Where Does It Say In The Bible That You Go Directly To Heaven When You Die?

[genuineoriginal]

Physical death is separation of body and soul/spirit.

Physical death is the separation of the spirit from the body - resulting in the death of the soul.

Spiritual death is separation of man from God.

Nope, Spiritual death is a doctrine of men that is not taught by the Bible.

Was Adam separated from God the day he ate of the Tree? Yes. Therefore, he died, spiritually.

Adam was separated from God before, during, and after he ate from the tree, therefore there is no such thing as spiritual death.

 

[Derf]

Good post, eleos. I'm not in total agreement, but I like the way you've given your take on the subject and scripture to back it up. Keep up the good work!

here are some of my thoughts:

***
Yes it is dangerous. Following are things to be considered.

The truth of the State of the Dean IS most important here are some reasons why and some things to think about.

I'm curious about why you think it is dangerous. Usually "danger" has something to do with potential loss of life or some part of life (like running a table saw is dangerous because you might lose a hand). If someone thinks that there is a spiritual life that is separate from our physical life, how would that CAUSE a loss of life?


I didn't get what you meant by this:

These four people are four souls.

Jesus calls death "sleep." It is a state of total unconsciousness.

9. Jesus called the unconscious state of the dead "sleep" in John 11:11-14. How long will they sleep?
"So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep." Job 14:12.

I think you're begging the question by using this verse. Jesus called something "sleep" and also called it "death", but He didn't define it as a state of unconsciousness, except to call it "sleep" (which we recognize as mostly an unconscious state. Your Job passage defines it pretty well, though.

The righteous will be raised to life and given immortality at Jesus' second coming.

10. What happens to the righteous dead at the second coming of Christ?

"Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." Revelation 22:12. "The Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, ... and the dead in Christ shall rise ... and so shall we ever be with the Lord." 1 Thessalonians 4:16, 17. "We shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, ... and the dead shall be raised incorruptible. ... For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality." 1 Corinthians 15:51-53.
Answer: They will be rewarded. They will be raised, given immortal bodies, and caught up to meet the Lord in the air. There would be no purpose in a resurrection if people were taken to heaven at death.

This is possibly contradictory to the idea of the dead not waking up until the heavens pass away. In other words, Job 14:12 can't be talking about ALL dead people, if SOME dead people will arise before the heavens pass away.

The devil's first lie to Eve was "You won't die" - a statement completely contrary to all Scripture.

11. What was the devil's first lie?

"And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die." Genesis 3:4. "That old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan." Revelation 12:9.

Answer: Satan told Eve that sin would not bring death. "Ye shall not surely die," he said.

Those who believe the dead are alive become easy targets for the devil's deceptions.

12. Why did the devil lie to Eve about death? Could this subject be more important than many think?

Answer: It is one of the cornerstones of the devil's kingdom. He has worked powerful miracles down through the ages through people who claim to receive their power from the spirits of the dead. (Examples: Magicians of Egypt Exodus 7:11, Woman of Endor 1 Samuel 28:3-25, Sorcerers Daniel 2:2, A certain damsel Acts 16:16-18.)

I think this is the "danger" you mentioned above. But it someone is going to spend life in hell rather than dying, I don't really see that as a perceived benefit for the "not die" believers. As our mothers always reminded us, "Two wrongs don't make a right", but if the dead ARE still conscious, but they not able to affect those still alive, then the "danger" doesn't' seem as great.

Posing as Jesus' Disciples
Posing as godly loved ones who have died, saintly clergymen who are now dead, Bible prophets, or even the apostles or disciples of Christ (2 Corinthians 11:13), Satan and his angels will deceive billions. Those who believe the dead are alive, in any form, will most assuredly be deceived.

I have a hard time believing that anyone who believes that will "most assuredly" be deceived. Our best defense against deception is not believing in a particular doctrine, but believing that the bible represents God's truth and can be used as a standard to measure any proposition. It works whether we believe in spirits of the departed being conscious or not, for surely, even if we believe that the departed are NOT conscious, we still believe in spirits (angels and demons) that could lead us astray, not to mention live persons, as Paul stated in Gal 1:8.

The elect will not be deceived, because they firmly reject everything that is contrary to Scripture.

14. Why will God's people not be deceived?

"They received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." Acts 17:11. "If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isaiah 8:20.

Answer: God's people will know from their earnest study of His book that the dead are dead, not alive. Spirits of the dead do not exist. Therefore, God's people will reject all miracle workers and teachers who claim to receive special "light" or work miracles by contacting the spirits of the dead. And God's people will likewise reject as dangerous and false all teachings that claim the dead are alive in any form, anywhere.

