Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Retrobyter

Calculations about the New Jerusalem

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

 

 

9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. 10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven (the sky) as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11 Which also said,

"Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven (the sky)? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven (the sky), shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven (the sky)."

And, just to be clear, these disciples weren't gazing into some PLACE called "Heaven"; they were gazing up into the SKY! They watched him rise, as we do rockets from Cape Canaveral, until they couldn't see Him any longer when He went behind a cloud!

Anyway, that's enough for now.

Hi Retro,

So...where is Jesus now?

Marilyn.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Retro,

So...where is Jesus now?

Marilyn.

Shalom, Marilyn.

That's a simple answer IF you'll believe what Yeshua` said, both times through Yochanan ("John"):

John 14:1-3 (KJV)

1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. 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. 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.

Revelation 21:1-3 (KJV)

1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven (a loud voice out of the throne) saying,

"Behold, the tabernacle of God (Greek: hee skeenee tou Theou = "God's Tent") is with men, and he will dwell with them (Greek: skeenoosei met' autoon = "He-will-tent with them"), and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God."

This "skeenee" or "tent" is the same word used for Avraham's Bedouin tent in which he and his children lived, Avraham's HOUSE:

Hebrews 11:9-10 (KJV)

9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles (Greek: skeenais = "tents") with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: 10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

He was actually anticipating the New Jerusalem that God was building, although at the time he didn't know it would be called that! It was at that time in Genesis that we read anyone call God, "Adonay," which means "my-Foundation-Layer," or "my-Founder." I believe this is how the author of Hebrews knew this about Avraham.

Very early (page 14) of the book Manners and Customs of Bible Lands by Fred H. Wight (Moody Press, Chicago, 1953), Mr. Wight said,

Quote

The Bedouin's home is his tent, which is made of black goat's hair. He calls it beit sha'ar, i.e., "house of hair."

Later in a section headed, "Patching a Tent and Enlarging the Quarters," he added,

Quote

 

New tents are very seldom made among the Bedouins. About the only time this happens is when a young groom and bride set up housekeeping for themselves in a different location from that of the groom's parents, and this rarely happens. The usual procedure is to accumulate the goat clippings of a year or so, and with these make a new strip with which to repair the old tent. The women do this work. The section of the tent roof that is most worn is ripped out, and a new piece of the cloth replaces it. The old piece is then used for a side curtain. Each year new strips of cloth replace old ones and the "house of hair" is handed down from father to son without its being completely new or completely old at any one time.

As the tent-dweller's family grows larger, or as he becomes richer and wishes to enlarge his tent, he does so by simply adding another section to his old tent, very much like the Occidental would build another room on to his house, but there is this difference: instead of building a new tent they just continue patching.  ...

 

(pages 17-18)

This is the allusion that Yeshua` made above when He said, "I go to prepare a place for you." He was going there to His Father's house, His Father's Tent, the New Jerusalem, to add on a room for each one of them (and ultimately for us, too). That's why I say, that, as long as Yeshua` is absent, He is still building within the New Jerusalem; it is still "under construction!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

 

Hi Retro,

As usual, quite interesting. And as usual you really didn`t answer my question. So...is Jesus behind the clouds, on a planet, or as Scripture tells us at the right hand of the Father, who is above all, the heaven of the heavens. That is the Godhead`s seat of power beyond all created things.

The city comes down out of heaven FROM GOD. God is omnipresent and will dwell with people in the city by His Holy Spirit.

Marilyn.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2019 at 9:47 PM, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, Diaste.

Just for the record, we'll answer this post, too. 

Now, let's attack the root misunderstandings:

First, one MUST be able to distinguish between an object and its dimensions. To say that an object is x long and y wide and z high, it does draw for us an imaginary "box" in which the object is contained, but it does NOT mean that the object fills that box!

