I absolutely despise the doctrine of hell, and in researching whether the bible teaches eternal hell or annihilation, I came to the conclusion that the bible teaches both. I agtree with you that there are contradictions in the bible and your video highlights one of them.
Good point, in spite of the fact that most Christians believe they will go to heaven immediately, there is not one single example in the Bible of anyone going to heaven upon death.
THANK YOU for this video! Even when I was a Christian, this question always bothered me. I was told I would go straight to heaven, and wanted to believe that...but couldn't figure out why the "dead would be raised" when Jesus came back. What dead? Weren't we already there? LOL. :)
Why is it when I read someone's obituary it says they went to be with the Lord. Now how in the hell do they know that? I just know some of those people surely had to go to hell. Faith is believing what you know isn't so.
The Bible clearly teaches that when a Christian dies he goes to the grave/earth (Acts 2:29-35) and the soul is in a sleep like state not knowing what is happening (Ecclesiastes 9:5) until the resurrection.
So Paul is saying between death and the resurrection it will be as if no time has passed. Just as happens to us during nightly sleep.
You need to read all of Paul's writtings to fully understand him and consider the context and who he is writting to and why.
The bible doesn't 'clearly' teach any such thing. Just look at my discussions with Blogrich55. The bible is a confusing and contradictory book...that's the problem.
Hm, just wrote a comment, but YouTube ate it. My issue with your video from the point of a non-believer is that although there are plenty of contradictions in the bible, there is so little discussion of the migration to heaven that one easily can conciliate those bible passages ("God moves them back into their bodies just in time so that they can join the other in Jesus's kingdom."). My two cents.
Have a good one. Oh, and BTW, have you already had a look at ProfMTH's vids on bible blunders?
One can reconcile this contradiction, but to do so, one must avoid the literal translation of the words. Don't christians believe the bible is inspired? If so, then shouldn't the words be accurate? Additionally, does it make sense that god would move their souls back into their bodies, especially when most have already decomposed?
Well, here we open the can of worm referred to as the supernatural. How can we apply reason to it? As long as you can bridge a potential contradiction with some magic (and putting flesh back on skeletons should be a piece of cake for a god busy with Armageddon, i.e. killing billion of people), so I still do not deem this to be a strong contradiction due to a gap left for magic. Contradictions like pi = 3 or circumcision bad bad and good good according to St. Peter are more glaring.
Does my video really not make sense from a premillennial perspective? Is it really more logical that god would take the souls that were already with him in heaven and move them back into a body that he has 'raised' when most would have already decomposed?
If you take the words literally, then the dead will rise, not just the bodies. Additionally, the phrase "And so we will be with the Lord forever" implies that the dead were not already with the Lord.
No Steve, it does NOT make any sense. You are really stretching in your desperate attempt to demonstrate what you want to be a contradiction in scripture.
1. What makes you think the bodies He would put them in would still be decomposed. It is believed they are glorified bodies. Yet by your very asking of such a question, you make it hard to take you seriously.
2. If you take words literally Jesus can be found in a bakery. Is He a loaf of Wonder bread or Roman Meal?
If that is exactly your point, Steve, it is a poor one. The term glorified body would not necessarily mean or imply new or different body. This is an assumption on your part. The Bible says we are new creatures in Christ and doesn't mean different in the sense you do. When the corruptible puts on immortality,it itself is transformed. If this were NOT the case why would it even bother to say glorified oody? Why not different or new? A new body is not a resurrected body but a different body.
I have a response to your foolish attempt to find a contradiction in the Bible:
These are two different aspects of the final things or eschatology. Your attempt to present them as two conflicting views is dishonest and childish. You are comparing apples and oranges.
And I hereby am announcing myi disbelief that you were EVER a preacher! This is BASIC and SIMPLE. Even if you don't believe the Bible only a very thick person would see a contradiction here. Sorry to be so blunt Steve.
Are you telling me that when it says the dead in Christ shall rise, it doesn't mean it? The dead won't rise, but only their bodies? And, it's not even their bodies that are raised, but it's a new, spiritual body? Wait, why do they even need a body, as they have already been in heaven? This is all nonsense.
