Time

[Willowbirch]

If God is outside of time, then to God, everything is 'now' and there is no such thing as 'then'.  My dead Grandparents, Moses, and I will all approach the Throne at the same instant, immediately following each of our respective deaths.  This elliminates the conceptual need for a 'holding tank' for those who die before the end of 'time'. 

The Lord is "God of the living". No one is dead to Him. "...to win salvation through our Lord Jesus Chirst, who died for us so that, alive or dead, we should still live united in Him." - 1 Thess. 5:10 Paul says elsewhere that all at once, all together, no man or woman or child alone, we will meet our Savior. He calls this great meeting a far better thing than to simply fly away, one at a time, to the Lord. What an explosion of joy! What a cacophony of glory! To come, not to meet the ancients who have been with the Lord for millenia already, but to join them and walk beside them as, all at once, "the Lord showers righteousness upon them". The whole creation waits to see the saints revealed - alongside one another, as the perfected family of God, the Bride of the Lord.
My dad has said over and over how he wished he could have held his father's hand, and walked into Heaven together, rather than let that man cross over without him. I hope that he will have this wish, and me too; whether it is true that the "dead" are waiting on the "living" to enter glory together, or whether it is true that there is no Time (and no waiting) at all in the presence of God.

[airIam2worship]

Amen Willow, when a person dies the body returns to the dust and the soul returns to God.

[1Tim]

Thanks Willow  ,


When my grandpa died, my only regret was that I never went hunting with him.  It was a regret I felt deep down, not real heavy, but it was there.  By the time I was old enough, and had the money to buy an out-of-state License, he was not able to enjoy a hunting trip any more.

The night before his funeral, I had a dream.  All I can remember about that dream was a phesant folding up in a cloud of feathers in front of my barking shotgun, and grandpa was there.  I've never been phesant hunting, and allways wanted to try it.

In the morning, that sense of regret that I felt for not having gone hunting with grandpa was gone, and in its place was a sense of satisfaction...that ain't the right word...I knew we had gone hunting together and had the time of our...lives()

Was it real, or imagined? Was it just a dream??  It didn't hit me as just a dream, no dream I ever had remained with me like that did.  I don't know what it was really, but what is crystal clear was that Jesus did something for me that nite, and I was overjoyed, and at peace.  I still look foreward to our next hunting trip, but if it never happens, we'll be in His house forever, and it won't matter.

I don't know why I wrote that, but I'm trusting that I was led to.

[Brother Jerry]

1Tim

I posted that study under the General Theology sections.  I was going to put where to find it....but you know I thought of a better idea....LINKS!!  Those things are great...they like allow you to link stuff from one page to the next...what a great concept....DUH

Here it is

http://forums.christiansunite.com/index.php?topic=12433.0

[doc]

Well. 1 Tim,

You have some action for your question. I have not read the entire thread as of yet, but will resp to the initial one re: 1 Pet 3:15. (reply # 17)

Albert Barnes is a favorite of mine - available in e-Sword - freeware.  He says of:  "To give an answer - Greek, “An apology,” (ἀπολογίαν  apologian.) This word formerly did not mean, as the word apology does now, an excuse for anything that is done as if it were wrong, but a defense of anything. We apply the word now to denote something written or said in extenuation of what appears to others to be wrong, or what might be construed as wrong - as when we make an apology to others for not fulfilling an engagement, or for some conduct which might be construed as designed neglect. The word originally, however, referred rather to that which was thought not to be true, than that which might be construed as wrong; and the defense or “apology” which Christians were to make of their religion, was not on the supposition that others would regard it as wrong, but in order to show them that it was true. The word used here is rendered “defense,” Act_22:1; Phi_1:7, Phi_1:17; answer, Act_25:16; 1Co_9:3; 2Ti_4:16; 1Pe_3:15; and clearing of yourselves in 2Co_7:11. We are not to hold ourselves ready to make an apology for our religion as if it were a wrong thing to be a Christian; but we are always to be ready to give reasons for regarding it as true.

Following this is the use of the word "hope" (elpis in Greek)  Again, today's use of this word does not contain the original use of the word.  Hope for Paul was a "confident expectation" different than "I hope it doesn't rain today" - it never meant maybe.

