Paradise: in Heaven or on Earth?

by artful 35 Replies latest watchtower bible

JosephMalik

Joseph, I know that some like to cite Acts 1:11 as "iron clad" proof that Jesus would return to Earth in the flesh: however, it could also be argued in light of other scriptures that refer to Christians reaching out for heavenly "citizenship", that Jesus "throne" is located in heaven etc. that Acts 1:1 could be understood to mean that Jesus return would be in Spirit with some sort physical manifestation ("as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.").
Artful,
The reason that I use this verse so much is because it cannot be refuted or altered to mean something else regardless what you think Acts 1:1 means. And Acts 1:1 does not say what you do does it? No, not even close. Stay with the material. Acts 1:11 are not our Lords words which can sometimes be called parables and open to interpretation, but a pure simple direct statement of truth uttered by the men in white robes the credentials of which cannot be questioned. It is a foundation text for the future coming of Christ.
Artful said: Not to get into a discussion on the return of Christ...my point is that by extracting our own "proof" scriptures and then insisting that our view is correct when presented with scriptural evidence that suggests a contrary view (when interpreted differently than we do), we are in danger of being as dogmatic as the WTS.
None-sense. This kind of thinking has no place in a discussion such as this. Some people get burned and very visibly sure and the weakness of an argument hits you in the face at times, yes, but we cannot and should not accuse anyone of being dogmatic. We should reveal such biased thinking by the proofs offered or even by those not supplied and not by accusations such as this.
Artful said: Maybe, this paradise issue could be considered in the same way that you suggested regarding "after the 1000 years"...when you wrote "Trying to speculate beyond that is a waste of time". In other words, these "speculation" points make for some interesting discussions, but are in no way strong enough to be considered "basic scriptural truths".
The paradise issue is a doctrine of Christ. It was uttered as truth, a fact from which the thief could take comfort. It should be more than considered. It should be understood by all claiming to be disciples of the one that taught this truth in the first place.
Joseph
artful

Joseph wrote:
"we cannot and should not accuse anyone of being dogmatic. We should reveal such biased thinking by the proofs offered or even by those not supplied and not by accusations such as this."
Please accept my apology. I assure you that it was not my intention to insult your reasoning by using the word dogmatic (by which I merely suggest that you were asserting your beliefs in such a manner as to "state them as an established tenet" - I did not mean to imply that your reasoning has no adequate grounds). However, considering the scriptural ambiguity on whether "paradise" would be located in heaven or earth, to accuse others of supporting "antichrist" doctrine based on your scriptural interpretation (that paradise will be on earth and that Jesus would return in flesh) seemed to me to be dogmatic.
Joseph wrote:
"The paradise issue is a doctrine of Christ. It was uttered as truth, a fact from which the thief could take comfort. It should be more than considered. It should be understood by all claiming to be disciples of the one that taught this truth in the first place."
I don't dispute that "paradise" is a doctrine of Christ, and I would most assuredly like to share your certainty of belief as to its location. However, based on the scriptural evidence I have considered so far, there seems to be no "undeniable" proof of where it will be. I would suggest that initially the Jews and disciples of Christ were looking for a restoration of paradise to the earth, and as time went on Paul and John (among others) seemed to point to a heavenly citizenship, and therfore my leanings are toward the heavenly (as we are discussing in another thread) -
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=42689&site=3
Artful
JosephMalik

Paul and John (among others) seemed to point to a heavenly citizenship, and therfore my leanings are toward the heavenly (as we are discussing in another thread) -
Artful,
Seem? Paul and John were discussing our citizenship in a kingdom or paradise well into the future and they looked to where Chirst was waiting. This discussion is about where this paradise will be AT THE TIME of its reality. The verses you are using are not even in context with this discussion.
Joseph
Edited by - JosephMalik on 2 January 2003 16:54:5
artful

Joseph: I agree that the discussion is about where this paradise will be "at the time of its reality", but rather than repeat our discussion about what Paul and John said here, I would suggest that we continue this at the other post that I referenced:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=42689&site=3
Thanks
Artful
UnDisfellowshipped

Joseph,
I haven't read all the posts here, but have you explained why Jesus told the thief that he would be with Jesus in Paradise today?
Please explain this IF Paradise is on Earth.
UnDisfellowshipped