Second, one MUST be able to distinguish between two-dimensional measurements and three-dimensional measurements. One usually doesn't get into this until they get into calculus, but there's such a thing as a PROJECTION in which the dimensions of the three-dimensional object are PROJECTED onto a two-dimensional grid, like the picture of an object being PROJECTED onto a flat screen or a person's shadow is PROJECTED onto the ground.

The words "lieth foursquare" is a TWO-dimensional measurement, not a three-dimensional description! What it means is that the BASE of the city is two-dimensionally projected as a SQUARE! However, it does NOT tell us anything about the third dimension in that single statement! That's why John went on and added, "the length and the width and the height of it are equal." NOW, he gives information about the third dimension. However, ALL that is said is that the imaginary "box" in which the city would reside would be "12,000 furlongs" high as well! That statement by itself says NOTHING about the shape of the walls of the city or about their directions within that "box!" ALL that he said was that, whatever the city looks like within that imaginary "box," the height of the city does not exceed the "12,000 furlongs" limit!

Finally, a real reed IS a tube! It's a grass stalk! How many grasses do you know that produce rectangular cross-sections in their stems? It's not a yardstick, y'know! How hard is it to measure with a ROUND rod?! And, can you imagine how long it would take to use a six-foot rod to measure 1,379.86 MILES????!!!! It MIGHT be possible for an "angel" to do it ... POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, POP, .... "Phew! Done! Now, how many times was that?" (Ridiculous.)

Can you imagine how much such an event would tax the normal patience of a person? (John went out for coffee and a nap for days on end until the "angel" completed the task!)

How much simpler would it be to measure the angle from the top to the bottom of the city or from one side of the city to the other side, use the distance from which you are away from the city, and calculate how high and how wide that would make the city?

Conclusion? It's a surveyor's theodolite. As Charlie "Tremendous" Jones would say, "See it big, keep it simple."

Then you are saying no conclusion can be drawn about the shape of the city and the pyramid argument fails. Fact is it's described as a cube just like any cube is described today. I solve for triangles quite frequently for my work, including constructing a pyramid shape from time to time, and never is the shape described x³. I have constructed hundreds of three dimensional shapes based on L, W, H and none have been described as a² x b² = c². But if you wish to persist contrary to everyday understanding you are certainly free to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2019 at 8:59 PM, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, Diaste.

Well, if you're a flat-earther, then, no, this argument won't make any sense. But, we AREN'T on a flat earth! I have never seen satisfactory physics for believing in a flat earth.

As a kid, I used to LOVE reading encyclopedias for a hobby. (Still do, when the mood strikes.) My parents bought the family a set of Compton's Encyclopedias while I was still in grade school, and I inherited the set, and made them accessible to my children. One of the examples they showed was a ball that was bigger than a house upon which a tiny fly lands. To the fly, the ball seemed like a flat land, even though we could see it was round.

One of the proofs for a round earth is watching the ships sail off into the horizon. First, the bottoms of the ships disappear from sight and finally the tops of the ships disappear as the ships sail over the horizon. (This is why sailors used to worry about comrades falling off the edge of the earth!)

When you're traveling to a mountainous region, the first thing you see about the mountains is their tops. You won't see the bottoms of the mountains until you get close enough to the mountains.

One of the confusing things to flat-earthers are the directions of sun beams, always pointing away from the sun through the clouds, but what we are seeing are foreshortened shafts of light that are radiated out from the sun 93 million miles away.

Hold up your hand in front of your face, and look at your hand and see how long your fingers are. Now, point your fingers away from your face and look down your hand to your fingertips. You are seeing your fingers foreshortened, and they seem much shorter that the actual lengths of your fingers.

When we're looking at sunbeams, we are seeing beams of light from the sun that are ALMOST parallel to each other, but the sun is actually VERY big, compared to the earth, and these rays of light come from the entire disk of the sun (from our perspective). So, we are seeing these "fingers" of light foreshortened and since they are NOT actually parallel, we see them spreading out as they emanate from the sun.

