Posts by JCanon

44

A revelation for me: the revelation of Revelation

by Eyes Open in

i was reading the thread about revelation, and some research i did on the beginning of chapter 10 of the apocalyptic book came to mind, so i thought i'd share it here in case anyone's interested.. as an ignorant jehovah's witness, i had no idea of the real literary structure of the book.

the watchtower society makes out the mighty angel in 10:1 who stands on the sea and earth is jesus christ, and that the contents of the little scroll he hands john is a prophecy to be fulfilled after 1914. to grasp the simple truth that the strong angel in 10:1 is the angel alluded to in 1:1, and that the little scroll is actually the scroll which has been progressively unsealed in 6:1 to 8:1, was very satisfying.

it describes the revelation being given to john, which contains the main content of the prophetic work!.

JCanon

Awakened...

Have you ever given any thought to how this equally possible alternate rendering of Rev 1:10 would change the whole WTS view of the Apocalypse? I did, and that thought led me to question everything else that the WTS teaches, because they base evrything on possibilities and then teach them as if they were absolute realities... Going through Gilead and seeing how everything in the Bible supposedly pointed to their miserable history in 1919 and shortly thereafter really woke me up... Which is why I was...

You make a good point, but in this case "context" prevails for such a complex book. Bottom line is that specific events only happen ONCE during end times, which as Satan being kicked out of heaven. So even if some of the ancient congregations are mentioned, they become symbolic and have to become a reference for the end-time setting.

Even as initially referenced, "the things that will shortly take place" resets the intended audience to those who would reasonably be warned to experience these things shortly, say within the lifetime of a generation and so that lifts the reference to an end-times scenario. At the same time, that would not preclude parts of Revelation becoming a viable reference for the congregations back then which would not specifically relate to an end-time scenario.; which only means Revelation is a complex book.

The term the "Lord's day" though is far too a common reference among Christians by now to be too generalized and not refer to the second coming scenario.

2 Thess 2:

1 However, brothers, respecting the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we request of YOU 2 not to be quickly shaken from YOUR reason nor to be excited either through an inspired expression or through a verbal message or through a letter as though from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord is here.
3 Let no one seduce YOU in any manner, because it will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed, the son of destruction.

Even this specific reference is in the context of the second coming.

As far as redening "on" vs "in", the same word is used, ev to describe "in inspiration in the Lord's day", which would otherwise be translated "on inspiration on the Lord's day." So I see no specific mistranslation issue here or John referring to the current day for this verse.

JC

Please note the word for "day" (hemera) (Strong's G2550) is the same word used in Revelation 1:10:

That 1519 ye 5209 be 4531 0 not 3361 soon 5030 shaken 4531 in 575 mind 3563 , or 3383 be troubled 2360 , neither 3383 by 1223 spirit 4151 , nor 3383 by 1223 word 3056 , nor 3383 by 1223 letter 1992 as 5613 from 1223 us 2257 , as 5613 that 3754 the day 2250 of Christ 5547 is at hand 1764 .

I was 1096 in 1722 the Spirit 4151 on 1722 the Lord's 2960 day 2250 , and 2532 heard 191 behind 3694 me 3450 a great 3173 voice 5456 , as 5613 of a trumpet 4536 ,

MEANING? Meaning you have a broad range of interpretation here, the casual or specific use of terms to refer to certain concepts. However, the CHRONOLOGY of specific events related in Revelation is absolute per other references in the Bible and that alone dates the book to modern-time references, not excluding that it had contemporary references or generalized references; just like the "7 times" prophecy was a literal 7 years of madness for Nebuchadnezzar to be off his throne but 2520 years when you make a "greater fulfillment" which is required/permitted when you have a specific Biblical precedent for doing so, which is the "day for a year" reference, which also is confirmed by practical application; i.e. the first coming at the 70th week was 483 years not literal days from the "going forth of the word to rebuild Jerusalem" which occurred the 1st year of Cyrus in 455 BCE. So the CHRONOLOGY preempts any remote presumption this work really doesn't reference any future events beyond those in that contemporary setting back there. In fact, it is so preemptive that such a notion is "incompetent." Please contact any scholars commenting on the subject if you wish and have them call me and I'll be glad to explain it to them.

JC

22

Temple construction: a question for Leolaia and the board's scholars

by behemot in

a book that i'm reading (j. alberto soggin, "israel in the biblical period.

institutions, festivals, ceremonies, rituals", 2001), talking about the jerusalem temple, states that "certain authors have seen in the dates of the beginning and of the end of the construction works elements of the yearly cicle of the cananean ba'al", but no bibliographic reference is given supporting the statement.what does he refer to?

can someone point me to sources of information on this matter?thanks a lot.look forward to your replies.