Now you've just said that anyone who doesn't agree with you (assuming you count yourself as one of God's people) is not one of God's people. That's dangerous ground, too, you know.

 

[way 2 go]

You are mistaken.
Adam did not "spiritually die" on the day he ate from the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Adam did die on the day he ate from the tree
Just like God said he would, died spiritually.

Gen 2:17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

it so obvious the bible teaches spiritual death


Luk 15:24 For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.’ And they began to celebrate.

Isa 59:2 but your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden his face from you so that he does not hear.

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Rom 7:9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died.

 

[Lon]

I don't know for sure, but I haven't found anything that says those in heaven are looking down on us.

In the same way, those in the place of the dead, before the cross, were spared the knowledge of the goings on in this world. There will be no more worry....how can that be if we see our loved ones suffering here on earth. So far, the two verses you and Dan have offered haven't convinced me.

1 John 3:2 would effect this btw. I still believe 'cloud of witnesses' signifies clearly they are seeing because that is what 'witness' means ("seeing"). Paul's whole argument is about running 'because' we are seen.

Moreover, I believe it proves the point that we do not lie dormant in the earth, that we are aware, along the query of the thread so more directly why so late a post. I think it definitively settles this thread issue. It does at least, for me. I firmly believe this is Paul's point and that it proves life in His presence. :e4e: -Lon

 

[Danoh]

Both rather than either limitation, imho.

Nope. GD is right.

I don't think the "witnesses" there are referring to their looking down, but of their being examples of faith....their testimonies, as it were. Like Abel...

Hebrews 11:4
By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.​

Off the top of my head...

The word "witness" can refer to someone who is observing or has observed an event or events;

Or, to someone's communicating to another what they are observing or have observed;

Or, to a person, place, thing, or event that is a witness or an evidence of something.

And in that passage in Hebrews 12:1, it is this third sense that is being referred to, Lon.

In what sense is that great cloud of witnesses - a great cloud of witnesses?

And of what?

The writer of Hebrews is reminding said Hebrews of how that said great number witnesses having faithfully endured all that they had endured throughout the centuries - only to not receive the promise - serves as an evidence (exactly what Hebrews 11 began with) that God is not yet done with all He has set out to accomplish before He finally makes said promise a reality to all to whom it is His purpose to both promise and deliver, said promise to.

Note how chapter 11 ends...

Hebrews 11:37 They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented; 11:38 (Of whom the world was not worthy: ) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. 11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: 11:40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

In other words, during their own trials, each generation had looked back at the witness of faith in enduring of the prior generation.

Chapter 12 continues on that theme...

Hebrews 12:1 Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,

During their own sufferings, the Hebrews are to look back to that good confession of faith towards God before men that prior generations had had, no matter what had come their way...

James comes to.mind right about now - he writes something similar...

James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. 1:2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations; 1:3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience. 1:4 But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

Not only that, but the writer of Hebrews continues on the same thought he had continued into in 12: 1, this time adding to that the Lord's Own example of a good confession of faith towards God before men during His sufferings...

12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God. 12:3 For consider him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.

This also comes to mind, just now - how that just like "Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession; 1 Tim. 6:13, the Hebrews are being encouraged to do likewise - that great cloud of witnesses (who had witnessed a good confession of faith towards God before men, no matter what had come their way) a source of encouragement to said Hebrews.

In fact, this is a common theme throughout the Scripture...

Why?

Towards what intent?

Romans 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

Case in point, once more...

Acts 4:18 And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus. 4:19 But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. 4:20 For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.

Just a matter of time in the Word, Lon.

Then, a right context will begin to set off memory of the relevant passages.

Case in point...

John 2:22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

Rom. 5: 6-8.

 

[Lon]

Nope. GD is right.

Nope. Else the 'witnesses' wouldn't be. So either 'both' OR I was right alone. It 'can' include your interpretation but MUST include mine. The passage doesn't allow for any rogue tangent views.

Off the top of my head...

The word "witness" can refer to someone who is observing or has observed an event or events;

Nope. Hebrews 11 ALREADY told you who the witnesses were.... :sigh:

 

[Danoh]

Nope. Else the 'witnesses' wouldn't be. So either 'both' OR I was right alone. It 'can' include your interpretation but MUST include mine. The passage doesn't allow for any rogue tangent views.



Nope. Hebrews 11 ALREADY told you who the witnesses were.... :sigh:

Prove it through Scripture.

Oh wait, you're a Calvinist.

