousands of years after he actually died. He said his soul would be conscious outside the body upon death and be with the Lord in that conscious state. Then he proceeded to speak about being accepted of Christ at the judgment. Whether he is with the Lord or absent from the Lord, Paul wanted to be accepted of the Lord. And the acceptance alone refers to the judgment, not the absence from the body.

How can Paul include presence in the body with acceptance of Christ if your view is correct?

6Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord: 7(For we walk by faith, not by sight 8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. 9Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.

Paul spoke first of being HOME in the body. This state caused him to be absent from the Lord. He walked by faith in being home in the body. Walking by faith in the context here is not seeing the Lord.

Then he said he would rather be absent from the body and present with the Lord. And then he said that whether he is present or absent, he wanted to be accepted of the Lord.

Whether living or dying, Paul wanted to be accepted of Christ. Living in verse 9 is present with the body. Dying is absent from the body. So it is not saying he is present with the Lord at resurrection/judgment, but he labours to be accepted by the Lord.

[mfblume]

A bit more on John 14 and the MANSIONS in the FATHER'S HOUSE.

Note that John also uses mone in verse 23: “Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.” Perhaps, this is the real spiritual meaning behind the use of the term. God is always wishing to provide a means for His children to be near or close to Him. This is why He had the Israelites build the Tabernacle. “And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them” (Exodus 25:8). This is why we are the Church of Christ. “In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit” (Ephesians 2:22). And in this verse we are the mone or “dwelling place” of the Father and the Son while on earth

The place Jesus went to was the cross and then the Father to make atonement and THEREBY make us into ROOMS for the Father to indwell. The place where Jesus was was a place of being the Father's dwelling place. He would make us be in such a state as well by atonement.

[mfblume]

Anyway, thanks for your thoughts, Michael. I always keep these different views in mind in case God is trying to show me something.

[mfblume]

Posts from 2011:

Originally Posted by mfblume

You overlooked a huge point here. Paul did not merely say we would be with the Lord at the resurrection, as though we are not with Him in any manner beforehand if we died beforehand. He said we would be "EVER" "WITH" HIM. We would be ALWAYS WITH HIM. The state of being in an immortal body would remain permanently with the Lord. Beforehand, we were only with Him in soul without body. But when the resurrection occurs we will forevermore be with Him in spirit, soul and body.



You have made a very common mistake in assuming Jesus spoke of our future. Jesus was not speaking about our future but of the point in time from the resurrection and ascension of Jesus into Heaven and onward.

Notice Jesus said, "That where I am..." He was somewhere RIGHT THERE AT THAT MOMENT 2000 years ago. Though they stood right there with Him, He said "Where I am there ye may be also." He was saying that He was somewhere at that moment where they were not. He did not say "That where I will be..." as though He was not talking about that moment.

How can Jesus say they were not in the place He then was, and yet He would go away so that they would be where He was at the moment He spoke to them? There is only one answer. As Son of God He was speaking about HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE FATHER.

Notice He said the FATHER'S HOUSE was the subject. "IN MY FATHER'S HOUSE ARE MANY MANSIONS." Keep reading.

4And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know. 5Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? 6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Where was Jesus going? TO THE FATHER. What is the way to the Father? JESUS IS THE WAY. How was JESUS THE WAY? THE CROSS!!!!

Jesus is speaking about going to the cross in death and then rising again to go to the Father. He said THE WAY FOR THEM TO GO TO THE FATHER is BY HIMSELF. Whither He went was to the FATHER. THE WAY they would go is BY JESUS.

This is speaking of the cross.

And who lives in the Father's house? Who lives in mfblume's house? Mfblume! Who lives in the Father's House? THE FATHER!

People have this all messed up. They think the SAINTS live in the FATHER'S HOUSE. They are wrong. The FATHER lives in the Father's house. And that is the reason Jesus then says:

10Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

So when Jesus said He was in a place at that moment He was talking that they were not in, and that they would BE IN after He went away was A HOUSE FOR THE FATHER. In other words, THE MANSIONS Jesus spoke of WOULD BE THOSE DISCIPLES! They are not mansions like movie stars live in, but ROOMS THE FATHER LIVES IN.