It's a little like looking down a long, straight line of electrical towers and the wires hanging between them. If we are standing below one of these towers, we can see the wires forming what look like waves of wire looping in what looks like u's of wire. However, in reality, the wires are pulled very tightly and their weight pulls them down in a shape called a catenary that looks like a parabola, but is slightly different in shape. Looking edge-on, however, they appear to be sagging quite distinctly.

That's enough for now, but no matter what I explain, you're not going to accept the explanations until you are WILLING to accept them. After all, "a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still." Since you were not willing to accept the pyramid theory, I had to attack the problem at its source, the theory of a flat earth. May God give you a clear understanding and open eyes to see.

Well, YOLO! 

It has been proven many times by amateur videographers that zooming in on a ship which cannot be seen by the naked eye brings the full ship back into view, right down to the waterline. There are many reasons why eyesight is obscured and to accept a popular argument, or arguments, as proof is intellectually lazy, imo. Perspective plays an enormous part in our ability to see distant objects. Objects shrink in the distance and every great Master artist has proven this for centuries. Given enough distance the object will disappear. 

There is a long straight road here in WY that drops down from a high point into a valley then climbs to another high point about 5 miles distant. I can see the entire roadway through the valley as it slowly shrinks to nothing more than a line then disappears altogether. Since I'm between two high points that disappearance of the roadway has nothing to do with the curve of a globe and everything to do with observation and perspective. One day I was parked on the high point above the valley taking in the scene across the valley to snow capped peaks when a car passed by heading into the valley. That vehicle shrunk to the size of an ant from my perspective before it got to the valley floor. Halfway through the valley I could no longer even detect movement nor see the glint of the chrome. Perspective, not a globular curve. Observation, not equation. Evidence, not agenda.

You realize that Eratosthenes calcs while correct, I reproduced these simple calculations, are based on two assumptions that cannot be proven. We have barely deviated from those factless assumptions for almost 600 years. 

I have asked several times of globe apologists for the video NASA must have of the spinning earth. After all, they were a total of 36 full days to the moon and back from late 60's to early 80's. They couldn't train a camera on the spinning globe to get the most amazing footage ever recorded? Imagine the awestruck wonder of actually being able to witness our globe spinning. But there's nothing, no real time video. 

One of the biggest and most profound arguments against the heliocentric model is the biblical proof, "and every eye will see him". That is not possible on a globe unless Jesus is coming in at least every cardinal direction at the same time. So, flat earth makes much more sense than the unproven spinning globe and whirling solar system careening through space at ludicrous speeds.

" for the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he hath set the world upon them." - 1 Samuel 2

"And the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were discovered," - 2 Samuel 22

" the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved." - 1 Chronicles 16

"Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding." - Job 38

"the foundations of the world were discovered at thy rebuke, O Lord, " - Psalms 18

"Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever." - Psalms 104

And on and on. The earth is fixed by the word of the Lord. But you go ahead and believe whatever you wish; it's our privilege and curse.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not hi-jack another thread with the flat earth / global earth debate ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Diaste said:

One of the biggest and most profound arguments against the heliocentric model is the biblical proof, "and every eye will see him". That is not possible on a globe unless Jesus is coming in at least every cardinal direction at the same time.

Some assumptions are being made here on Revelation 1:7 that are not there and about time. It doesn't say everyone at the exact same moment on the planet will see the Lord coming. I get the sense "clouds" in this meaning are not for masking or hiding, clouds are symbols of majesty [Ex. 19:18, Ps 18:11, Isa. 19:1] as every eye shall see Him. Perhaps clouds not only represent majesty, but is also an analogy for movement in the 2nd heaven to witness and see?

Revelation 1:7 (KJV) Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

However, since the Lord is omnipresent, every eye could see Him coming at the exact same moment globally. I don't believe the world is going to have a long wait to witness this event, based on 'all' end-time Bible prophecy being fulfilled and coming into view. 