:chuckle:

Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[Lon]

Prove it through Scripture.

Oh wait, you're a Calvinist.

:chuckle:

Rom. 5:6-8.

Proof is 'simply' this: No chapter division is inspired. There IS no division between chapter 11 and 12. It is its own proof, hence: "since then we have this huge cloud of witnesses..." :think:


Try not to drag anything of our Lord through areas where these pearls don't belong. I don't care about your or my pride. I care about properly handling the Word. You've a poor showing here and tried your first attempt with lame and snarky. Up your game and leave your pride at the door.
These ARE the witnesses. Paul says it exactly in this manner, not your supposed 'only' way. In the spirit of the matter, I can acquiesce it can include it, as I already stated. That it'd be limited to your eisegesis (?Matthew 6:7 Ecclesiastes 5:7;6:11.) :nono: One is implicit in the text, the other, an idea that shores up a doctrine. It isn't there.

 

[musterion]

Does it matter either way?

 

[Danoh]

Does it matter either way?

Nope.

Not this pagan, RCC, Casper the friendly ghost, dead saints as eye witnesses supposedly ever hovering about, assertion of his - which he failed to prove through Scripture.

:chuckle:

______________

And not to worry, Lon, I appreciate anyone's being forthright with me.

I prefer it over one's brown nosing me.

Always.

In short, pride has nothing to do with my disagreement with you on one thing, or another.

I disagree with you, Lon, where you fail to prove an assertion through Scripture.

The rest is a rib of what I perceive is your error - your obvious reading into a thing.

But you're a Calvinist, after all.

:chuckle:

Rom. 5: 6-8.

 

[musterion]

What I mean is, take your pick: unconscious/soul sleep until bodily resurrection, or consciously (awake and aware) present with the Lord in glory from the first second after physical death. For the believer, what does it matter either way? You're already in Christ and bound for glory while yet in this flesh, likewise whether asleep in the ground for awhile or aware of it immediately.

This is one controversy I have never understood wasting time arguing over.

 

[Lon]

Nope.

Yes, Musterion, it does matter. Whatever scripture says, that's what I believe.

Not this pagan, RCC, Casper the friendly ghost, dead saints as eye witnesses supposedly ever hovering about, assertion of his - which he failed to prove through Scripture.

:chuckle:

______________

And not to worry, Lon, I appreciate anyone's being forthright with me.

I prefer it over one's brown nosing me.

Always.

In short, pride has nothing to do with my disagreement with you on one thing, or another.

I disagree with you, Lon, where you fail to prove an assertion through Scripture.

The rest is a rib of what I perceive is your error - your obvious reading into a thing.

But you're a Calvinist, after all.

:chuckle:

Rom. 5: 6-8.

Disagree on sustainable scriptural premises, and again against the other. These witnesses are a 'huge cloud.' It speaks for itself. ONLY a preconceived notion would miss these clear indicators in scripture. I'm NOT the one with an agenda. Calvinism doesn't care which is which BUT for what scripture says.

 

[Danoh]

Yes, Musterion, it does matter. Whatever scripture says, that's what I believe.




Disagree on sustainable scriptural premises, and again against the other. These witnesses are a 'huge cloud.' It speaks for itself. ONLY a preconceived notion would miss these clear indicators in scripture. I'm NOT the one with an agenda. Calvinism doesn't care which is which BUT for what scripture says.

Again, you failed to prove Scripturally, that your assertion is nothing more than that: your assertion.

While your use of the phrases "preconceived notion" and "an agenda" is very impoverished.

As if either is not only not always the reality, but only a negative, and only the other guy's reality.

Fact is, everyone has "an agenda."

In fact, countless agendas...all day long, as to all sorts of things, throughout one's every day.

The question is then, what any particular agenda might be; whether it is well-intentioned or not; unintended or not; wise or not; well-informed or not; what standard of measurement is being applied when attempting to determine what said agenda is, etc.

Likewise with the phrase "preconceived notion."

We all form them constantly, and throughout our everyday, and on a million things.

And, I've learned too much in life and from far too many a supposed enemy to allow myself to simply comparmentalize such things into an either all out black, or and all out white.

Luke 15:2 And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.

Rom. 5: 6-8.

 

[Lon]

Again, you failed to prove Scripturally, that your assertion is nothing more than that: your assertion.

