Enoch's DEATH is in Hebrews

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

10 minutes ago, AdHoc said:

God's original plan was for man to be in His image and likeness, and to subdue and then rule the earth, sea and sky and their contents (Gen.1:26-28). Since He promised "the seed of the woman", God is sovereignly working to restore and realize that plan. Whereas you and I would probably scrap the plan and start anew, God is sovereign and His councils are immutable. Nothing is too hard for Him, so He does not give up with mankind. He has joined Himself to man and with man He will ultimately accomplish what He st out to do.

In the process of saving man, God has five goals.
1.Institute a Substitute Who could pay for man's offenses 100%
2. Institute a process which will make man royalty, to make him an heir and to impart divine life so that man can be like God in behavior and rule with a godly character
3. Institute a process which will change the man's utterly evil nature to a godlike one
4. Institute a process whereby man's utterly corrupted body is replaced
5. Train a man to rule with righteousness worthy of God's Kingdom.

Points 1, 2 and 4 are achieved by a Work of God alone. Man is singularly incapable of paying for his sins, experiencing a divine and royal birth and raising his body from the dead. God does the Work and it is applied to mankind irrespective of his efforts. But points 3 and 5 is where God has restricted Himself and man's cooperation is needed. For instance in 2nd Corinthians 3:18 the transforming process need the man to behold Christ at length. In John Chapter 6 in order to be a spring of life man needs to eat Christ. In order to be a "help meet" for Christ man needs to seek a relationship.

God has established an incentive to ensure man cooperates. He is a God of REWARD. Any man who will invest his life fr God's purposes will be rewarded. The special resurrection is first alluded to in the harvests of Leviticus 23. God is Lord of the harvest and commands His portion. The first-fruits are His. The first fruits of the winter crop are followed by the first fruits of the summer crop, which are in turn, followed by the general harvest. If a plant is willing to take more rain and more hat of the sun, he/she will ripen first.

The special resurrection is first plainly elaborated on in Philippians 3:9-14. The word for "resurrection" in verse 11 is "exanastasis". It is used only once in the bible and literally means "the resurrection out of the resurrection". It must be ATTAINED to. As we know from 1st Thessalonians 4:13-18 that the rapture follows resurrection, God has instituted a special rapture which in the same verses is PRIZE to be WORTHY of. The Greek in verse 14 is best translated; " the PRIZE of the UPWARD CALL!"

The special resurrection is again mentioned in Revelation 20. In verses 1-6 it is called "the FIRST resurrection". The Greek word for "first" is "protos". It can mean "first in time", or, it can mean "first in importance". Since there are multiple resurrections before the men are "beheaded" in Revelation 20, they are not "first in time". They must be from a special resurrection that is FIRST IN IMPORTANCE.

Many Christians feel that they owe God a lot and it is mercenary to want a reward. Well ... they do owe God a lot, but I think we should do things His way. If He thinks a reward system is good, lets not argue with Him. Let's be like Paul and STRIVE for the rewards He has set before us.

Thank you for your reply on this AdHoc, can I press you further and ask when it mentions these in the past tense? Meaning, have you found any examples of what it mentions there when it speaks of  not accepting their deliverance for a better resurrection in the OT?

[AdHoc]

38 minutes ago, AFlameOfFire said:

Thank you for your reply on this AdHoc, can I press you further and ask when it mentions these in the past tense? Meaning, have you found any examples of what it mentions there when it speaks of  not accepting their deliverance for a better resurrection in the OT?

I cannot answer your question. To my knowledge, no man willfully provoked his killers to "finish the job" so that they might be martyred. But this brings two things to the surface.
1. The Lord sees the heart. A man who does not care for his life to bring glory to God will be an Overcomer anyway - though he not die a martyr.

2. If you were Lord the Jesus which man would you prefer. The martyr who goes out in a blaze of glory (I do not wish to lower the sacrifice's importance), or the meek man who subjects himself to 50 years of self-denial to be transformed for the Kingdom?

Question 2 is a tough one in my estimation.

If it makes any difference to your estimation, Paul thought that death for a Christian was better than life. But he chose life to prophet the Church. Should a Christian willfully provoke death and Christ loses a member of His Church who could have been a testimony? Not easy ...

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

1 hour ago, AdHoc said:

I cannot answer your question. To my knowledge, no man willfully provoked his killers to "finish the job" so that they might be martyred. But this brings two things to the surface.
1. The Lord sees the heart. A man who does not care for his life to bring glory to God will be an Overcomer anyway - though he not die a martyr.

2. If you were Lord the Jesus which man would you prefer. The martyr who goes out in a blaze of glory (I do not wish to lower the sacrifice's importance), or the meek man who subjects himself to 50 years of self-denial to be transformed for the Kingdom?

Question 2 is a tough one in my estimation.