JCanon

I know this is slightly off topic but somewhat parallel, but apparently Melqart's temple had no images, no idols, just those two pillars. So how directly that relates to Baal?

But this was not the original focus, it was the Baal cycle and the temple. I see absolutely no connection since the temple was buit over a 7-year period and the Baal, "dying king" ritual is an annual one associated with spring rites. Further it was noted Melqart was more associated with a sea god than a mountain god like Baal. So lots makes the temple construction seem incidental and the actual dating for the temple construction didn't even incidentally match the two special times for Baal worship, so there is no casual or specific comparison that is broadly discussed that I can tell. It doesn't seem to be commonly known.

But thanks for posting this. There is a lot of exegetical commentary linking Baal worship with Druids and Halloween that I didn't know about. Again, my suggestion if this is of specific concern is to query the author himself to get his specific references.

Cheerio.

JC

22

Temple construction: a question for Leolaia and the board's scholars

by behemot in

a book that i'm reading (j. alberto soggin, "israel in the biblical period.

institutions, festivals, ceremonies, rituals", 2001), talking about the jerusalem temple, states that "certain authors have seen in the dates of the beginning and of the end of the construction works elements of the yearly cicle of the cananean ba'al", but no bibliographic reference is given supporting the statement.what does he refer to?

can someone point me to sources of information on this matter?thanks a lot.look forward to your replies.

JCanon

So DON'T comment on this comment.
May I enquire as to the consequences of my commenting on your comment on the Nathan Natas comment and my comment above? For example, will I face divine wrath at the hands of you and your heavenly father or anything major like that?

No. Don't comment further on this because it highjacks the thread!!! That's how threads are highjacked. The majority of the posts talking about issues other than what the topic is about. SO DON'T COMMENT FURTHER out of respect for the thread. Start a new topic of messiah bashing and let this topic remain about the temple. I'm not the one "highjacking" this thread but Nathan started it. He's to blame. My comments were pertinent to the topic. So I'm not going to comment further on any non-temple/Baal related issues and I kindly request you do not do so either. I will not reply to you further. JC

22

Temple construction: a question for Leolaia and the board's scholars

by behemot in

a book that i'm reading (j. alberto soggin, "israel in the biblical period.

institutions, festivals, ceremonies, rituals", 2001), talking about the jerusalem temple, states that "certain authors have seen in the dates of the beginning and of the end of the construction works elements of the yearly cicle of the cananean ba'al", but no bibliographic reference is given supporting the statement.what does he refer to?

can someone point me to sources of information on this matter?thanks a lot.look forward to your replies.

JCanon

... still looking forward to a proper answer ... Behemot

Sorry for the attempt to hijack your tread with their silliness. I did a quick search and there was "nothing" which is a clear indication that probably there is no easy link to pagan tradition. But what scholars might have focussed on is the similarity of the two pillars of the temple which has some pagan resonance (see below) in later Freemasonry traditions. Some might have thought the two pillars were based somewhat on pagan tradition...

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/images/members/15207.jpg

But also it is possible the author is loosely linking Solomon's temple, not with pagan ritual but similar building constructions for that period in general, for instance this statement:

Temple at Tell Tainat

I t is abundantly clear that there was a powerful Phoenician influence in the construction of the temple. Therefore, the most reliable archaeological evidence concerning Solomon's temple can be determined from a comparative study of contemporary temples. The most interesting discovery was the sanctuary at Tell Tainat in Northern Syria. The interesting features of this structure is the rectangular shape and its division into three area. The Jerusalem temple contained the entrance hall, main hall and the Holy of Holies. The pillars are under the roof of the Syrian sanctuary which was 2/3 smaller than Solomon's temple was primarily a royal chapel attached to the palace, much as were the royal temples of Nineveh and Khorsabad. From 1 Kings 9:15 we find that Solomon also built the cities of Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezar. From the remains of a large building at Megiddo, samples of ashes were taken and analysed to be cedar, indicating that the super structure was built with a half timber type construction like Solomon's buildings. Lining the walls of buildings with wood was a very common practice in the Iron Age

It is possible this could be what he is referring to. That is, the claim that Solomon's temple was similar and common to the construction of other buildings and temples of that period and thus the claim it might have been actually based on "pagan" design.