Once again, you have demonstrated that your only tools are rhetoric and insults.
Maybe you can also say that I'm lying about having 2 kids :-)
#1. Actually Steve, I do. I am sorry, sir, but I sincerely doubt just about everything you have said about yourself. Yet how would I know for sure?
I will tell you what most premill fundamentalists mean. As you should know if you ever were one, they believe the soul or spirit goes immediately to be with God upon death to wait in heaven for the resurrection. Only the shell is in the ground or grave. They do not believe a person IS their body but dwells in a body while alive. The body raised is
#2. Glorified, some say without blood, which they compare to the resurrected body of Christ. They believe these bodies are going to live in a thousand year kingdom ruled by Christ literally from the throne of David in Jerusalem.
Since a person is NOT his body but only a dweller in it, to have a new body would not be a contradiction at all. It would still be their body because it belongs to them. However, they believe it will be their original transformed and restored if and glorified.
Why do you present the argument of a premillennialist when you're a preterist? I thought calvinists weren't supposed to be inconsistent. Monty would be so disappointed in you :-)
With premillennialism, amillennialism, postmillennialism, no millennialism, and preterism, aren't you being disingenuous when stating that the interpretation of these passages is obvious?
The reason I bring up Monty is because you idolize him, and have changed your tactics to be like his. I have yet to determine why you would want to be like him, as I have provide evidence to you that he is a habitual liar.
As I understand it, you are accusing me of lying about the following things:
1) I have two children
2) I preached (by the way, I never said I was a head pastor)
3) I was in the faith for 30 years
If I demonstrate that your accusations are false, does that make you a slanderer? And if you are shown to be a slanderer, does this mean you aren't elect?
As I understand it you evidently don't know the difference between a person having honest doubt and a slandering you. I guess you really are that obtuse.
blogr_I've cataloged hundreds of errors and contradictions in the filthy Bible...As a former believer, I know firsthand the deceptions and lies you tell yourself to not see or acknowledge them.
trixie, the very fact that you refer to God's holy word as filthy tells a lot. You must forgive my doubts as to the genuine nature of your former Christian condition. You were probably self deluded. Now you are thinking you were an ex Christian. Many have made this claim who were formerly Mormons, JWs, or some other cult or kooky fringe member. I am not trying to judge you or you alleged former experience.Actually I would welcome a personal message about your former profession of faith. Please?
Why do you continue to insult me and falsely accuse me of not having an argument? This is NOT a contradiction Steve. Maybe to someone who claims they were once a holy roller preacher but not to an ordinary thinking adult.
You are NOT blocked. At least, I have tried my best to unlblock you. If you like, I will waist time and show why this is NOT a contradiction. Not that you probably ever really were a holy roller preacher mind you, but for since you say you were...
Thanks CP- always enjoy your videos. Great music choice, too. I suppose the obvious way (i.e., with about 2 minutes thought lol) to reconcile these is to say the Lord is in the ground. Why not- Samuel was when the witch of Endor raised him?
Dreamy2 the Bible doesn't say that at all. It is the crackpots like Hal Lyndsy and John Hagee who say that garbage. Jesus said He was returning before His generation had passed away. He had to return by 73 AD. Surprise surprise--
He returned in judgement through the Roman soldiers who burned Jerusalem to the ground, stopped animal sacrafice, destroyed their geneologies, etc...
Check out the OT instances of Jehovah coming in vengeance against Isreal. Always through other nations. Same here.
One can interpret it that way, but to do so, you must reject taking scripture literally. Paul was specific when he said that being dead resulted in being with the Lord.
Yes and as you well know if you really were a holy roller preacher Steve, death means the soul or spirit goes to be with God immediately. The promise of the ressurection as addressed in the other verses quoted is the hope that the body will one day be raised in a glorified state and reunited with the soul or spirit. There is NO LOGICAL problem because they are talking about two different things.
The soul goes to heaven with no body? What does the soul do and what is its limitation? I guess it doesn't need a body, right?