 

Just my 2 mites worth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Diaste said:

One of the biggest and most profound arguments against the heliocentric model is the biblical proof, "and every eye will see him". That is not possible on a globe unless Jesus is coming in at least every cardinal direction at the same time.

It is possible if all mankind were within say 2000 miles of the Mt of Olives.  What do you think the purpose of; 1/4th of mankind dying in the 4th Seal; 1/3 of the earth burning up in the 1st Trumpet; 1/3 of the sea turning to blood in the 2nd Trumpet, 1/3 of the waters turning bitter in the 3rd Trumpet; No more islands of the 7th Bowl.  All these are herding the population masses closer to the End (the Second Coming).

In Christ

Montana Marv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dennis1209 said:

Some assumptions are being made here on Revelation 1:7 that are not there and about time. It doesn't say everyone at the exact same moment on the planet will see the Lord coming. I get the sense "clouds" in this meaning are not for masking or hiding, clouds are symbols of majesty [Ex. 19:18, Ps 18:11, Isa. 19:1] as every eye shall see Him. Perhaps clouds not only represent majesty, but is also an analogy for movement in the 2nd heaven to witness and see?

Revelation 1:7 (KJV) Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

However, since the Lord is omnipresent, every eye could see Him coming at the exact same moment globally. I don't believe the world is going to have a long wait to witness this event, based on 'all' end-time Bible prophecy being fulfilled and coming into view. 

 

Just my 2 mites worth. 

I do suppose every point has a counterpoint but from extensive reading on the subject it certainly seems Jesus appears the cites fall and He comes down on the mount of Olives to fight against His enemies. I have not read where he makes a circuit of the globe, a tour as it were.

I cannot understand omnipresence as having multiple physical forms all existing at the same moment. It's explained thus, " that God may be all in all [manifesting His glory without any opposition, the supreme indwelling and controlling factor of life].

The very being of the Most High is all creation but He has one physical form. He is the life, not multiple projections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Montana Marv said:

It is possible if all mankind were within say 2000 miles of the Mt of Olives.  What do you think the purpose of; 1/4th of mankind dying in the 4th Seal; 1/3 of the earth burning up in the 1st Trumpet; 1/3 of the sea turning to blood in the 2nd Trumpet, 1/3 of the waters turning bitter in the 3rd Trumpet; No more islands of the 7th Bowl.  All these are herding the population masses closer to the End (the Second Coming).

In Christ

Montana Marv

It's possible but I don't see it based on,

"And He will send out His angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather His elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other." - Matt 24

"And He will send out the angels to gather His elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven." - Mark 13

Looks like under the whole sky, from end to end of the earth under the heavens, the elect are gathered. 

So I would conclude that no, not everyone will be within 2000 miles of Jerusalem.

From that far away on a globe our size the drop is 530 miles give or take. The rise of the globe between the observer and the object from that distance is 128 miles; outer space is 62 miles up. Does that seem feasible?

This is just a what if, because I have no idea, but maybe Operation High Jump found the dome just over 18 miles up and the rest of the data has just been falsified? 

