xfrodobagginsx
Active member
Please take the time to read this first post if you haven't yet
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
- Thread starter xfrodobagginsx
- Start date
Right Divider
Body part
Only after we have them.
Right Divider
Body part
*resurrection
Right Divider
Body part
Plus some faith.
xfrodobagginsx
Active member
2 Peter 1:20-21 KJV
[20] knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. [21] For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
[20] knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. [21] For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
2 Peter 1:20-21 (KJV) - knowing this first, that no prophec | YouVersion
knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Ho
bible.com
xfrodobagginsx
Active member
What is your view on Grace Age Believers marrying in heaven? Just curious becaus some mod acts believe we will
Right Divider
Body part
A scripture quote with no comment is vague and lacking context. Why are you quoting it?2 Peter 1:20-21 KJV
[20] knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. [21] For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
2 Peter 1:20-21 (KJV) - knowing this first, that no prophec | YouVersion
knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Hobible.com
Right Divider
Body part
I don't think that there will be any literal marriages in heaven.
Name one mid-Acts dispensationalists that teaches we will marry in heaven.
xfrodobagginsx
Active member
A well-known Mid-Acts Dispensationalist who taught that believers may experience marital relationships in heaven is J. C. O'Hair.
J. C. O'Hair’s view
O'Hair, one of the early leaders of Mid-Acts dispensationalism, suggested that the statement of Jesus in Gospel of Matthew 22:30 (“they neither marry nor are given in marriage”) applies specifically to Israel and the resurrection related to the kingdom program, not necessarily to the Body of Christ.
Because Mid-Acts theology distinguishes between Israel’s program and the Church (Body of Christ) revealed through Paul the Apostle, O'Hair argued that some statements made during Jesus’ earthly ministry may not directly define the destiny of the Church.
From that reasoning, he allowed the possibility that relationships like marriage could exist for members of the Body of Christ in heavenly places.
Important note
Even within Mid-Acts circles (teachers influenced by Cornelius R. Stam or Charles F. Baker), this idea is not widely taught. Most Mid-Acts teachers simply say Scripture does not clearly reveal whether marriage exists in heaven for the Body of Christ.
J. C. O'Hair’s view
O'Hair, one of the early leaders of Mid-Acts dispensationalism, suggested that the statement of Jesus in Gospel of Matthew 22:30 (“they neither marry nor are given in marriage”) applies specifically to Israel and the resurrection related to the kingdom program, not necessarily to the Body of Christ.
Because Mid-Acts theology distinguishes between Israel’s program and the Church (Body of Christ) revealed through Paul the Apostle, O'Hair argued that some statements made during Jesus’ earthly ministry may not directly define the destiny of the Church.
From that reasoning, he allowed the possibility that relationships like marriage could exist for members of the Body of Christ in heavenly places.
Important note
Even within Mid-Acts circles (teachers influenced by Cornelius R. Stam or Charles F. Baker), this idea is not widely taught. Most Mid-Acts teachers simply say Scripture does not clearly reveal whether marriage exists in heaven for the Body of Christ.
The problem is that marriage implies new human beings.
Ones who might rebel against God after He just got done kicking out everyone who ultimately rejected Him.
Revelation 21:4 specifically states there will be no more death.
Death is separation from God. It's the wages of sin. Sin is rebellion against God.
These things cause the other things mentioned in the verse.
Just based on that reasoning alone I strongly doubt that God will allow marriages in the new Heaven and new Earth.
Ones who might rebel against God after He just got done kicking out everyone who ultimately rejected Him.
Revelation 21:4 specifically states there will be no more death.
Death is separation from God. It's the wages of sin. Sin is rebellion against God.
These things cause the other things mentioned in the verse.
Just based on that reasoning alone I strongly doubt that God will allow marriages in the new Heaven and new Earth.
Leader? By what standard?
Who is it claiming that this person is a leader of Mid-Acts Dispensationalism?
From what I can tell he was something of a pioneer in regard the modern American Mid-Acts movement but he was never any sort of leader in the sense of an organized movement. What he taught wasn't even fully formed Mid-Acts Dispensationalism. His teaching helped lay the groundwork for what later became known as Mid-Acts Dispensationalism and anything he might have stated in regard to post resurrection marriage certainly cannot be construde as normative Mid-Acts teaching.