The hope that is within your heart, 1 Tim, is your eternal life with God, Christ, and your departed loved ones in heaven.  -  Amen?

Your dream may be prophetic or just wishful thinking - God knows - but your peace only comes from Him and He may use this venue.

You're a little young to be "dreaming dreams", but we gotta start somewhere.

Hopefully,
doc

[doc]

  The question that comes up in my mind is why did God not give me the same insight that he gave the pastor?  Well on one hand He did--through the pastor, but why not directly?  I've concluded that for some reason that I don't understand, He elected to do it that way.  As we look arround us, almost everything has a hierarchy of authority.  God established an authority progression in the Home, at work, in the military, in the Government...ect., and also in His Church.  This is what I ws attempting to address.  Although God chooses to give me guidence through the pastor and teacher I sit under (as well as friends and other Christians) only He is the Teacher.
 
I believe vs 10 says we are to learn from Jesus only, and those set up in authority positions in the church are only there to guide our learning, but we must take everything heard from them to the Word, and to Jesus, before committing it to our belief system.

I've done more reading 1 Tim,

Authority, accountability and devotion - - all point to The Lord.  A baby Christian needs milk, not solid food, so there are intermediaries along the way, as you have perhaps discovered.  After some spiritual maturation the intermediaries and the false hierarchy may be unnecessary - even harmful - and it is time to move on for more growing up. "For though by this time you ought to be teachers , you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food."  Hebrews 5:12 NKJV  The Hebrew writer was talking to the diaspora of Jews and to us today, as with all scripture.

The hierarchy defined in Eph 4 is a misreading by "the Church" - the institution, in my opinion.  Many years of seeking has convinced me these are the characteristics of a mature Christian, not the offices of His Body.  Paul carefully defines the 2 offices in God's Body - overseer (elder) and deacon.  (Timothy and Titus.)  All else is a fleshly creation - pride, power, controll, etc. over many centuries have allowed this system to exist and flourish.  The eventual maturation of any Christian - man or woman - is God's plan of discipleship.  How we express this maturation is an individual issue, but never forget: "And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together , as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching."  Hebrews 10:24-25 NKJV  (I love this book)

In His Glorious Name,

a growing doc,

[Len]

If you take a look at the biblical use of tongues as mentioned by Paul and in Acts what do you find?  You find that someone was preaching and the Spirit came in and filled the people so that they would be talking and everyone could understand them.  Imagine if you will a kung-fu flick dubbed over...someone would speak in Aramaic and a person who only knew Hebrew could understand them.  This is the first true translation of the Word of God. 
 
Sincerely
Brother Jerry

If I understand your post, Brother Jerry, you are saying each believer spoke thier own langauge but each nonbeliever heard and understood what was said in THEIR language. If I am wrong in this understanding of your post, I  apologize.

But if I understand you correctly, I have to refer you to Scripture that says that they spoke in languages not their own. Big diff, there.

Were the believers speaking in tongues or were the nonbelievers hearing in tongues? If nonbelievers were hearing in tongues, then that means nonbelievers received a Spiritual gift...hearing in tongues. I really don't think it happened that way because Scripture says it happened another. (Call me silly.)

[1Tim]

yer silly.

 

[Len]

I already know YOU think I'm silly.

[Brother Jerry]

Len

But if I understand you correctly, I have to refer you to Scripture that says that they spoke in languages not their own. Big diff, there.

[/quote]Were the believers speaking in tongues or were the nonbelievers hearing in tongues? If nonbelievers were hearing in tongues, then that means nonbelievers received a Spiritual gift...hearing in tongues. I really don't think it happened that way because Scripture says it happened another. (Call me silly.)
[/quote]
Take a read at Acts 10:44 "While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word"
We see that the Holy Ghost came upon all who were there to hear the word of God preached by Peter.  It was not that the Spirit came upon Peter and he spoke in different languages.  It was that the Spirit came upon all who were there, and later in verse 46 mentions "For they heard them speak" thus the miracle is that they heard them speak in their own language.  Which if we then go back to Acts 2 we notice a couple of things.  It is specified that they heard them speak in their own language.  If the preachers were simply speaking in their own language and others were simply seeing thier lips move and it was coming out as normal it would not have been an amazing affect, no one would have noticed.  For example if you were to see a speaker and he was speaking in English and you saw his lips move to match his words you would think nothing of it.  But now if you saw that speaker speaking and heard it in English but yet his lips moved to words spoken in Russian it would be an amazing thing.