Then, the body is raised from the grave, but it's not the original body at all, but a new body? Why is the old body raised if it's not the same body? Then it's reunited with the soul? For what purpose?
This sounds like two different views of death that you are trying to make fit together. The problem is that they make no logical sense when this is done.
Steve, it is hard to take you seriously on this video. You really can't be this dense. If you were I'd feel sorry for you. Please present a real chhallange. ho ho ho hum.ROFLOL
Steve, I find no reason to argue with something as naive and simplistic as this nonsense. It is actually beneath your usually challenging and infuriating attacks on the faith. What is there to answer?
I don't think anyone will be impressed with your silly and pointless polemic or the goofy questions you raise. You open an entire can of eschatological worms there are hundreds of volumes on. Would it make you feel better if I did a video response?
BTW how do you notice any failure to defend my argument on the subject Steve? I have not given one yet. I was a holy roller for 22 years as you well know.
Why do you continue to comment without an argument? You always make it sound like you have one without ever producing one. It is apparent that this is your MO.
I encourage you to make a video explaining this contradiction. Although I won't be able to comment on it (since you have blocked me), I will still accept it as a response to my video.
My daughter was married in Paraguay and this song played at her wedding. Hearing it in your video has brought back a flood of memories of my time spent there. 5 stars for that alone.
If you cross your eyes, stick out your tongue, pat your head, jump on one foot and recite these verses, they make sense. That's because you're so freaking distracted by all the activity....
the trick they actually use in the churches though, is to have *bible studies*. This is where you pull verses out of different books and line them up until they DO make sense. But only if you don't ask any questions....
I'm an atheist, but here's the problem as I see it.
1.) There are passages that clear-cut state we go to the grave until judgment day.
2.) There are flimsy passages that MIGHT be interpreted to mean we go directly to heaven.
What to do? Interpretations are human, go with what the bible clear-cut states, we go to the grave.
However, relgion is nuts. Embrace atheism!
BoyintheMachine 1 year ago
I absolutely despise the doctrine of hell, and in researching whether the bible teaches eternal hell or annihilation, I came to the conclusion that the bible teaches both. I agtree with you that there are contradictions in the bible and your video highlights one of them.
ShaneChiswick 1 year ago
Good point, in spite of the fact that most Christians believe they will go to heaven immediately, there is not one single example in the Bible of anyone going to heaven upon death.
averagebear1 2 years ago
THANK YOU for this video! Even when I was a Christian, this question always bothered me. I was told I would go straight to heaven, and wanted to believe that...but couldn't figure out why the "dead would be raised" when Jesus came back. What dead? Weren't we already there? LOL. :)
Allegro2500 2 years ago
Thanks Allegro2500.
crazypills2 2 years ago
I really like the last part - "If something doesn't make sense, don't pretend it does".
dannukesem 2 years ago
Thanks dannukesem. It was only when I allowed myself to question things that I was able to see things how they really are and change my view.
crazypills2 2 years ago
Why is it when I read someone's obituary it says they went to be with the Lord. Now how in the hell do they know that? I just know some of those people surely had to go to hell. Faith is believing what you know isn't so.
Dwicker64 2 years ago
The Bible clearly teaches that when a Christian dies he goes to the grave/earth (Acts 2:29-35) and the soul is in a sleep like state not knowing what is happening (Ecclesiastes 9:5) until the resurrection.
So Paul is saying between death and the resurrection it will be as if no time has passed. Just as happens to us during nightly sleep.
You need to read all of Paul's writtings to fully understand him and consider the context and who he is writting to and why.
See 2 Peter 3:16.
BOX5500 2 years ago
BOX550,
The bible doesn't 'clearly' teach any such thing. Just look at my discussions with Blogrich55. The bible is a confusing and contradictory book...that's the problem.
crazypills2 2 years ago
Hm, just wrote a comment, but YouTube ate it. My issue with your video from the point of a non-believer is that although there are plenty of contradictions in the bible, there is so little discussion of the migration to heaven that one easily can conciliate those bible passages ("God moves them back into their bodies just in time so that they can join the other in Jesus's kingdom."). My two cents.