If it makes any difference to your estimation, Paul thought that death for a Christian was better than life. But he chose life to prophet the Church. Should a Christian willfully provoke death and Christ loses a member of His Church who could have been a testimony? Not easy ...

This has been bugging me to find an example, so I did what I actually hate to do (unless I am really stuck ) and went to check out some commentaries on it. And it turns out that there is an example found in Eleazer with  Antiochus in 2 Maccabees 6 which mirrors what Paul was speaking of. I do realize most protestants exclude Maccabees which might be why I cannot find such an example in what I presently have. But it has an example within it. And most of the commentaries refer to 2 Maccabees in this instance. I have not read those books, but I think I might do that.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on these things, much appreciated

[Dennis1209]

15 hours ago, AFlameOfFire said:

Thank you for your reply on this AdHoc, can I press you further and ask when it mentions these in the past tense? Meaning, have you found any examples of what it mentions there when it speaks of  not accepting their deliverance for a better resurrection in the OT?

I do not mean to butt in between you and AdHoc, but this piqued my interest also. I do not shun commentaries because they often direct me to other information that parallel and important passages do not.

Your study on this surpasses my own, and as you stated, 2 Maccabees 6:18; 7:42 gives more information, as well as 2 Kings chapter four. Perhaps you can glean some additional information from one of my commentaries?

Women received their dead raised—as the widow of Zarephath (1 Ki 17:17–24). The Shunammite (2 Ki 4:17–35). The two oldest manuscripts read. “They received women of aliens by raising their dead.” 1 Ki 17:24 shows that the raising of the widow’s son by Elijah led her to the faith, so that he thus took her into fellowship, an alien though she was. Christ, in Lu 4:26, makes especial mention of the fact that Elijah was sent to an alien from Israel, a woman of Sarepta. Thus Paul may quote this as an instance of Elijah’s faith, that at God’s command he went to a Gentile city of Sidonia (contrary to Jewish prejudices), and there, as the fruit of faith, not only raised her dead son, but received her as a convert into the family of God, as Vulgate reads. Still, English Version may be the right reading.

and—Greek, “but”; in contrast to those raised again to life.

tortured—“broken on the wheel.” Eleazar (2 Maccabees 6:18, and; 2 Maccabees 8:20, 30). The sufferer was stretched on an instrument like a drumhead and scourged to death.

not accepting deliverance—when offered to them. So the seven brothers, 2 Maccabees 7:9, 11, 14, 29, 36; and Eleazar, 2 Maccabees 6:21, 28, 30, “Though I might have been delivered from death, I endure these severe pains, being beaten.”

a better resurrection—than that of the women’s children “raised to life again”; or, than the resurrection which their foes could give them by delivering them from death (Da 12:2; Lu 20:35; Php 3:11). The fourth of the brethren (referring to Da 12:2) said to King Antiochus, “To be put to death by men, is to be chosen to look onward for the hopes which are of God, to be raised up again by Him; but for thee there is no resurrection to life.” The writer of Second Maccabees expressly disclaims inspiration, which prevents our mistaking Paul’s allusion here to it as if it sanctioned the Apocrypha as inspired. In quoting Daniel, he quotes a book claiming inspiration, and so tacitly sanctions that claim.^[1]

 

---

^[1] Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., & Brown, D. (1997). Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (Vol. 2, p. 474). Logos Research Systems, Inc.

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

7 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

I do not mean to butt in between you and AdHoc, but this piqued my interest also. I do not shun commentaries because they often direct me to other information that parallel and important passages do not.

Your study on this surpasses my own, and as you stated, 2 Maccabees 6:18; 7:42 gives more information, as well as 2 Kings chapter four. Perhaps you can glean some additional information from one of my commentaries?

Women received their dead raised—as the widow of Zarephath (1 Ki 17:17–24). The Shunammite (2 Ki 4:17–35). The two oldest manuscripts read. “They received women of aliens by raising their dead.” 1 Ki 17:24 shows that the raising of the widow’s son by Elijah led her to the faith, so that he thus took her into fellowship, an alien though she was. Christ, in Lu 4:26, makes especial mention of the fact that Elijah was sent to an alien from Israel, a woman of Sarepta. Thus Paul may quote this as an instance of Elijah’s faith, that at God’s command he went to a Gentile city of Sidonia (contrary to Jewish prejudices), and there, as the fruit of faith, not only raised her dead son, but received her as a convert into the family of God, as Vulgate reads. Still, English Version may be the right reading.

and—Greek, “but”; in contrast to those raised again to life.

tortured—“broken on the wheel.” Eleazar (2 Maccabees 6:18, and; 2 Maccabees 8:20, 30). The sufferer was stretched on an instrument like a drumhead and scourged to death.

not accepting deliverance—when offered to them. So the seven brothers, 2 Maccabees 7:9, 11, 14, 29, 36; and Eleazar, 2 Maccabees 6:21, 28, 30, “Though I might have been delivered from death, I endure these severe pains, being beaten.”