As far as the cyclic festivals of Baal, there was a focus on the spring and winter solstice and that is not significant for the building of this temple, which began in the second month, etc. I believe if there were consistent similarities it would not have been difficult to actually find a commentary on it, but I didn't find anything except the above. In addition, the fact that Solomon became apostate and set up pagan places of polytheistic worship nearby suggests the Jewish temple was unique and in no way just a parody of what the Jews were borrowing from the pagan Canaanites. Instead, when they were influenced it was distinctly apart from the temple. If anything, Leolaia would know more specifics, but she hasn't weighed in yet that I can see.

I do generally recall a comment in passing that some archaelogists have said the Jewish temple was of typical construction similar to those among the pagans but, even the reference above simply shows similarities in the actual construction methods and only loose similarities. But even so that doesn't mean it necessarily was based directly on those pagan temples.

So maybe this comment is specific to some references he has and has been misinterpreted. You know, you can always write the author and ask him what he meant. Many times authors will oblige and give you some specific references if not cited in the book. But I saw no consistent or propagandistic discussions linking the temple rituals to those of Baal, specifically. In fact, just the opposite.

JC

22

Temple construction: a question for Leolaia and the board's scholars

by behemot in

a book that i'm reading (j. alberto soggin, "israel in the biblical period.

institutions, festivals, ceremonies, rituals", 2001), talking about the jerusalem temple, states that "certain authors have seen in the dates of the beginning and of the end of the construction works elements of the yearly cicle of the cananean ba'al", but no bibliographic reference is given supporting the statement.what does he refer to?

can someone point me to sources of information on this matter?thanks a lot.look forward to your replies.

JCanon

And thus another thread is hijacked by the messiah.

(If it wasn't so funny it would be annoying.)

I have NOT hijacked this thread. My comment was short and "informative" and I'm not going to respond to Nathan in this thread who is the one who introduced an off-topic issue. This thread is not hijacked. This thread is about the temple construction and I was giving the JIOR perspective, to take or leave. I know a lot of people are watching to see the actual temple in Jerusalem be rebuilt to fulfill prophecy, but the last temple is a spiritual one. Just reflecting on that thought briefly. That's all. So DON'T comment on this comment. Wait until Leolaia comments. I have no further need to comment further. JC

4

Date of Genesis Book..

by greek in

hi to all, i ve studied the book of genesis , and works of reference, and i arrived to the conclution that genesis wasn t written by moses in the century xv-xvi b.c.

this is my source of antecedents to my theory:.

genesis 10 spoke about nineveh, calah , resen as "the great city", that , really, only become so in the centuries viii-vii b.c., and not before.. in many verses it is spoken of " in that time inhabited the cannanim", etc.

JCanon

Scholars will agree with you. Many say that Moses probably never existed, there is absolutely no
proof that the Israelites were slaves in Egypt, and it seems that the Egyptian empire was physically
built by craftsmen and skilled labor.

This is an inaccurate and incompetent statement. Syncellus/Manetho specifically notes when Joseph became vizier in the 17th of Apophis in which case you can date the Exodus specifically to the last year of Amenhotep III.

The Bible states at Isaiah 19:19 that the king who ruled after Egypt was struck with a blow that the Egyptians would build an altar for Yahweh in the middle of Egypt "near it's boundary", meaning halfway between Upper and Lower Egypt. Aknenaten did this and was a monotheist. So the Exodus works exceedingly well when it is actually dated to the correct time.

Here's Kathleen Kenyon's absolute dating for when the Israelites conquered Jericho:

Kathleen Kenyon: Digging Up Jericho, Jericho and the Coming of the Israelites, page 262:

"As concerns the date of the destruction of Jericho by the Israelites, all that can be said is that the latest Bronze Age occupation should, in my view, be dated to the third quarter of the fourteenth century B.C. This is a date which suits neither the school of scholars which would date the entry of the Israelites into Palestine to c. 1400 B.C. nor the school which prefers a date of c. 1260 B.C."
Page 261 of her book, "Digging Up Jericho," in the Chapter called "Jericho And Coming Of The Israelites," she says:
"It is a sad fact that of the town walls of the Late Bronze Age, within which period the attack by the Israelites must fall by any dating, not a trace remains."