Have a good one. Oh, and BTW, have you already had a look at ProfMTH's vids on bible blunders?
muuminlaakso 2 years ago
Hi muuminlaakso,
One can reconcile this contradiction, but to do so, one must avoid the literal translation of the words. Don't christians believe the bible is inspired? If so, then shouldn't the words be accurate? Additionally, does it make sense that god would move their souls back into their bodies, especially when most have already decomposed?
Take care,
Steve
crazypills2 2 years ago
Hi Steve,
Well, here we open the can of worm referred to as the supernatural. How can we apply reason to it? As long as you can bridge a potential contradiction with some magic (and putting flesh back on skeletons should be a piece of cake for a god busy with Armageddon, i.e. killing billion of people), so I still do not deem this to be a strong contradiction due to a gap left for magic. Contradictions like pi = 3 or circumcision bad bad and good good according to St. Peter are more glaring.
muuminlaakso 2 years ago
Steve the reason I was answering it from a premillenial viewpoint is because your video doesn't even make sense from that perspective.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Rich,
Does my video really not make sense from a premillennial perspective? Is it really more logical that god would take the souls that were already with him in heaven and move them back into a body that he has 'raised' when most would have already decomposed?
If you take the words literally, then the dead will rise, not just the bodies. Additionally, the phrase "And so we will be with the Lord forever" implies that the dead were not already with the Lord.
crazypills2 2 years ago
No Steve, it does NOT make any sense. You are really stretching in your desperate attempt to demonstrate what you want to be a contradiction in scripture.
1. What makes you think the bodies He would put them in would still be decomposed. It is believed they are glorified bodies. Yet by your very asking of such a question, you make it hard to take you seriously.
2. If you take words literally Jesus can be found in a bakery. Is He a loaf of Wonder bread or Roman Meal?
No such implication!
Blogrich55 2 years ago
"What makes you think the bodies He would put them in would still be decomposed. It is believed they are glorified bodies." - Rich
That's exactly my point. It's a new, glorified body, so there is no resurrection of the body. This can only mean a resurrection of the soul.
And, your analogy regarding the bread of life is quite erroneous. That is obviously not to be taken literally. Nice try though.
crazypills2 2 years ago
If that is exactly your point, Steve, it is a poor one. The term glorified body would not necessarily mean or imply new or different body. This is an assumption on your part. The Bible says we are new creatures in Christ and doesn't mean different in the sense you do. When the corruptible puts on immortality,it itself is transformed. If this were NOT the case why would it even bother to say glorified oody? Why not different or new? A new body is not a resurrected body but a different body.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
I have a response to your foolish attempt to find a contradiction in the Bible:
These are two different aspects of the final things or eschatology. Your attempt to present them as two conflicting views is dishonest and childish. You are comparing apples and oranges.
And I hereby am announcing myi disbelief that you were EVER a preacher! This is BASIC and SIMPLE. Even if you don't believe the Bible only a very thick person would see a contradiction here. Sorry to be so blunt Steve.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Rich,
Are you telling me that when it says the dead in Christ shall rise, it doesn't mean it? The dead won't rise, but only their bodies? And, it's not even their bodies that are raised, but it's a new, spiritual body? Wait, why do they even need a body, as they have already been in heaven? This is all nonsense.
Once again, you have demonstrated that your only tools are rhetoric and insults.
Maybe you can also say that I'm lying about having 2 kids :-)
crazypills2 2 years ago
#1. Actually Steve, I do. I am sorry, sir, but I sincerely doubt just about everything you have said about yourself. Yet how would I know for sure?
I will tell you what most premill fundamentalists mean. As you should know if you ever were one, they believe the soul or spirit goes immediately to be with God upon death to wait in heaven for the resurrection. Only the shell is in the ground or grave. They do not believe a person IS their body but dwells in a body while alive. The body raised is
Blogrich55 2 years ago
#2. Glorified, some say without blood, which they compare to the resurrected body of Christ. They believe these bodies are going to live in a thousand year kingdom ruled by Christ literally from the throne of David in Jerusalem.
