Andy Anderson on the "Overcomers"

[OBW]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Tell that to Martin Luther when you see him. The entire protestant reformation was started over the matter of selling indulgences. Granted, that could be the straw that broke the camel's back, or it could be merely a symptom of the real disease, maybe it just made the best copy for the journalists and historians. You cannot refute this teaching if you don't know what happens when people die.

That is somewhat incorrect. I believe that you could refute them by showing that no one but yourself is responsible for your destiny. It cannot be bought by anyone, including yourself. And once you are dead, it is over.

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

2nd, again you didn't read the posts. Jesus told Nicodemus that to be a teacher in Israel you have to know, at the very least the things of this earth, but the top standard is Jesus who also knows the things of heaven. Being able to explain these things is a testimony that Jesus is Lord and that He has ascended into heaven and descended from heaven.

This fails the context test. I think that you will find that this cannot be construed as requiring that we figure every thing out that we could possibly set our minds to.

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

3rd, Paul said 1Cor 15:35 "But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?" Now these are those who deny the resurrection. You cannot preach the gospel if you cannot handle these challenges. It is not just about you and your walk, it is about helping new ones with any and all concerns they have.

Not compelling. Since the people of Corinth did not actually see Jesus, before or after resurrection, look at the account given and tell me that you know exactly what it is that Paul has described.

But more importantly, does Paul answer because it was important to know, or to deal with funny teachings coming from others (some that you might be labeling as "false teachers" in the other thread). I read the account Paul gives and know that it is not simply physical. It is spiritual. But not simply spiritual. It was touchable.

And when Paul was done, he probably hoped that they could get back to living this life.

In any case, the fact that there is a small bit on it does not mean that we have a need to figure it out beyond what was recorded.

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

So let's see, this was important to Martin Luther, Jesus and Paul. But not important to OBW. Who to listen to?

And the answer is that you have misrepresented what I am saying. My point is that going into deeper details than what is simply recorded in scripture does not have any impact on your present life (unless realizing that there is a future life causes you to rethink).

But the present life is the only thing that will impact your future life. And that only the realm of "in" or "out" and, if in, in the realm of "reward." The body you get is the body you get. Knowing about it in details beyond what is told fairly simply and in few words is, at best, speculative. In other words, it is not actually knowing. It is just guessing. And if you are right or wrong will not affect whether or not it is your experience at that time.

What do you achieve beyond claiming some knowledge that is, at best, tenuous? And what benefit is it with respect to the Kingdom? Worrying about my body after the resurrection is a waste of my time. It will be what it will be. And the little we are told would appear to be enough as far as God was/is concerned.

Your mocking question is not actually asked by any of those people. They do not conclude that you need to go beyond what is recorded.

Jesus did not say that we should know everything. He didn't even say that the teachers of the law should know everything. But he did suggest that the point he was making in John 3 should have been understood, or at least something on his radar to think about. At least for the teachers.

Martin Luther did not need to know where we go when we die to conclude that faith is the only thing that saves us. And that once dead, there is no more opportunity for faith. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus should have settled that.

Paul set out to deal with some claiming there is no resurrection. And going along with that was a question about what kind of body we would get assuming there is a resurrection. Paul's answer was that it is not simply a reconstituted physical body. It is also spiritual. Like the one Jesus got. And that seemed to be enough. Got them over their problems.

So which one of these needed to explain the difference in paradise and heaven? And if we "get to be with Jesus" upon death, as you mentioned in a prior post, and He is said to be in "heaven," then do we not "go to heaven"? What else do we need?

But the real question that I keep asking and you have not answered is this: If you are right/wrong, what does it do to your theology? To your salvation? To your eternal destiny? The only thing affected will be your theology. And right theology is not required. Just being right with God. That will dictate everything.

And don't you dare come back and say that just because I said getting theology right is not the important thing that I am saying that it really doesn't matter what you believe. I shouldn't have to say that, but the little question about Martin Luther, Jesus, and Paul would suggest that I need to. When I speak of theology in this post, I am referring to the many things which are not the core of the faith. Things that do not decide whether one is a believer in Christ or just in some good teachings. Many believers in Christ do not buy into dispensational theology. That does not affect their destiny. Some baptize by sprinkling. It does not reduce their salvation. There may be a right and a wrong, but getting it right is not central to the Kingdom life.

And there are a bunch of theoretical theologians somewhere that have wondered how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Deep stuff. There might be enough information in the scriptures to at least postulate an answer. But it is completely off the reservation to think about it. The question(s) about what happens after our death is(are) not totally irrelevant. But the important things are broad and are covered fairly clearly. More details than are given becomes speculative, at best. At some point, the best answer is to say "it doesn't matter. It is distracting us from what does matter." You don't "get ready" for His return by studying the difference in heaven and paradise or filling in more details on our resurrected body. ("Will be able to fly? To just be wherever we want?" Does it really matter? Is that more important that what is actually recorded in the scripture?)

You may not like it, but to me, the level to which the search for details not provided is in the "it doesn't matter" category. And it does not fly in the face of what Jesus said to Nicodemus, or Paul said to the Corinthians. How Martin Luther went about trying to argue against indulgences is really not important. Funny thing is that it was never decided. The discussion did not happen. He was simply rejected by Rome and taken under the wings of the German government. Politics was the decider. The issue was not discussed. Salvation by faith was.