The third quarter of the 14th century is 1350-1325 BCE! If you correct the 1st of Cyrus to 455 BCE, the Exodus is exactly 19 jubilees earlier, that is 19 x 49 = 931 years. That dates the Exodus to 1386 BCE and the fall of Jericho 40 years later to 1346 CE, which is exactly where archaeology is dating this!! So you've got a confirmation and very strong statement here that Akhenaten, having experienced the ten plagues, did exactly what the Bible said, and repented and offered sacrifice and became monotheists!!

So to say "there is ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF" is subjective and basically being ill-informed with the latest research.

As far as the Jews never being slaves, though I anticpate you will object, these slaves making bricks during the reign of Thuthmosis III. He shows slaves making BRICKS! That is what the Jews were used for. So we have a confirmation that Egyptiand did have SLAVES who made BRICKS, so why is there "absolutely no proof"?

In the meantime, these slaves are not Egyptian looking. They are not Egyptian in dress! Egyptians are dark. These guys are white and they look rather Asiatic! So why are they NOT Jews? You can't say. You have the Biblical record that during the reign of Thuthmosis the Jews would have been slaves and you see slaves making bricks, and they are not hired Egyptians. Egyptians are depicted as dark so since these are not, one presumes they are of fairer skin tone. Plus look at the facial features? Egyptian, or more Asiatic?

So it depends on the "eye of the beholder." To you, these might seem like anybody else BUT Jews. To me they are obviously Jews.

You think I'm crazy, I'm sure. I think you're mis-informed living in a historical anti-Biblical fantasy world..... Akhenaten's conversion to monotheism is all a Biblicalist needs to confirm the 10 plagues and the Exodus, besides the chronology specifics, which are now in place. That is, RC14 dating for the fall of Rehov by Shishak is dated to 871 BCE which dates the Exodus to 1386 BCE, exactly 931 years from 455 BCE, the 1st of Cyrus, just as the Bible indicates.

http://www.geocities.com/ed_maruyama/rehov872.html

By the way, "scholars" are in no position to agree or disagree until they specify which pharaoh ruled at the time of the Exodus. When that rule becomes Akhenaten, there's plenty of "confidence" over the ten plagues and the Exodus. After experiencing the ten plagues, he considered all the gods of Egypt as "worthless" and claims his own god told him to build a new city and altar in the middle of Egypt, just as the Bible confirms. Just an insider joke if you're a witness, this means that Akhenaten, technically, was one of "Jehovah's witnesses"!!! TEE HEE!

Sorry. The Exodus actually happened as well as the ten plagues. You need only to have the correct chronology and archaeology lined up.

JC

1

Examining Ezekiel's Future "Temple"

by Observer17 in

for those of us who enjoy examining bible prophecy and considering new angles and perspectives on prophecy, please see the following article (link below).

i think you may find it quite interesting, with some new angles to consider.

here is the link for the article:.

JCanon

The final temple is SPIRITUAL.

JC

22

Temple construction: a question for Leolaia and the board's scholars

by behemot in

a book that i'm reading (j. alberto soggin, "israel in the biblical period.

institutions, festivals, ceremonies, rituals", 2001), talking about the jerusalem temple, states that "certain authors have seen in the dates of the beginning and of the end of the construction works elements of the yearly cicle of the cananean ba'al", but no bibliographic reference is given supporting the statement.what does he refer to?

can someone point me to sources of information on this matter?thanks a lot.look forward to your replies.

JCanon

This may be only loosely related so I won't expound.

But the final temple is spiritual. Christ at the second coming does not build another physical temple but the spiritual one, the one foreshadowed by the physical one.

Having noted that, the rebuilding is related at the second coming for the 490 years which begins the first-coming temple construction in 455 BCE, the 1st of Cyrus, with the period of 1506-1996.

That is, nobody questions 455 BCE to 36 CE as the 490 years relating to the first coming. Only 455 BCE, when it is assigned to the 1st of Cyrus gets connected with the rebuilding of the temple.

If you count 490-year periods down to our day, which is 4 x 490 = 1960 + 36 CE you get another 490-year period ending in 1996 and beginning in 1506 AD. Thus to parallel the rebuilding and restoration of the temple from a spiritual standpoint, Martin Luther fulfills this reference. He became a monk around this time and, of course, started the Protestant Movement. So the Prostestant Movement was seen as the beginning of the rebuilding of the temple, which had become totally apostate via pagn Catholicism. Even so, the "temple in its right condition" which is the witnesses/Bible students would not be in place until the last 110 years of the last 1260 years. But, Martin Luther's advent in 1506 virtually assures that the temple organization would come out of a refinement of Prostestantism, which it did.