Since a person is NOT his body but only a dweller in it, to have a new body would not be a contradiction at all. It would still be their body because it belongs to them. However, they believe it will be their original transformed and restored if and glorified.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Rich,
Why do you present the argument of a premillennialist when you're a preterist? I thought calvinists weren't supposed to be inconsistent. Monty would be so disappointed in you :-)
With premillennialism, amillennialism, postmillennialism, no millennialism, and preterism, aren't you being disingenuous when stating that the interpretation of these passages is obvious?
crazypills2 2 years ago
I will answer your question if you will answer mine:
Why do you keep bringing up Monty? Are you suggesting I am not capable of thinking independently for myself?
If this is what you are hinting at, why ask me anything? Why not go ask Monty if you want to know my opinion?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Rich,
The reason I bring up Monty is because you idolize him, and have changed your tactics to be like his. I have yet to determine why you would want to be like him, as I have provide evidence to you that he is a habitual liar.
crazypills2 2 years ago
Rich,
As I understand it, you are accusing me of lying about the following things:
1) I have two children
2) I preached (by the way, I never said I was a head pastor)
3) I was in the faith for 30 years
If I demonstrate that your accusations are false, does that make you a slanderer? And if you are shown to be a slanderer, does this mean you aren't elect?
crazypills2 2 years ago
As I understand it you evidently don't know the difference between a person having honest doubt and a slandering you. I guess you really are that obtuse.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
blogr_I've cataloged hundreds of errors and contradictions in the filthy Bible...As a former believer, I know firsthand the deceptions and lies you tell yourself to not see or acknowledge them.
216trixie 2 years ago
trixie, the very fact that you refer to God's holy word as filthy tells a lot. You must forgive my doubts as to the genuine nature of your former Christian condition. You were probably self deluded. Now you are thinking you were an ex Christian. Many have made this claim who were formerly Mormons, JWs, or some other cult or kooky fringe member. I am not trying to judge you or you alleged former experience.Actually I would welcome a personal message about your former profession of faith. Please?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Why do you continue to insult me and falsely accuse me of not having an argument? This is NOT a contradiction Steve. Maybe to someone who claims they were once a holy roller preacher but not to an ordinary thinking adult.
You are NOT blocked. At least, I have tried my best to unlblock you. If you like, I will waist time and show why this is NOT a contradiction. Not that you probably ever really were a holy roller preacher mind you, but for since you say you were...
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Rich,
If you have an argument, present it. If not, then admit it.
crazypills2 2 years ago
Thanks CP- always enjoy your videos. Great music choice, too. I suppose the obvious way (i.e., with about 2 minutes thought lol) to reconcile these is to say the Lord is in the ground. Why not- Samuel was when the witch of Endor raised him?
twinnumber3 2 years ago
Thanks PaganSteve
crazypills2 2 years ago
pretty good, but will they argue that "to be with christ" is just a guarantee for a place in heaven?
anyway, bible says jesus is late for 2000 years already, but he should be god :)
dreamy2 2 years ago
Dreamy2 the Bible doesn't say that at all. It is the crackpots like Hal Lyndsy and John Hagee who say that garbage. Jesus said He was returning before His generation had passed away. He had to return by 73 AD. Surprise surprise--
He returned in judgement through the Roman soldiers who burned Jerusalem to the ground, stopped animal sacrafice, destroyed their geneologies, etc...
Check out the OT instances of Jehovah coming in vengeance against Isreal. Always through other nations. Same here.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
dreamy2,
One can interpret it that way, but to do so, you must reject taking scripture literally. Paul was specific when he said that being dead resulted in being with the Lord.
crazypills2 2 years ago
Yes and as you well know if you really were a holy roller preacher Steve, death means the soul or spirit goes to be with God immediately. The promise of the ressurection as addressed in the other verses quoted is the hope that the body will one day be raised in a glorified state and reunited with the soul or spirit. There is NO LOGICAL problem because they are talking about two different things.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Rich,
The soul goes to heaven with no body? What does the soul do and what is its limitation? I guess it doesn't need a body, right?