a better resurrection—than that of the women’s children “raised to life again”; or, than the resurrection which their foes could give them by delivering them from death (Da 12:2; Lu 20:35; Php 3:11). The fourth of the brethren (referring to Da 12:2) said to King Antiochus, “To be put to death by men, is to be chosen to look onward for the hopes which are of God, to be raised up again by Him; but for thee there is no resurrection to life.” The writer of Second Maccabees expressly disclaims inspiration, which prevents our mistaking Paul’s allusion here to it as if it sanctioned the Apocrypha as inspired. In quoting Daniel, he quotes a book claiming inspiration, and so tacitly sanctions that claim.^[1]

 

---

^[1] Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., & Brown, D. (1997). Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (Vol. 2, p. 474). Logos Research Systems, Inc.

Your not butting in at all Dennis1209,  I appreciate your input, and I initially threw my question up to the wind and AdHoc ended up replying. And sometimes I prefer to do that so as to not make any one person feel they are on the hook to answer a question that I might have (while leaving the door open).

Great references Dennis1209, and yes I did see those referred to in the commentaries. And its not that I am against the use of commentaries altogether, its that I prefer the practice of searching things out for myself, and exhausting myself by myself "first". I don't ever want to answer for someone else's work.  Besides, I find  it rewarding regardless if I come up short on anything because that leaves room for personal engagement (and others adding to my learning) without just copying off of websites. And for me it helps in the area of personal diligence keeping me from becoming lazy by leaning back on another's workmanship in the word. Its just what I personally prefer concerning myself,  although I am also glad when I find the same  in others. I guess I tend to gravitate to the less academic-like responses, without the fancy bullet point outlines padded with emotional appeals to convince of things outside the use of scripture (for the most part).

Just because I prefer that. I am not against them, I just rarely look at them but when I do  find them very helpful but it has to be after I have exhausted my own searching first. Otherwise I feel like I am cheating my own self or something.

Edited December 24, 2023 by AFlameOfFire

[Marilyn C]

On 12/24/2023 at 3:15 AM, AFlameOfFire said:

On another note, what does being tortured, and not accepting your own deliverance from it have to do with obtaining a better resurrection?

You never hear much about that, or practicing that. I am referring to Hebrews 11:35

Can you imagine being sawn asunder and your torturer says, okay, I am done now it is enough and the one being sawn asunder replies, no please continue I will have a better resurrection if you stay overtime and complete the job (for my greater good).

 

 

Hi AFlameOfFire,

I would like to answer your question, however, I see it will take this topic way off so will start a new thread. I have to write the notes first. Hope you can join me.

regards, Marilyn.

BTW the answer is in that chapter as well as other scriptures.

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

4 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi AFlameOfFire,

I would like to answer your question, however, I see it will take this topic way off so will start a new thread. I have to write the notes first. Hope you can join me.

regards, Marilyn.

BTW the answer is in that chapter as well as other scriptures.

Thank You Marilyn C I pretty much got what I was looking for concerning that one specific reference, you needn't open a whole thread up on my behalf concerning this.

[Serving]

On 12/24/2023 at 6:11 AM, AFlameOfFire said:

Thank you for your reply on this AdHoc, can I press you further and ask when it mentions these in the past tense? Meaning, have you found any examples of what it mentions there when it speaks of  not accepting their deliverance for a better resurrection in the OT?

Flame,

Besides seeking the examples you queried above,  this word : "Better" has implications right?

So keeping that in mind, would I be wrong in assuming that your line of questioning really has to do with determining which "Resurrection" is being spoken of here, or am I mistaken?

[Marilyn C]

23 minutes ago, AFlameOfFire said:

Thank You Marilyn C I pretty much got what I was looking for concerning that one specific reference, you needn't open a whole thread up on my behalf concerning this.

That`s fine, however I think I will still post the new thread as it is a topic many people do not know about. 

[Guest AFlameOfFire]

13 minutes ago, Serving said:

Flame,

Besides seeking the examples you queried above,  this word : "Better" has implications right?

So keeping that in mind, would I be wrong in assuming that your line of questioning really has to do with determining which "Resurrection" is being spoken of here, or am I mistaken?

I sort of forgot the reason I posted it because it was in the discussion of death and the question come to me after Sister had proposed something I never considered concerning pain in death in someway. Which  was followed up by me in trying to seek some affirmation in what she might have shared when come the question regarding the pains of death in various ways and, in what way were the pains of death "loosed", or in what way does it refer to the sting of death (and "where" is its sting also) because in the context of that is the law and sin there as well.

I don't really look for full explanations to things, just something kicked back to me in a place or two using the scriptures where I can find my way through it and convince myself of whatever it might be speaking of.

The question sort of sprang out from your post through someone else's answer which made me think of these other places.

I don't even know what I am asking, but go with that, sounds good

 

 

Edited December 24, 2023 by AFlameOfFire