The spiritual temple was recently completed so now the door is closed to the kingdom. Apparently all 1,440,000 members are accounted for (the 144K represents natural Jews and only the "root" of 10% of the whole number. Isa 6:13)

If this is similar to Canaanite ritual it may be coincidental or mimical.

JC

24

ENOCH & the Watchtower Society

by Honesty in

genesis 5.

5 so all the days of adam that he lived amounted to nine hundred and thirty years and he died.

8 so all the days of seth amounted to nine hundred and twelve years and he died.

JCanon

I don't think the being translated through time would nullify Jesus statement that no man has ascended into heaven but he that descended from heaven. But there still is that Heb 11:13.

I actually intended to write this post proving that he wasn't currently dead but I'm leaning the opposite direction now.

I think you're addressing a "technical" area that is not answered in scripture. Those who have died and need to be resurrected are likened to "seeds". That is, they are in a certain state, not connected with being in heaven nor alive or conscious particularly in the flesh. But I don't want to limit God's choice to temporarily resurrect someone. For instance, Jesus had a conversation with Elijah and Moses, right? Both were said to be "caught up" like Enoch, so.... Who knows what unique state apart from an actual angel or being in the flesh Jehovah allows?

Even so, see my related post that ultimately, in the end, when all the faithful ones of old are resurrected first back into the flesh, they can get anointed by holy spirit and sealed into the kingdom after that. The only thing preventing them from getting sealed into the kingdom is being alive after Christ dies, which is no problem for Jehovah! He just brings them back into the flesh and anoints them at that time. That's how they get into the kingdom. Those who are alive after Pentecost realize that "promise" in a greater sense when they are directly anointed into the kingdom. That's what the older ones did not experience, so that's the difference between the two groups. But for the faithful of old, they just get anointed later when they come back. They are not excluded from the kingdom.

Now step back and realize how much sense this makes. Would Moses and Abraham and Enoch and Daniel and even John the Baptist miss out on the greatest human opportunity of all time, just because they were born at the wrong time? I don't think so. No, in fact. It only requires them to be resurrected back into the flesh to get anointed into the kingdom and that is what happens. The hand of God is not short.

JC

24

ENOCH & the Watchtower Society

by Honesty in

genesis 5.

5 so all the days of adam that he lived amounted to nine hundred and thirty years and he died.

8 so all the days of seth amounted to nine hundred and twelve years and he died.

JCanon

Hi Tuesday. You're brilliant to notice this!!!

Damn, now I feel less original, I was setting up my tough questions for Jehovah's Witnesses and had this down as number 11. My question is basically if the soul cannot be separated from the body at death, and the heavenly hope was not available to humans until after Jesus died, and also no human body can enter into heaven what exactly happened to Enoch?

First of all, we know from the Scripture that many of old will be in the kingdom, including Daniel and Abraham, Isaac and Jacob! Plus Hebrews mentions many of the ancient ones of old who are part of Heavenly Jerusalem and Enoch is specifically mentioned:

5 By faith E´noch was transferred so as not to see death, and he was nowhere to be found because God had transferred him; for before his transference he had the witness that he had pleased God well.
39 And yet all these, although they had witness borne to them through their faith, did not get the [fulfillment of the] promise, 40 as God foresaw something better for us, in order that they might not be made perfect apart from us.

So we are not in doubt about Enoch being part of the Bride Class, nor Abraham or any of the others. In fact specifically note Luke 13:28:

28 There is where [ YOUR ] weeping and the gnashing of [ YOUR ] teeth will be, when YOU see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but yourselves thrown outside.

