Q&A

Question 1A: When the rapture happens and the dead in Christ rise first, what is actually happening?

1 Thessalonians 4:16–17 “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.”

Public Visibility

shout, voice, trump of God

Resurrection of the dead in Christ

Refers to those believers that have died

their spirits, which are already with God (2Cor. 5:8)

are reunited with our new glorified bodies - incorruptible and immortal (1Cor. 15:52-53)

(It is widely agreed upon that this is the same kind of body that the resurrected Christ had. Physical, new, and eternal.

The living believers are instantly transformed (1Cor. 15:51-52)

we immediately receive glorified bodies without dying

and we are “caught up” (Latin rapiemur = Rapture) to meet Christ

All believers meet Christ together

Paul says believers “meet the Lord in the air.”

This is symbolic of a welcoming procession—a group going out to greet a king and accompany him.

Many theologians compare it to an ancient city greeting a returning ruler and escorting him back in.

What happens next depends on the theology

Christians disagree about the timing and sequence:

Pre-trib Rapture view

Believers are taken to heaven temporarily.

A period of tribulation occurs on earth.

Christ later returns fully to reign.

Post-trib / Historic view

The resurrection and rapture happen at Christ’s Second Coming.

Believers rise to greet Christ and accompany Him as He renews creation.

Amillennial view

The event symbolizes the final resurrection at the end of history.

The “meeting in the air” is a picture of welcoming Christ as He establishes the eternal kingdom.

If we are already in heaven does our Spirit join our body?

Your spirit is reunited with a new, resurrected body

This comes from passages like:

1 Corinthians 15:52–53 — “the dead will be raised imperishable.”

1 Thessalonians 4:16 — the dead in Christ rise first.

This resurrected body is described as:

immortal

incorruptible

physical yet transformed (like Jesus’ resurrection body)

So yes — your spirit joins (or is clothed with) a newly transformed body.

Question 1B: Why a body at all if we’re already in heaven?

Because in Christian theology:

⭐ The ultimate destiny of humans is not just “souls in heaven,” but resurrected people living in God’s renewed creation.

This is the pattern of Jesus:

His spirit did not stay disembodied.

He was raised in a glorified body.

Believers are promised the same kind of resurrection.

earthly body → spiritual/glorified body (1 Cor. 15:35–44)

Question 1C: Why do we need our bodies in heaven?

Christians often wonder this because we tend to picture heaven as a place for souls, not bodies. But in the Bible, the final destiny of God’s people is resurrection, not disembodied existence. Here are the main reasons Christian theology says we need bodies in heaven.

1. Because God created us as body + spirit on purpose

Humans were never meant to be “floating spirits.” In Genesis, God creates Adam from the ground and breathes life into him.

We are meant to be:

physical,

spiritual,

embodied,

relational.

Your body is not a prison — it’s part of your God-designed identity.

2. The resurrection mirrors Jesus

Jesus didn’t stay a spirit after death. He rose with a body:

able to eat,

recognizable,

physical but glorified,

immortal.

“We shall be like Him.” — 1 John 3:2

If Jesus is bodily raised, His followers are too. Christianity is not about escaping the body but redeeming it.

3. Because God is restoring creation, not abandoning it

Revelation, Isaiah, and Romans describe a renewed creation — a restored heaven + earth.

This means:

real places

real life

real relationships

real work, joy, creativity, worship

These things require bodies. The biblical picture is not “souls floating on clouds” — it’s a renewed world without sin, death, or decay.

4. A body allows us to experience joy and God’s goodness more fully

God made physical existence good:

sight

music

touch

movement

beauty

presence with others

The resurrection body enhances this. Paul describes it as:

powerful

glorious

incorruptible

spiritual (Spirit-empowered)

Rather than being limited, your resurrected body lets you experience God’s glory and creation more, not less.

In short: Why do we need our bodies?