This is going to hurt: ONLY for the unstudied, Danoh. You are frankly ignorant of every commentary given out there. EVERY one of them. Yep. You came in with a snarky 'nope' as if "Danoh" is some great magnificent scholar able to put them all to shame with his outrageous handling of God's Word as if he is the new pope of all popes. lain: Guess again pal. You are simply posturing and emoting beyond your pay grade, and frankly, and sadly, it shows. I'm not at all worked up over your postulations and declarations. You just aren't this big of a man nor have the prowess, frankly. You proved that by posting in the blind in pure ignorance. You HAVEN'T studied this matter out and it shows. I've been through Hebrews a good number of times. While I can (graciously even as I have already done) acquiesce a bit of your interpretation as allowable YET surmised, not plain from the text as mine is, you ineptly think it was your deduction. INDUCTIVELY, all men point to the interpretation that I've laid out: These were the men "witnesses" given in chapter 11. Sorry, it is just this clear and you lose.

While your use of the phrases "preconceived notion" and "an agenda" is very impoverished.

:chuckle: I have a WEALTH of scholars at my disposal. NONE of them say what you've said. Several display a bit of your thoughts but not one of them contradicts that the witnesses are found in chapter 11. That is YOUR weak interpretation DEDUCED from a theological bent NOT from the text. You are frankly, uneducated over the matter.

As if either is not only not always the reality, but only a negative, and only the other guy's reality.

Here is a novel idea, pick up a couple of commentaries and AT LEAST see if anybody else agrees with you AND disagrees with my take (none do). That way, you AT LEAST know how hard to push your poor showing. You simply look ignorant with this posturing. Go ahead. You are digging your own assessment here and looking worse for the wear. It frankly appears as one who hasn't studied this matter. Your problem, Danoh. You shouldn't have tried "off the top of your head." Your recollection looked foolish for it.

Fact is, everyone has "an agenda."

Right. Some agendas are nobler.

In fact, countless agendas...all day long, as to all sorts of things, throughout one's every day.

Fact, some agendas are nobler.

The question is then, what any particular agenda might be; whether it is well-intentioned or not; unintended or not; wise or not; well-informed or not; what standard of measurement is being applied when attempting to determine what said agenda is, etc.

A good handle on what your peers and predecessors instead of 'off the top of your head' would be a noble start :think:

Likewise with the phrase "preconceived notion."

We all form them constantly, and throughout our everyday, and on a million things.

Yet some of us compare our notions to those who have preceded us, and check to see how arrogant our own pronouncement and posture might be. I'm LESS audacious when many disagree with me. THIS particular is not the case. Most if not all, disagree rather, with you.

And, I've learned too much in life and from far too many a supposed enemy to allow myself to simply comparmentalize such things into an either all out black, or and all out white.

"Nope" you haven't. THAT WAS black and white, Danoh. YOU came up with it while I allow the secondary. You frankly, disallowed it, obviously not knowing where most commentary and scholars fall over this matter.

Luke 15:2 And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.

Rom. 5: 6-8.

:idunno: Same verse you gave for "You're a Calvinist! :noway: "

I guarantee you Calvinism has nothing, nadda, to do with this. Arminians, Calvinists, and even a good many MAD agree these witnesses are those from chapter 11. It is a verse that STRONGLY supports being absent from the body is present with the Lord. It doesn't matter if you disagree. You could have done so much more graciously and less snarky that your 'nope.' You are on shaky ground with the assertion when most disagree with you. Commentaries aren't my mainstay, but it is nice when I find intelligent men and women with the wherewithal that I happen to agree with. It authenticates my studies and gives me the acknowledgement that my studies aren't in vain and are producing the desired exegetical affect. I desire to be less bent in my interpretations of scripture. Authentication and confirmation are good ways to check. You don't have to be a scholar, but you should walk with a few. -Lon

 

[Lon]

What I mean is, take your pick: unconscious/soul sleep until bodily resurrection, or consciously (awake and aware) present with the Lord in glory from the first second after physical death. For the believer, what does it matter either way? You're already in Christ and bound for glory while yet in this flesh, likewise whether asleep in the ground for awhile or aware of it immediately.

This is one controversy I have never understood wasting time arguing over.

I acquiesce this, but I'm convinced rather that it is the former. Again, I acquiesce, as you do, that the other 'could' be, at least that I can see how one can come to that conclusion, but I'm also convince the Lord Jesus and Apostle Paul make it clear we do not soul sleep, so when one pushes it, I feel a need to help one recognize their 'my way is right, yours is wrong, period' is a poor showing. I can let it go as well, but have to wonder why another pushes this hard with "nope, you are wrong, period." It is coming out swinging. I've studied enough to know what my position, at least, is over the matter. "No you can't logically or scripturally believe that way" is a challenge that I'm willing to meet head on, especially when I believe the opposite, though not that important of a disagreement to me, is less scripturally tenable. The majority of Christian theologians list 'soul sleep' as unbiblical (by a very large number and all using scriptures as proof). We need to be seeking biblical answers and responses. In Him -Lon

 

[musterion]

The majority of Christian theologians list 'soul sleep' as unbiblical (by a very large number and all using scriptures as proof).