Then, the body is raised from the grave, but it's not the original body at all, but a new body? Why is the old body raised if it's not the same body? Then it's reunited with the soul? For what purpose?
This sounds like two different views of death that you are trying to make fit together. The problem is that they make no logical sense when this is done.
crazypills2 2 years ago
Steve, it is hard to take you seriously on this video. You really can't be this dense. If you were I'd feel sorry for you. Please present a real chhallange. ho ho ho hum.ROFLOL
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Rich,
Once again, you present no argument, just insults. This is very common for you. Did you and Monty learn that from Clark? :-)
What is the purpose of the new body Rich? And, why does the soul/spirit need it when it got along just fine without it it while in heaven?
I notice that you spend a lot of time ROFLOL instead of defending your argument. Are you sure you're not a holy roller? :-)
crazypills2 2 years ago
Comment removed
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Steve, I find no reason to argue with something as naive and simplistic as this nonsense. It is actually beneath your usually challenging and infuriating attacks on the faith. What is there to answer?
I don't think anyone will be impressed with your silly and pointless polemic or the goofy questions you raise. You open an entire can of eschatological worms there are hundreds of volumes on. Would it make you feel better if I did a video response?
Jejune twaddle merits no refutation just a sigh.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
BTW how do you notice any failure to defend my argument on the subject Steve? I have not given one yet. I was a holy roller for 22 years as you well know.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Rich,
Why do you continue to comment without an argument? You always make it sound like you have one without ever producing one. It is apparent that this is your MO.
I encourage you to make a video explaining this contradiction. Although I won't be able to comment on it (since you have blocked me), I will still accept it as a response to my video.
crazypills2 2 years ago
If something doesn't make sense, don't pretend that it does. <3
Iced1992 2 years ago
Words I live by Iced1992.
crazypills2 2 years ago
Christians are damn flesh-eating zombie bastards!!!
TheCurtisHouse31 2 years ago
C'mon Steve! You CAN'T be THAT obtuse! You SAY you used to be a holy roller preacher and you don't know the answer to this?? PUH-LEEZ!
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Rich,
I've heard several attempts to reconcile this problem. However, all fall apart when looked through the eyes of logic.
However, if you have a good argument, please share.
crazypills2 2 years ago
I am SO glad to see the crazy pills start again. Makes me roflmao every time I see it.
Great video. I hadn't really thought about this before.
emeralds222 2 years ago
emeralds222,
I added the clip for you....
crazypills2 2 years ago
So dead christians will come back as zombies?
abaddon5 2 years ago
To be near "God" and be out of ur body is to meditate..
kaxitaksi 2 years ago
Great Vid! 5 star!
jasason10 2 years ago
Thanks for your support jasason10
crazypills2 2 years ago
Maybe Paul just misremembered it....lol Great music choice.
Antichryst666 2 years ago
Thanks Antichryst666...it's a great song.
crazypills2 2 years ago
My daughter was married in Paraguay and this song played at her wedding. Hearing it in your video has brought back a flood of memories of my time spent there. 5 stars for that alone.
dunwrkn4 2 years ago
I'll take 5 stars anyway I can get them :-)
crazypills2 2 years ago
If you cross your eyes, stick out your tongue, pat your head, jump on one foot and recite these verses, they make sense. That's because you're so freaking distracted by all the activity....
the trick they actually use in the churches though, is to have *bible studies*. This is where you pull verses out of different books and line them up until they DO make sense. But only if you don't ask any questions....
8journey8 2 years ago
8journey8,
Yes, when one begins to critically look at the bible, it's illusion of consistency shatters.
crazypills2 2 years ago
They go to the Great Shopping Mall in the Sky.
otherether 2 years ago 3
otherether,
So you're saying god is a woman?
crazypills2 2 years ago
Funny. No. I think men shop at malls, too. I was saying something silly to fit the notion of some beliefs.
otherether 2 years ago
they go into the ground and deompose like the rest of us immortal carbon-based wads of flesh.
soundscapenyc 2 years ago 5
I think you're right soundscapenyc.
crazypills2 2 years ago