Because that’s how humans were designed to exist. Because Jesus was raised bodily. Because God is redeeming creation, not replacing it. Because resurrection is the final defeat of death. Because a body lets us fully experience God and each other.

You won’t be less real — you’ll be more real than you’ve ever been.

Question 2: Why does God love us?

, the simple answer is God’s character, grace, and sovereign choice, not anything inherently lovable or deserving in us

But to explain it a little more

God loves us because He is love! (His Nature)

Based on scripture, God’s love flows from His own nature, not from anything we do

1 John 4:8 “He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.”

God’s love is an expression of His unchanging character

God’s love is not caused by us; it orginates in Him

2. God loves us out of His free, soverign grace

a. This is a core belief that salvation is by grace alone, faith alone

i. Romans 5:8 “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”

God did not love us after we became worthy. He loved us while we were unworthy

This preserves God’s glory: His love is a gift, not a reward

3. God loves us for His glory and redemptive purposes

a. display His mercy

b. redeem a people for Himself

c. glorify His Son Jesus Christ

Eph.1 tells us that God’s saving grace/love/mercy is accourding to His good pleasure of His will

So to summerize it all up in one sentence, He loves us not because we deserve it, but because He can through His redemptive work in His Son Jesus Christ.

Question 3: Is there anywhere in the Bible where the high priest had to be pulled out of the holiest of holies by a rope? If not is there any historical documents that show this?

Short answer: No. There is nowhere in the Bible that says the high priest had a rope tied around him or had to be pulled out of the Holy of Holies.

This idea is a later Jewish tradition, not Scripture.

What the Bible Actually Says

The Old Testament gives detailed instructions for the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16) and the high priest’s garments (Exodus 28–29), but none of these passages mention:

a rope

a cord

tying the priest to anything

pulling him out if he died

Even in later biblical books (Ezekiel, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah), the idea never appears.

Where the Rope Story Comes From

The earliest references to this idea show up much later—long after the biblical period. Points to know:

1. No mention in the Mishnah (c. A.D. 200)

The Mishnah has an entire tractate on the Day of Atonement (Yoma) with extensive detail on the high priest’s actions. It never mentions a rope.

2. First appearance is medieval (not ancient)

The Zohar (a medieval Jewish mystical work, c. 1200s AD) mentions a gold chain or cord. This is thousands of years after Moses and never considered historical evidence.

3. Jewish and Christian scholars agree

It is widely acknowledged to be a legend, not a historical practice.

Where the idea likely came from

People sometimes assumed:

Since the high priest entered God’s presence, he might die if unclean.

No one else could enter the Holy of Holies (Leviticus 16:2).

So he must have had a rope to retrieve him.

But this is reasoning from possibly the bells around the bottom of his garment and to most likely instill a since of fear

So I reserched why exactly the bells were on his garment

Where the Bible Says This

The bells appear on the robe of the ephod, part of the high priest’s clothing.

Exodus 28:33–35 “And beneath upon the hem of it thou shalt make pomegranates of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, round about the hem thereof; and bells of gold between them round about: A golden bell and a pomegranate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, upon the hem of the robe round about. And it shall be upon Aaron to minister: and his sound shall be heard when he goeth in unto the holy place before the Lord, and when he cometh out, that he die not.”

Why the Bells Were There

1. To signal the priest’s approach before God (reverence)

The bells made a sound as the high priest walked. This symbolized that he approached God’s presence with care, humility, and awareness.

In the ancient Near Eastern royal context, it signified:

announcing oneself before a king

not rushing into the king’s presence uninvited

The holiest place was the earthly throne room of God.

2. To mark that he was properly clothed according to God’s command

The bells were part of the divinely prescribed garments. If the high priest entered without the required vestments, he was in disobedience—and disobedience in the Holy of Holies meant death (Exodus 28:35).

The bells were a reminder of this responsibility.