Where does O'Hair make this claim? Assuming, for the sake of argument that this claim is actually made, does O'Hair make an argument for this claim? If so, what is that argument?
All Mid-Acts Dispensationalists argue that "SOME STATEMENTS made during Jesus’ earthly ministry MAY not directly define the destiny of the Church."
That should not be taken to mean that EVERY STATEMENT made by Jesus does not apply to the Body of Christ, nor that we pick and choose at random which apply and which do not.
If that was his entire reasoning then he wasn't anyone's leader.
It is more likely that whatever it is you're quoting here has taken something he said out of context and is using it as a bludgeon, trying to imply that the entire system is based on such obviously vacuous reasoning.
I'd just about bet my house that this is YOUR motive for bringing it up. I find it funny, in a ludicrously stupid sort of manner, the degree to which people have to stretch the truth just to make what feels to them like something similar to a refutation of Mid-Acts Dispensationalism. They don't even bother to try to actually understand the doctrinal system, they just draw a caricature of it and make fun of the big nose they've drawn on it.
Yeah, because there is no basis for it whatsoever.
No, this is false. The scripture could not possibly be any clearer...
Jesus (God Himself in the flesh) said explicitly, "...in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven." (Matt. 22:30)
There is no indication that Jesus' comments were aimed at Israel. He was asked a general question about resurrection and gave a general answer. Nor is there any indication anywhere in the bible at all that the resurrection for the Body of Christ is any different than it is for believers from prior dispensations. Anyone suggesting that this concept of our "being like the angels of God" doesn't apply to those in the Body of Christ is speculating, at best. The motivation for such speculation is understandable. People love their spouses dearly and often can't imagine anything being considered a paradise if they are found there without their wife or husband. This, however, is short sighted. God is very much better than we imagine and we are very much worse than we think. What awaits us in Heaven is so far beyond what we can even think or image that I suspect that those who thought such things will laugh at their naivety when confronted with the splendorous truth that heaven will be.
Last edited:
That's an interesting sentiment. You think marriage is necessarily sexual.
It is certain a major part of marriage but it does not seem to be primary and less than necessary. God creating Eve was in resolution to the following problem...
Genesis 2:18 And the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” 19 Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him.
Procreation came a bit later. It clearly wasn't an afterthought, but it was clearly secondary (and therefore not necessary).If marriage does not occur in Heaven, then it will be interesting to learn how this "helper" issue is resolved.
I find it interesting that the command from God to "be fruitful and multiply" comes before Adam's statement on being joined together as one flesh.
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 1:26-28 - New King James Version
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in His own image; in the image...
And the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said:“This is now bone of my bonesAnd flesh of my flesh;She shall be called Woman,Because she was taken out of Man.” Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 2:18-25 - New King James Version
And the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living...
This does not seem to address the point. The passage I cited and which you have now repeated, explicitly states the problem that God was addressing when He decided to create Eve. Again, reproduction was certainly not an afterthought but it does seem to have been secondary to the companionship and helper function she was explicitly created to fill. And that makes sense, right? Healthy marriages are not PRIMARILY sexual in nature, even less so reproductive. The relationships primary function is one of simple companionship and life-partnership. A relationship that is deeper than mere friendship even when one completely discounts the more physically intimate aspects of it.I find it interesting that the command from God to "be fruitful and multiply" comes before Adam's statement on being joined together as one flesh.
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 1:26-28 - New King James Version
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in His own image; in the image...www.biblegateway.com
And the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said:“This is now bone of my bonesAnd flesh of my flesh;She shall be called Woman,Because she was taken out of Man.” Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 2:18-25 - New King James Version
And the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living...www.biblegateway.com
To clarify, this is false:
I do not.
I'm simply pointing out that it's a prerequisite for "be fruitful and multiply" since it provides the best foundation for raising children.
In other words: It's not necessary to marry if no children are to be produced.
You might have missed it, but I was being somewhat non-committal in post #354.
Perhaps God will allow it, or something like it.
But every indication from scripture is that it won't happen.
Cool. We agree. I suspect (but cannot prove) that the context of our heavenly existence will make marriage a non-sequitur. We won't miss it because it just won't make any sense.