Like I said, no idea other than we are being lied to about a great many things; only the Lord has the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By Retrobyter
      Shabbat shalom, everyone.
      Sometimes, strange comparisons come to mind, and this is one of the strangest. HOWEVER, it is also one that I feel not only explains my position on "Heaven," but also shows why it became necessary to have such a position.
      I grew up on wonderful movies like "White Christmas" with Bing Crosby, "It's a Wonderful Life" with Jimmy Stewart, and "The Naughty Nineties" with Bud Abbott and Lou Costello. Here's an excerpt from the "Who's On First" routine that Abbott and Costello did for the movie:
      (This was found at Baseball-Almanac.com.) It's a GREAT routine, and Abbott and Costello were probably the ONLY team that could have delivered it so hilariously!
      Now, here's the comparison:
      Who : Naturally :: Kingdom : Heaven.
      This is read, "'Who' is to 'Naturally' as 'Kingdom' is to 'Heaven.'"
      "Going to Heaven" is as bad to say as "picking up the ball and throwing it to Naturally!"
      Let me explain in terms of English grammar: "Who" is the guy's nickname; therefore, Abbott used it as a personal noun (and not a "personal PROnoun," either)! However, Costello is hearing it as an interrogative pronoun. "Naturally" is used by Abbott as an adverb, but Costello reasons that THIS is the personal noun!
      "Heaven" is NOT a "place" for which we are destined. We are destined for the Kingdom of God ruled by the King, God. It is called the "Kingdom of God" which means it is "God's Kingdom." God's Representative (His "Messiah"; His "Mashiyach"; His "Anointed"; His "Christos"; His "Christ") will be its PHYSICAL King, who is ONE with His Father, God, and who will be VISIBLE to the world!
      John 1:18 (KJV)
      18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
      The Messiah's Kingdom is described this way by the angel Gavri'el (Gabriel) to Miryam (Mary, Yeshua`s mother):
      Luke 1:30-33 (KJV)
      30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS (Greek: Ieesous = Aramaic: Yeeshuwa`). 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
      He was both the son of his ancestor David the King and the "Son of the Highest" because of these passages of Scripture:
      2 Samuel 7:1-17 (KJV)
      1 And it came to pass, when the king sat in his house, and the LORD had given him rest round about from all his enemies; 2 That the king said unto Nathan the prophet, See now, I dwell in an house of cedar, but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains. 3 And Nathan said to the king, Go, do all that is in thine heart; for the LORD is with thee.
      4 And it came to pass that night, that the word of the LORD came unto Nathan, saying, 5 Go and tell my servant David, Thus saith the LORD, Shalt thou build me an house for me to dwell in? 6 Whereas I have not dwelt in any house since the time that I brought up the children of Israel out of Egypt, even to this day, but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle. 7 In all the places wherein I have walked with all the children of Israel spake I a word with any of the tribes of Israel, whom I commanded to feed my people Israel, saying, Why build ye not me an house of cedar?
      8 Now therefore so shalt thou say unto my servant David, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I took thee from the sheepcote, from following the sheep, to be ruler over my people, over Israel: 9 And I was with thee whithersoever thou wentest, and have cut off all thine enemies out of thy sight, and have made thee a great name, like unto the name of the great men that are in the earth. 10 Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime, 11 And as since the time that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel, and have caused thee to rest from all thine enemies. Also the LORD telleth thee that he will make thee an house. 12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. 14 I WILL BE HIS FATHER, AND HE SHALL BE MY SON. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men: 
      15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. 16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever. 17 According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David.
      This scene was repeated in 1 Chronicles 17:
      1 Chronicles 17:1-15 (KJV)
      1 Now it came to pass, as David sat in his house, that David said to Nathan the prophet, Lo, I dwell in an house of cedars, but the ark of the covenant of the LORD remaineth under curtains. 2 Then Nathan said unto David, Do all that is in thine heart; for God is with thee.