When we look at the term MANSIONS, here is the Greek meaning:

“Mone (mon-ay); Word Origin: Greek, Noun Feminine, Strong #: 3438 1) a staying, abiding, dwelling, abode 2) to make an (one's) abode.” (Strong’s Greek/Hebrew Lexicon)
“mone: a staying, abiding, dwelling, above: Jn. xiv.2,” (Thayer, p. 417).
The Greek term was used to refer to soldiers using temporary tents as they traveled. The English term “was first a place that held soldiers overnight, on their marches” (Joseph T. Shipley, Dictionary of Word Origins, 300).
Many of the newer translations do not use “many mansions,” but “many rooms” or “many dwelling places”:
“In my Father’s house are many rooms...” (English Standard Version)
“many rooms;” (New International Version)
“many rooms” (Revised Standard Version)
“many dwelling places.” (New American Bible)
“ many resting_places.” (Weymouth’s N.T.)
“ many rooms” (International Standard Version)
“rooms enough” (BBE: Bible in Basic English)
“many rooms” (Montgomery Translation)
“many rooms” (Goodspeed Translation)
“many rooms” (Contemporary English Version)
“many dwelling places” (New American Standard Version)
"many dwelling places" (New American Standard Version)

THE SAME GREEK WORD IS USED LATER IN THE SAME CHAPTER, but is translated as ABODE.

23Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

You can read it like this: 23Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our MANSION with him.

So if the Father makes HIS ABODE IN US, then we are the ABODE. The MONE. THE MANSION! The many Mansions in the Father's house are US! Jesus said He would prepare a place for us so that the FATHER WOULD DWELL IN US! That PLACE is the body of Christ.



We have to get the biblical statements right first!

Now, what was Paul talking about when he said absence from the body is presence with the Lord. You said what you think it DOES NOT SAY, but you have not yet said what it DOES SAY.

Thanks!

I will check your next post to see your response there.

[Michael The Disciple]

MBlume

Incorrect. I already addressed that allegation, but let me repeat it. Mortality and death being swallowed up of life applies to nothing except the BODY in the all-important context in which it is found in 1 Cor 15. It means something mortal becomes something immortal. The question begs to be asked if the soul is mortal already or not? Not changed. To be swallowed up of life, something has to first be mortal. Mortality applies to the body.

Is context REALLY all important? Just think, there are 58 verses in chapter 15 of first Corinthians. It is the most concise teaching on immortality and life after death that appears anywhere in the Bible!

And YET.....not even one mention of anyone dying and going to Heaven apart from the RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD!

And you are saying that CONTEXT is all important?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Is context REALLY all important? Just think, there are 58 verses in chapter 15 of first Corinthians. It is the most concise teaching on immortality and life after death that appears anywhere in the Bible!

And YET.....not even one mention of anyone dying and going to Heaven apart from the RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD!

And you are saying that CONTEXT is all important?

Context is always important. Seriously?

The chapter is not about dying and going to heaven, though. It's about the body and what body shall we receive in resurrection. Period.

Let's not get lost in what context means. Or how important it is. The point is, you said:

The "instant Heaven" doctrine would grant mortality being swallowed up of life at the moment of death.

And I responded explaining that you're talking apples and oranges, because the soul going to heaven at death has nothing to do with death swallowed up of life. Death swallowed up of life is the CHANGE OF THE MORTAL BODY INTO AN IMMORTAL ONE. It is an alteration. No alteration of the soul occurs. Swallowing death up of life is an alteration of one thing, and nothing else... THE BODY. And this flows with the context of "WITH WHAT BODY DO THEY COME?" The body is mortal and susceptible to death. So, the death element in the body is swallowed up and overcome by life. Are you implying there is a death element in the soul and the is overcome by life so the state of the soul changes from being mortal to immortal? If so, there is no teaching to that effect like there is with the body.