The miracle or sign that God was working was not an optical illusion of having a person or persons speaking and lipping different languages all at once...but that the speakers were speaking in their native tongues but yet everyone heard it in their own native tongue.

[1Tim]

In Acts 10:44, it was Cornelius' household, those who had allready heard the message, who recieved the Spirit, and were speaking in toungs, as a sign to Peter and the believers with him, and those who he told about the situation.  I think it can be assumed that they also believed the word they heard, as Paul illustrates in Galations 3:2, that the Spirit is recieved by believing the Word.

In Acts 2:4, we are told it was the diciples in the house who both recieved the Spirit, and began to speak in other toungs, apparently, before there were unbelievers arround to hear them.  In vs. 13, they are accused of drunken babbeling, illustrating that some of the disciples were speaking sounds unrecognizable to some of the hearers, and they knew that others were hearing the same thing they were, unrecognized "gibberish"--for, to make a statement like that to others who could understand the speech would be absurd.

[Soldier4Christ]

Speak in tongues, hear in tongues.

If we look at he many verses in regards to this we will actually see both spoken of. One person speaking yet everyone there hearing what is said "in their own tongue". If we take notice that in some instances it is said they spoke in toungues (plural) not just spoke in another tongue (singular).

Acts 2:4 does say that they "began to speak with other tongues" but it was not just gibberish as in Acts 2:5 - 12 we are told that there were men of many languages present and yet they all heard in their own language.

Those people mentioned in verse 13 accusing them of being drunk would not have heard the word even if it had been in their own language (they were blind and could not hear). These were mockers, unbelievers, their heart was hardened and did not believe (Acts 19:9 ).

Mat 13:15  For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

[Len]

Len


Were the believers speaking in tongues or were the nonbelievers hearing in tongues? If nonbelievers were hearing in tongues, then that means nonbelievers received a Spiritual gift...hearing in tongues. I really don't think it happened that way because Scripture says it happened another. (Call me silly.)

Take a read at Acts 10:44 "While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word"
We see that the Holy Ghost came upon all who were there to hear the word of God preached by Peter.  It was not that the Spirit came upon Peter and he spoke in different languages.  It was that the Spirit came upon all who were there, and later in verse 46 mentions "For they heard them speak" thus the miracle is that they heard them speak in their own language.  Which if we then go back to Acts 2 we notice a couple of things.  It is specified that they heard them speak in their own language.  If the preachers were simply speaking in their own language and others were simply seeing thier lips move and it was coming out as normal it would not have been an amazing affect, no one would have noticed.  For example if you were to see a speaker and he was speaking in English and you saw his lips move to match his words you would think nothing of it.  But now if you saw that speaker speaking and heard it in English but yet his lips moved to words spoken in Russian it would be an amazing thing.

The miracle or sign that God was working was not an optical illusion of having a person or persons speaking and lipping different languages all at once...but that the speakers were speaking in their native tongues but yet everyone heard it in their own native tongue.

Acts 2:4. "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues , as the Spirit was giving them utterance."

Do you have a verse to share that says they heard in a tongue not their own?

[Soldier4Christ]

Acts 2:4. "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues , as the Spirit was giving them utterance."

Do you have a verse to share that says they heard in a tongue not their own?

I never said that. They all heard in their own language.

Act 2:6  Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

Act 2:8  And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?


Take note here that there were many that were listening at the same time and yet each one heard it in their own tongue.

[Len]

I never said that. They all heard in their own language.

Act 2:6  Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

Act 2:8  And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?


Take note here that there were many that were listening at the same time and yet each one heard it in their own tongue.

I'm with you on this, Pastor Roger. My response and query was to Brother Jerry. But, there were many speaking, each one in a different tongue, making it possible for each one listening to hear the word in his own tongue.

It sounds to me like each tongue represented was addressed by someone who was speaking for the first time in that tongue.