      3 And it came to pass the same night, that the word of God came to Nathan, saying, 4 Go and tell David my servant, Thus saith the LORD, Thou shalt not build me an house to dwell in: 5 For I have not dwelt in an house since the day that I brought up Israel unto this day; but have gone from tent to tent, and from one tabernacle to another. 6 Wheresoever I have walked with all Israel, spake I a word to any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to feed my people, saying, Why have ye not built me an house of cedars? 
      7 Now therefore thus shalt thou say unto my servant David, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I took thee from the sheepcote, even from following the sheep, that thou shouldest be ruler over my people Israel: 8 And I have been with thee whithersoever thou hast walked, and have cut off all thine enemies from before thee, and have made thee a name like the name of the great men that are in the earth. 9 Also I will ordain a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, and they shall dwell in their place, and shall be moved no more; neither shall the children of wickedness waste them any more, as at the beginning, 10 And since the time that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel. Moreover I will subdue all thine enemies. Furthermore I tell thee that the LORD will build thee an house. 11 And it shall come to pass, when thy days be expired that thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall be of thy sons; and I will establish his kingdom. 12 He shall build me an house, and I will stablish his throne for ever. 13 I WILL BE HIS FATHER, AND HE SHALL BE MY SON: and I will not take my mercy away from him, as I took it from him that was before thee: 14 But I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever: and his throne shall be established for evermore. 15 According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David.
      These passages are NOT talking about Shlomoh (Solomon); they are talking about David's SEED! Furthermore, David acknowledged that YHWH GOD was King, not just himself! He recognized GOD as HIS King!
      Psalm 5:1-2 (KJV)
      1 {To the chief Musician upon Nehiloth, A Psalm of David.}
      Give ear to my words, O LORD (YHWH), consider my meditation.
      2 Hearken unto the voice of my cry, my King, and my God: for unto thee will I pray.
      So, the KINGDOM OF GOD will be ruled by the Messiah Yeshua`, and the KINGDOM OF GOD is our destiny! "Going THROUGH THE HEAVENS (THE SKIES) to get to the Messiah's Kingdom and be there forever" is just a truth that unfortunately has been misinterpreted to "GOING TO HEAVEN to be there forever!"
      Again, here is how Strong's Exhaustive Concordance lists "ouranos" in its Greek Dictionary:
      3772 οὐρανός, οὐρανοῦ, ὁ. Perhaps from the same as oros (through the idea of elevation); the sky; by extension, heaven (as the abode of God); by implication, happiness, power, eternity; specially, the Gospel (Christianity) -- air, heaven(-ly), sky.
      Now, I know that it is also called "THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN," but one must understand that the Greek uses the words "HEE BASILEIA TOON OURANOON" (using "EE" for an eta and "OO" for an omega), the "-oon" (omega-nu) ending being the plural ending for both the noun "ouranos" and its article "ho." 
      In Koine Greek, there are 8 cases for a noun: the nominative (which acts as the subject in a sentence), the genitive (translated with an "of"), the ablative (translated with a "from"), the locative (translated with an "in" or an "at), the instrumental (translated with a "with" or a "by"), the dative (translated with a "to" or a "for"), the accusative (which acts as the direct object in a sentence), and the vocative (as though one is talking TO the noun, acting as an appositive).
      However, in CLASSICAL Greek (Attic Greek), there are only FIVE cases: the nominative, the genitive, the dative, the accusative, and the vocative. In Classical Greek, the genitive case can be used for BOTH the traditional genitive and origins of the ablative case! Thus, one can also translate Classical genitive case as either "of" or "from" in English. Indeed, even in the Koine Greek, the genitive and ablative cases are SPELLED THE SAME WAY! (That's also true about the locative, instrumental, and dative cases; they also are all spelled the same as each other.) My point is that the words, "hee basileia toon ouranoon," could also be translated as "the kingdom FROM the skies (the plural)," speaking not about "ownership" but about "ORIGIN!" One may have ASSUMED a genitive case when it should have been considered to be an ablative case!