Also, you said that these Verses are talking about Paradise on Earth:
2nd Corinthians 12:1: It is doubtless not profitable for me to boast. For I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.
2nd Corinthians 12:2: I know a man in Christ, fourteen years ago (whether in the body, I don't know, or whether out of the body, I don't know; God knows), such a one caught up into the third heaven.
2nd Corinthians 12:3: I know such a man (whether in the body, or outside of the body, I don't know; God knows),
2nd Corinthians 12:4: how he was caught up into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
2nd Corinthians 12:5: On behalf of such a one I will boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, except in my weaknesses.
Please explain then why Paul didn't know whether he went to Paradise in his body or out of his body.
Also, it says he was "caught up into Paradise".
That sounds a lot like the phrase used in this Scripture:
1st Thessalonians 4:16: For the Lord Himself will descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with God's trumpet. The dead in Christ will rise first,
1st Thessalonians 4:17: then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. So we will be with the Lord forever.
UnDisfellowshipped

Not that this is super important, because, as long as I am with the Lord Jesus, it won't matter where I am at.
JosephMalik

I haven't read all the posts here, but have you explained why Jesus told the thief that he would be with Jesus in Paradise today?
Undisfellowshipped,
There was no need. It is simply a matter of interpretation, how we read the text, and how we understand prophecy. Jesus did not go to Paradise that day. He went to hell for three days. So Jesus simply assured the thief that day that he would be in this Paradise with Him. This was a great revelation since by scriptural standards embodied in the Law Covenant this thief had no hope. And since this Paradise was still thousands of years away the thief and everyone else that died would have to wait for it just as we are still doing.
Joseph
JosephMalik

Also, you said that these Verses are talking about Paradise on Earth:
2nd Corinthians 12:1: It is doubtless not profitable for me to boast. For I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. 2nd Corinthians 12:2: I know a man in Christ, fourteen years ago (whether in the body, I don't know, or whether out of the body, I don't know; God knows), such a one caught up into the third heaven. 2nd Corinthians 12:3: I know such a man (whether in the body, or outside of the body, I don't know; God knows), 2nd Corinthians 12:4: how he was caught up into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
Undisfellowshipped,
I explained all this already. Paul often used the word heaven which expresses authority and is also used in place of the word governments as in Col 1:15. Paul experienced one heaven in his life the Law Covenant for which he killed Christians. Paul also experience a second heaven during his life which was the Law of Rome for which he claimed citizenship. Now in vision Paul experiences and describes a third heaven in his life, Paradise that he was not permitted to describe in detail. All three of these heavens are here on earth. But this Paradise, this revelation and vision this third heaven was future. It was a vision of the kingdom in which our Lord will rule and in which the thief would also be raised to life.
Undisfellowshipped said: Please explain then why Paul didn't know whether he went to Paradise in his body or out of his body.
There is nothing to explain. It was a vision or revelation with no sensory point of reference. He had an audible reference but no physical one.

Undisfellowshipped said: That sounds a lot like the phrase used in this Scripture:
1st Thessalonians 4:16: For the Lord Himself will descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with God's trumpet. The dead in Christ will rise first, 1st Thessalonians 4:17: then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught uptogether with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. So we will be with the Lord forever.
Yes it seem so at least partly. But these dead in Christ (angels actually as they are messengers of the covenant) simply join our Lord on His way down here to rule. Not unlike the way the physical and human body of Jesus was taken up is it? Only the direction is now back to earth.
:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
Are you suggesting that this is not possible or true? It may be strange to us like walking on water is strange and hardly believeable but this does not make it impossible or improbable does it? This return of our Lord was foretold by Him like this:
:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, [since they were caught up in the clouds] then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
What makes so many people think that our Lord will come down to rule with non-human beings is a mystery. The word angels does not of itself identify the Nature of such angels. No! It can just as well be transtaled messengers and often is. Context determines what is meant and we know from scripture that and our Lord will rule with human and not spirit Beings. They would be human beings, and followers of His like the Apostles that come in the clouds together with Him.
Matthew 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
No spirit creatures involved at all is there? Does anyone see any that I missed?
Joseph
Edited by - JosephMalik on 6 January 2003 17:30:10
artful

Joseph: I think the reason why as you say "so many people think that our Lord will come down to rule with non-human beings" is scriptures like the ones below which seem to suggest a change from a physical (natural) body to a spiritual one:
1Cor 15:
42So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"[5] ; the last Adam, a lifegiving spirit. 46The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. 47The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. 48As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear the likeness of the man from heaven.
1 Pet 3:18 For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, in order that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit
Artful

Paradise: in Heaven or on Earth?

Share this