Do try to avoid appeals to authority.

Just consider that at the point the pivotal passage for awareness after bodily death was spoken at the time when Christ did not speak to the crowds without hiding His words in parables.

 

[Danoh]

I acquiesce this, but I'm convinced rather that it is the former. Again, I acquiesce, as you do, that the other 'could' be, at least that I can see how one can come to that conclusion, but I'm also convince the Lord Jesus and Apostle Paul make it clear we do not soul sleep, so when one pushes it, I feel a need to help one recognize their 'my way is right, yours is wrong, period' is a poor showing. I can let it go as well, but have to wonder why another pushes this hard with "nope, you are wrong, period." It is coming out swinging. I've studied enough to know what my position, at least, is over the matter. "No you can't logically or scripturally believe that way" is a challenge that I'm willing to meet head on, especially when I believe the opposite, though not that important of a disagreement to me, is less scripturally tenable. The majority of Christian theologians list 'soul sleep' as unbiblical (by a very large number and all using scriptures as proof). We need to be seeking biblical answers and responses. In Him -Lon

Yo, brown-nose - you STILL failed to prove through Scripture, this pagan, dead saints watching people in this world, foolishness of yours.

You're quite the brown nose - I'll give ya that.

:chuckle:

Thank God for Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[Lon]

Yo, brown-nose -

1) Gross term, choose another more appropriate one when discussing the things of our Lord and Savior.
2) It is a ridiculous claim since there is nobody here to kiss-up to. It makes it yet another lame incomprehensible attack on par with "Calvinist!"

you STILL failed to prove through Scripture, this pagan, dead saints watching people in this world, foolishness of yours.

No, I did for people who can read. For people who can't AND are just debating "off the top of their head" instead of actually reading the scripture?

You are correct. I failed to prove it to them and have little interest in trying to 'prove' it to someone dense. Musterion I take the caution regarding an 'appeal' to authority alone, however, scripture also speaks of the intelligence of sharing all good things with one's teacher which does fall under 'appeal to authority.' Simply: "My teachers who also study scriptures diligently, disagree with you." It is its own argument when nearly ALL of them say the same thing. It is, imho, no longer an appeal to authority after that. JW's believe in Soul Sleep and very few others. When simpleton cults come up with stuff like this, I do fall into the line of thinking with smarter men AND believers rather than those caught in their own imaginings and still trying to please the Savior Judaized and deaf to His Spirit. That said, this one is not a big contention with me. It is 'how' it was broached. I'm the one who studied. The other is 'off the top of his head.'

You're quite the brown nose - I'll give ya that.

Again, gross term unworthy of this discussion as well as literally nobody here that I'm worried about pleasing. Try again on both counts, first to please the Lord, then to not toss out lame 'off the top of your head' accusations that don't even apply to anything or anybody.

:chuckle:

Thank God for Rom. 5:6-8.

Thank God I have a HUGE cloud of witnesses and you've literally nobody with your "nope" and "off the top of your head."
No, I can't prove anything to a thick head like you. No, I disregard your 'nope' because frankly you don't have the prowess to contend with your very much private maverick interpretation. No thank you. I'll keep what I studied instead of what came 'off the top of your head.' Your are just no one's gift to bible study and proper hermeneutics. While I'll heed Musterion's call both to drop this and not appeal to authority, there is YET some decent amount of comfort to know I'm following in good footsteps. As I said, there are MAD and a lot of them who agree with me on this as well. "Nope" was over-the-top and nothing but asserting. You, my friend, are the one who is doing the loose interpretation. Remove the chapter division between 11 and 12. That IS my proof. It is all in my humble but studied opinion, that anyone needs (again, in my humble but studied opinion). You can have the last word. The only thing I'm interested in, is what is biblically tenable and simply giving the result of my study, as I've already given. You can "nope" and "off the top of your head" all you like.

 

[musterion]

While I'll heed Musterion's call both to drop this and not appeal to authority, there is YET some decent amount of comfort to know I'm following in good footsteps.

Unless they're wrong.

 

[Danoh]

Unless they're wrong.

In which case he can always deflect some more.

:chuckle:

Rom. 5: 6-8.