      Yeshua` SHALL come again, not just to "judge the world," although He will certainly do that. He is to be its KING! As I've said before, one of the roles of the King of Israel was to be its "Supreme Court Justice!" Lesser judges could handle the easier matters of judgment, but when necessary, they could escalate the matter to the King who would then be the FINAL SAY in the matter. He is to rule and reign, both over Israel and its tributaries until He has conquered ALL the nations of the earth! Some shall submit willingly; some shall submit reluctantly to save their economies; many will resist. He shall "rule them with a rod of iron," and He shall "subdue all His enemies" until the last enemy, death itself, is finally subdued, as well. This will take a THOUSAND YEARS to accomplish (Psalm 2:1-12; 1 Corinthians 15:20-28; 2 Peter 3:7-12; Revelation 20:1-7). All this must be accomplished BEFORE the Great White Throne Judgment after the final Resurrection, after which Yeshua` shall turn the Kingdom - the WORLD EMPIRE at that time - over to His Father.
      It's not until AFTER all this, that God allows His New Jerusalem to come down out of the sky to the New Earth with its New Sky to be what many have called "Heaven on earth." It will be THEN that God "wipes away all tears" and "creates all things new."
    • By Retrobyter
      Shalom, everyone.
      I know that this will be unpopular and some will say downright alarming, but we are NOT told that we go to heaven when we die. As I've said in other threads, the "soul" is NOT independent from the "body." Genesis 2:7 bears repeating:
      Genesis 2:7 (KJV)
      7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
      In Hebrew (transliterated), this is...
      B'reeshiyt 2:7 (JPS Tanakh)
      7 Vayiytser YHWH Elohiym et-haa'aadaam `aafaar min-haa'adaamaah vayipach b'apaayv nishmat chayiym vayhiy haa'aadaam l-nefesh chayaah:
      7 Vayiytser = And-formed
      YHWH = YHWH; the-LORD; ADONAI
      Elohiym = God
      et- = (the next word is the direct object)
      haa'aadaam = the-man
      `aafaar = of-the-dust
      min-= from
      haa'adaamaah = the-ground
      vayipach = and-he-breathed
      b'apaayv = in-his-nostrils
      nishmat = a-puff
      chayiym = of-living-things
      vayhiy = and-became
      haa'aadaam = the-man
      l-nefesh = to-an-air-breather
      chayaah: = living:
      Therefore, God FORMED the MAN, NOT the BODY of the man! And, the MAN became a living air-breather once air was puffed into his nostrils. Furthermore, the term "soul" IS this "air-breather."
      Strong's dictionary say it like this:
      5315 nefesh (NEH-fesh). From naafash; properly, a breathing creature, i.e. Animal of (abstractly) vitality; used very widely in a literal, accommodated or figurative sense (bodily or mental) -- any, appetite, beast, body, breath, creature, X dead(-ly), desire, X (dis-)contented, X fish, ghost, + greedy, he, heart(-y), (hath, X jeopardy of) life (X in jeopardy), lust, man, me, mind, mortally, one, own, person, pleasure, (her-, him-, my-, thy-)self, them (your)-selves, + slay, soul, + tablet, they, thing, (X she) will, X would have it.
      Which comes from the root word, the verb form,...
      5314 naafash (naw-FAHSH). A primitive root; to breathe; passively, to be breathed upon, i.e. (figuratively) refreshed (as if by a current of air) -- (be) refresh selves (-ed).
      So, it's not some "immaterial part" of a person; it's talking about the fact that this body - this PERSON - is alive and breathing!
      The word "spirit," translated from the Hebrew word "ruwach," means a "wind," or by resemblance, the "breath":
      7307 ruwach (ROO-akh). From ruwach; wind; by resemblance breath, i.e. A sensible [palpable] (or even violent) exhalation; figuratively, life, anger, unsubstantiality; by extension, a region of the sky; by resemblance spirit, but only of a rational being (including its expression and functions) -- air, anger, blast, breath, X cool, courage, mind, X quarter, X side, spirit((-ual)), tempest, X vain, ((whirl-))wind(-y).
      Which comes from its root word, the verb form,...
      7306 ruwach (roo-AKH). A primitive root; properly, to blow, i.e. Breathe; only (literally) to smell or (by implication) perceive (figuratively, to anticipate, enjoy) -- accept, smell, X touch, make of quick understanding.
      When a person ceases to breathe, when he or she "breathes his/her last (which thankfully may not really be his or her last because of the Resurrection)" - "gives up the ghost" - "gives up the spirit" - "gives up the breath" - then he or she ceases to be an "air-breather." He or she ceases to be a "soul," and he/she awaits the Resurrection. Therefore, "soul" ("air-breather") = "body" + "spirit" ("breath").