So. We know from Scripture that Enoch and Abraham and many others understood they would be in the kingdom, but they didn't get anointed by holy spirit like those after Pentecost. But that is just a technicality. What YOU need here is HOW these would get into the kingdom. The easiest way for me to explain it is what happened when Jesus died. Now once Jesus arrived, everybody was pushing to stay alive until after Jesus died and ascended since after Pentecost you could get sealed into the kingdom. Those dying before then, could not get sealed. But when Jesus died, there was an earthquake and the memorial tombs were opened and some of the "saints" that had already died came back to life and came into Jerusalem. But note, once they were resurrected again and at least survived until Pentecost, then they could get anointed!!! Therefore, the only thing preventing any others from getting anointed, is simply to be resurrected back into the flesh first!! That is, however, precisely how the first resurrection works. EVERYBODY IS RESURRECTED BACK INTO THE FLESH to rule with Christ for the 1000 years, through Satan's last test, and then Judgment Day. Nobody goes to heven until death is destroyed forever, which is only when the last wicked person is throne into the lake of fire and everybody else has partaken of the trees of life and have eternal life. Therefore, the way Enoch and Abraham and others get into the kingdom is when they are resurrected back into the flesh first. It is as if they had just died a few weeks or months before Jesus died and then when Jesus died got resurrected to be present at Pentecost. So that's how that works in actuality. Very astute observation, though. In this way, the Bride Class includes everyone Jesus and Jehovah especially loved. Can you imagine the Bride Class not including Daniel or David or Abraham or Enoch? No way. They would not deprive themselves of that great pleasure of having them up in heaven with them! So it's not that they don't get the heavenly prize, it's just that they didn't realize the spiritual anointing, which only was possible after Jesus' death and after Pentecost. Therefore, of specific note, John the Baptist will also obviously be resurrected as well back into the flesh and become part of the kingdom. It is understandable, however, in expressing the difference it makes to be anointed or just promised, because John is used as an example of the magnitude of greatness involved, that a least one anointed into the kingdom would have attained a greatness superior to even that of John the Baptist, who Jesus called the greatest of all the prophets. But that just contrasted John at the time of his death and the rank of anointed one at the time of their death or upon beomcing anointed into the kingdom. But that did not exclude John later becoming anointed once he was resurrected back into the flesh. JWs, of course, are CLUELESS and confused over this, some of it understanably, but partly because they believe as the antichrist that Christ would not return in the flesh, when the Bible indicates that he would. I mean, would it really be a "second" coming to the earth if he was not in human form again? And does it make sense 144,000 (or 1,440,000) king-priests will be far away up in heaven trying to rule for 1000 years? That is, rather than being on the earth? It would make more sense if they materialized bodies and came down to the earth to have hands on management in that case. But turns out they simply are in the flesh with Christ. All ordinary men, just as Christ. That's why 1 Corininthians 15 characterizes the first phase of the resurrection as being "sown in corruption" or "sown in weakness" or "sown into a physical body" before becoming incorruptible:

44 It is sown a physical body, it is raised up a spiritual body..... 46 Nevertheless, the first is, not that which is spiritual, but that which is physical, afterward that which is spiritual.

Very basic here. First is the PHYSICAL, then the SPIRITUAL. The spiritual does not happen until death itself is no more and that is way down the line on the last day of Judgment Day! In the meantime, we know the first resurrection occurs before the millennium. So the first part that is physical, lasts for 1000+ years!!!! During this physical first-stage of the resurrection though, all the faithful witnesses of old get anointed, just like those who came to life right after Jesus died. They died again, but at least they got anointed with holy spirit, thus realizing their "promise." ISN'T THAT NEAT?!!!!! It'w wonderful!!! But now you can see, as prophesied, that the WTS is like a barren wasteland as far as spiritual understanding and knowledge. They have to make excuses around all those scriptures that show that Enoch and Abraham and others are definitely part of the heavenly calling!! Even sciptures that directly say that like Luke! The "sons of the kingdom" are definitely those of the heavenly calling, yet they are surprised to see Abraham in heaven with those from western parts and eastern parts who have taken their place!!! So there is no way around it if those who replace them up in heaven are with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob that those three must be up in heaven too. That's a direct reference. Even Hebrews says they would not be "made perfect apart from us", because ALL of them TOGETHER will get their spiritual bodies. One last scripture emphasizing this is 1 Thessalonians where Paul was noting in regard to the concern of some who knew they would die and be resurrected, whether they would get their spiritual bodies ahead of those who were alive at the time of Christ's second coming. Paul explains that FIRST, the dead rise and THEN all of them together wil be caugt up to heaven and meet Christ in the air. Thus even those persons of old would be "made perfect" at the same time the rest of those anointed would be:

16 because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. 17 Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we shall always be with [the] Lord.

That is, perfectly consistent with 1 Corinthians 15, everybody in the first resurrection come back as humans, imperfect humans during the last days. Those who are not already anointed, like Abraham and Enoch will get anointed and sealed at this time. Then AFTER this, they all get perfected and become angels. Only "after" is not a couple minutes but 1000+ years! So it's ALL THERE. The Bible answers all these questions. But you must be complemented to seeing the question first and seeking the answer. Some never notice. So now, you have your answer. Great, huh? Isn't the Bible wonderful? Of course, it's a dark place without holy spirit, certainly, so we must thank Jehovah for granting us with understanding. But we must first ask the question, no? JC