I am not mad or angry at all. I am a bit confused. I don't know if we are arguing about the same thing here.
1) Why did you post that long passage from the Council of Trent? Did you think that I was questioning the canon of Scripture? I surely wasn't and don't know what gave you that idea. Very confusing.
2) Are you claiming the Ascension happened the same day as the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead? You seem to imply this because of your previous citing of John 20:17. Our Lord first says that He has not ascended to his Father yet and then tells Mary Magdalene of His intent to do so. When Our Lord says "I ascend to my Father and to your Father, to my God and your God.(John 20:17)", the language clearly indicates a future event, not necessarily a very near future event.
3) This is absolutely proven by Acts 1:3. There is 40 days between His Resurrection from the dead and His Ascension. That is infallible.
To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion, by many proofs, for forty days appearing to them, and speaking of the kingdom of God.(Acts1:3).
Then a little later in Acts "And when he had said these things, while they looked on, he was raised up: and a cloud received him out of their sight.(Acts1:9)
"I am not mad or angry at all. I am a bit confused. I don't know if we are arguing about the same thing here."
1) "Why did you post that long passage from the Council of Trent? Did you think that I was questioning the canon of Scripture? I surely wasn't and don't know what gave you that idea. Very confusing."
The only reason why I posted Trent was because you made reference to me using words and tying it to infallibility. I was referencing the bible the whole time, its infallible.
2) "Are you claiming the Ascension happened the same day as the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead? You seem to imply this because of your previous citing of John 20:17. Our Lord first says that He has not ascended to his Father yet and then tells Mary Magdalene of His intent to do so. When Our Lord says "I ascend to my Father and to your Father, to my God and your God.(John 20:17)", the language clearly indicates a future event, not necessarily a very near future event."
Yes I do believe that. You contend that "I ascend" is a
future event. It is not, "I ascend" is a present participle in simple
present verb tense. There is no present participle simple
future tense i.e. I
will ascend or future
progressive tense i.e. I
will be ascending, which would indicate a future event. The verses that you provided [Acts ch. 1], I don't reject any of it. I know that Jesus stayed with the Apostles and disciples for forty days, I stated it. It all comes down to timing, that all. I am not trying to cause a scandal but I am only looking at the text.
I do find it interesting that in the gospel of John the word "ascend" is used but in Acts, the words "raised up" and "taken up" is used.
I ask you to consider these historical facts. Jesus died on Good Friday, and He descends into hell to preach the Good News, where every old testament saint is waiting to be delivered by Jesus i.e. Adam, Noe, Moses, Abraham, Isaias, Jeremias etc. And no one can go to heaven until Jesus enters first. Jesus is dealing with the men of the old and men of the new, at this juncture. Why would Jesus make the men of the old, wait another forty days, while Jesus deals with the men of the new testament. It would make sense, that Jesus would ascend after the preaching, and resurrection, so the old testament saints could be delivered into heaven after Jesus ascends, to meet them. And after that, late on the same day, He meets the Apostles in Galilee and stays with them 40 days, and thereafter is taken up again.
When Mary Magdalen, prostrated and touched Jesus' feet, He said to her,
do not touch me for I have not ascended to my Father yet. But later that same day and for forty days, everyone was touching Jesus. There would seem to be a contradiction there, if Jesus did not ascend to Heaven. But I think that He did ascend, which would remove the 'seeming' touching contradiction.
As I said, its just a timing issue. Based on the text of John, "Jesus saith to her: Do not touch me, for I am not yet ascended to my Father. But go to my brethren, and say to them:
I ascend to my Father" … it indicates that He is going to ascend presently and then go to Galilee and stay with the Apostle 40 days and then be taken up to heaven again. If the ascension was much later, then why would Mary Magdalen have to tell the Apostles about Him ascending, Jesus could have told the Apostles Himself, later that day.
Topic: Exposed and Refuted: The Dimond Brothers believe they are the Two Witnesses (Read 9508 times)