      Now, let me quickly add that I DO believe in an afterlife of blessing for the believer, but that doesn't begin until the Resurrection and culminates in that which many CALL "Heaven" because of its description, the New Jerusalem, descending to the New Earth THROUGH the "heavens" and landing upon this New Earth. It is THERE - within this New Jerusalem - that one will find the descriptions that many assign to "Heaven," namely (1) the streets of gold, (2) the golden city, (3) the gates of pearl, (4) the river of the water of life, (5) the tree of life, (6) the jasper walls, (7) the foundations consisting of several precious gems, and of course, (8) the throne of God and of the Lamb.
      This brings us to one more definition: "Heaven" itself:
      The Hebrew word translated as "heaven" or "heavens," depending upon the English version of the Bible one uses, is "shaamayim":
      8064 shaamayim (shaw-MAH-yeem). Dual of an unused singular shaameh {shaw-meh'}; from an unused root meaning to be lofty; the sky (as aloft; the dual perhaps alluding to the visible arch in which the clouds move, as well as to the higher ether where the celestial bodies revolve) -- air, X astrologer, heaven(-s).
      As noted, this is a DUAL word, neither singular nor plural in the multiple sense. The dual number is most often used for things that come in pairs, particularly body parts, such as the eyes, for instance. The author of this Strong's entry suggests that it refers to the atmosphere and to space visible beyond it, and in a sense, that's true. However, it really refers to the fact that the sky itself comes in a pair - the day sky and the night sky.
      Some make the mistake of thinking that Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 have a gap of time between them, but that is NOT how Hebrew literature works. The first verse is a SYNOPSIS of what is to follow. They frequently "telegraph their punches" in literature. If one is honest with himself or herself, he or she will realize that the words "et hashaamayim v'et haa'aarets" ("the heavens and the earth") in Genesis 1:1, the direct objects of God's creative power, are GIVEN those names by God in the following verses! Verse 8 in context says,
      Genesis 1:6-8 (KJV)
      6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven (Hebrew: shaamaayim). And the evening and the morning were the second day.
      God named this expanse of air between the waters above and the waters below, "shaamayim!" Adding the definite article "ha-" to this word gives one the word in Genesis 1:1, "hashaamayim."
      Verse 10 in context says,
      Genesis 1:9-13 (KJV)
      9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth (Hebrew: erets); and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it wasgood. 13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
      God named this dry ground "erets!" Adding the definite article (which also changes the vowel pointing) gives one the word in Genesis 1:1, "haa'aarets." There were no previous "skies and earth" because God hadn't created the expanse-between-waters and the dry-ground, yet! That wasn't accomplished until days 2 and 3 of the Creation week!
      Regarding this "shaamayim," this is where the birds are said to fly:
      Genesis 1:20-23 (KJV)
      20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament [expanse] of heaven (Hebrew: hashaamaayim = "of-the-[2]-skies"). 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
      That basically limits this expanse to the atmosphere. One might wonder about the fourth day:
      Genesis 1:14-19 (KJV)
      14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
      However, one should notice that this passage always uses the word "lights," never the "sun" or the "moon."
       
    • By ChristianGirl7770
      Hey everyone,
      Yesterday I visited a new church on my (Church Adventure). During the sermon the pastor was talking about Salvation. And the one thing that threw me off guard was the fact that he said "Revelation IS Salvation" I know that when it comes to the book of Revelation. There is lots of symbolism, and meaning to the end of days with the rapture and the mark of the beast. He tried explaining Salvation in Revelation. But it is impossible for me to see Jesus giving Salvation when he returns since he is going to bring justice for his people and finish the wicked. I wanted to know your opinion on Salvation and if it in any way relates to the book of Revelation?
×
×
  • Create New...