The catching away

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Ha ha I just cut and pasted the passages in Easters quote.

Scripture does not specifiy exactly when they rose Just that it was after the resurection of Christ. I did not say it happened at 70 ad but around that time frame. It is a thought I am still working out in my mind, this gives me input so I can take a closer look at things. Thanks for the imput.

Oh! Haha. Thanks for the clarification.

[Falla39]

What did the ripping of the veil do! It opened up the way into the Holiest of Holies! Where was the Holy of Holies! Within the veil! What did the ripping of Jesus' flesh do!
Opened up the WAY into the very PRESENCE of GOD! Where was GOD! IN CHRIST! You must go through the Son (Jesus) to get to the Father. The
Mighty God was hidden in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself. The
flesh (Son) was the vehicle that brought GOD to earth.

The Father (Spirit) was IN CHRIST JESUS! In His Presence there's fullness of joy. For
in Him dwelleth ALL the FULNESS of the GODHEAD bodily and ye are complete IN HIM!
In Him you will find LOVE, JOY, PEACE, LONGSUFFERING, GENTLENESS, GOODNESS,
FAITH, MEEKNESS and TEMPERANCE.

John 3:3-6:
3Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Try as you may, except you are born of water and of the Spirit, you will never SEE the
kingdom of God. You just cannot see it!!
The kindgom of God is within you. Righteousness, joy and peace in the Holy Ghost.

You must SEE it through new (Spiritual) eyes. You will see it through/in the Spirit.

Falla39

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by Falla39

What did the ripping of the veil do!

Sister Falla, while everything you've written concerning the underlying reason for the renting of the veil of the temple is certainly true, and without disputation whatsoever, I should point out that I made no mention of its purpose in my posting, rather I tendered questions regarding the location of the temple; was Matthew's writings referring to an earthly temple, or perhaps was this a reference to the temple that is located in the heavens?

I believe that a proper understanding of the answer to this question goes a long way in aiding one to arrive at a better understanding of many other areas of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead in which there exists such confusion among modern-day apostolic pentecostals, including, but not limited to the following:

1. The location of the "holy city" that is mentioned - whether it be the earthly city of Jerusalem or the invisible heavenly city of God.

2. Whether Matthew's usage of the word "bodies of the saints which slept" was a reference to their physical beings, or perhaps a reference to their eternal invisible souls.

Now if we are to conclude that the "holy city" is referring to the earthly city of Jerusalem then one must wonder why there exists no historical record which would tell of those who witnessed this event. If Matthew was indeed referring to a physical resurrection of what surely must have been a rather large number of saints, then would it not seem highly likely that someone would have had much to record for historical consumption about such a miraculous event? I certainly think so, yet no such record exists that I have been able to find.

If it be that Matthew was writing about a "bodily" resurrection, then would not such a thing directly conflict with the things which Paul penned in his epistle to the Corinthian saints about the "firstfruits" of the resurrection being Christ Jesus with the next resurrection taking place at the future moment of His return to this earth?

Can you grasp the enormity of the problems which arise because of the absence of a sound scriptural-based conclusion concerning the things which Matthew was inspired of God to record concerning this event?

[mfblume]

Thanks for your timeline, Sam. It is good for visual explanations of a viewpoint. It inspired me to make one!

God bless!

[mfblume]

Sometimes we are left with conjecture only as to things such as the dead who raised and walked in the holy city. We cannot say one way or another concretely if it was Heaven. We need to stick with things we can know concretely. I think. History does not have to exist, either, for one to think the veil ripped in the temple on earth, too.

I know a guy who fascinated over how the bible does not say Paul fell from a horse on the road to Damascus as is popularly noted, and had to tell everyone this fact. Who cares, though?

The point is there was a resurrection of others when Jesus arose, and resurrection is not resurrection unless something was dead and came to life. Resurged, in other words. For that reason I see no resurrection in AD70. So I think it has to be bodies in Matt 27:53. But it is not that important. The important thing is that many wonders occurred around the resurrection. Earthquake. Sun having turned black. Veil rent. Sin atoned for. Our deaths and resurrections with Him. And the message is as Falla and Easter said... way was opened in the holiest. So, Lafon, the issue of WHERE the veil was rent is not as vital as the WHY it was rent, to send a message to us reading it as our sisters noted.

My thoughts anyway.

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Thanks for your timeline, Sam. It is good for visual explanations of a viewpoint. It inspired me to make one!

God bless!

Excellent timeline Bro. Blume.
Now if we can get a complete Bible study from Gen thru Rev. with quality flip charts and what-not, it would be great. (hint-hint)

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Bowas

Excellent timeline Bro. Blume.
Now if we can get a complete Bible study from Gen thru Rev. with quality flip charts and what-not, it would be great. (hint-hint)

Haha. We should work on it together.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Thanks for your timeline, Sam. It is good for visual explanations of a viewpoint. It inspired me to make one!

God bless!

Thanks, Bro. Blume. Mine was not original. I downloaded it from somewhere.

[Falla39]

Originally Posted by Lafon

Sister Falla, while everything you've written concerning the underlying reason for the renting of the veil of the temple is certainly true, and without disputation whatsoever, I should point out that I made no mention of its purpose in my posting, rather I tendered questions regarding the location of the temple; was Matthew's writings referring to an earthly temple, or perhaps was this a reference to the temple that is located in the heavens?

I believe that a proper understanding of the answer to this question goes a long way in aiding one to arrive at a better understanding of many other areas of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead in which there exists such confusion among modern-day apostolic pentecostals, including, but not limited to the following:

1. The location of the "holy city" that is mentioned - whether it be the earthly city of Jerusalem or the invisible heavenly city of God.

2. Whether Matthew's usage of the word "bodies of the saints which slept" was a reference to their physical beings, or perhaps a reference to their eternal invisible souls.

Now if we are to conclude that the "holy city" is referring to the earthly city of Jerusalem then one must wonder why there exists no historical record which would tell of those who witnessed this event. If Matthew was indeed referring to a physical resurrection of what surely must have been a rather large number of saints, then would it not seem highly likely that someone would have had much to record for historical consumption about such a miraculous event? I certainly think so, yet no such record exists that I have been able to find.

If it be that Matthew was writing about a "bodily" resurrection, then would not such a thing directly conflict with the things which Paul penned in his epistle to the Corinthian saints about the "firstfruits" of the resurrection being Christ Jesus with the next resurrection taking place at the future moment of His return to this earth?

Can you grasp the enormity of the problems which arise because of the absence of a sound scriptural-based conclusion concerning the things which Matthew was inspired of God to record concerning this event?

Bro. Lafon.
Actually what I had in mind when I wrote my post was Bro. Blume's
post.
_________________
Bro. Blumes Quote:
Hebrews 10:20 KJV By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;

So the spiritual veil was the flesh of Jesus. He is the door. The living door. This makes me think the reference to the veil was the actual one on earth in the temple that opened to indicate Christ's flesh was broken in death so we could enter through his death into the holiest.
_________________


Falla39

[mfblume]

Just a reminder of interpreting Revelation from the rest of the bible.

If we let scripture interpret scripture then you will find that 278 of Revelation's 404 verses contain references to the Old Testament almost 69% of the book draws directly from OT references. Those references cover almost 500 different verses out the OT.