3. To audibly accompany his movements on the Day of Atonement

The sound indicated that the priest:

was alive

was moving correctly

was performing the ritual properly

But The Bible never connects the bells to the idea of dragging him out with a rope. That belief appears much later and can not be verified by Scripture.

4. Symbolic meaning: Holiness made audible

The bells and the pomegranates together symbolized:

fruitfulness (pomegranates)

holiness and purity in action (bells)

In Jewish interpretation, the bells can be understood as a picture of worship that is both inward (pomegranate/fruit) and outward (bell/sound).

All of this was meant to emphasize the seriousness and sacredness of entering God’s presence.

Question 4A: Did Lot ever know that his daughters got pregnant by him?

The Bible does NOT say that Lot ever knew. In fact, the way the story is written strongly implies that he never realized his daughters made him the father of their children.

What Scripture Actually Says

After the destruction of Sodom, Lot’s daughters fear there will be no men left to marry and continue the family line. So they intoxicate their father on two consecutive nights.

Genesis 19:33–35 “And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.”

The repetition emphasizes complete ignorance—both nights.

Did Lot ever find out later?

The Bible gives no indication that:

Lot sobered up and figured it out

The daughters confessed

Anyone else told him

The narrative ends without recording any awareness on Lot’s part.

In fact:

Lot is not mentioned again after Genesis 19 except in genealogies and passing references

The daughters’ sons (Moab and Ben-Ammi) are described as sons of his daughters, not explicitly described as acknowledged grandchildren

This suggests the Bible leaves the question intentionally closed.

Question 4B : What should have Lot done if he had found out?

Short Answer

If Lot had found out what his daughters did, the “right” thing—according to God’s revealed standards—would have been to:

Acknowledge the sin as wrong

Confess his part in it (drunkenness and lack of vigilance)

Call his daughters to repentance

Accept the children as his responsibility but not condone the sin

Seek God’s mercy rather than hide or excuse the wrongdoing

In other words: repentance, acknowledgment, and not covering up sin—not punishment or rejection of the children.

Why this is the answer (based on Scripture)

1. Incest was later explicitly forbidden by God’s law

Lot lived before the Law of Moses, but God’s character is consistent.

Leviticus 18:6–7, 17

Incest—especially a father with his daughters—is clearly forbidden.

If Lot later discovered the truth, he would have had to recognize:

It was a grave sin

It violated God’s moral order

It required confession and repentance

Not punishment or death (capital punishment was not prescribed for this specific case in the pay-tree-arichal period), but acknowledgment of sin before God.

2. Lot would have had to confess his own sin of drunkenness

Even though he didn’t knowingly commit incest, his drunkenness made it possible.

Scripture consistently condemns drunkenness:

“Do not get drunk with wine…” (Ephesians 5:18)

Drunkenness leads to shame (Proverbs 20:1)

Lot would have needed to acknowledge:

His daughters sinned

His own carelessness enabled the situation

Biblical examples show that fathers bore leadership responsibility, even when not directly at fault.

3. He would not have rejected the children

The Bible never teaches punishing the children for the parents’ sin:

“The son shall not bear the guilt of the father…” (Ezekiel 18:20)

Moab and Ammon became nations. Rejecting the children or harming them would have violated God’s character and laws.

The right response would be:

👉 Recognize the sin, but accept the children as innocent and created by God.

4. He would have called his daughters to repentance

Every biblical patriarch confronted sin within the family (Jacob, Judah, Eli, David—where failure to confront led to disaster).

Lot’s responsibility would have been:

Teach them that deception and incest are sin

Turn them away from such behavior

Lead them toward the fear of the Lord

Follow up response if the question gets asked: Why did he allow Moabb and Ammon to become nations then?

From a biblical and theological standpoint, God allowing the children of Lot’s daughters (Moab and Ammon) to become nations is not an approval of the sin that produced them, but rather a display of God’s sovereignty, mercy, and long-range redemptive purpose.

Here are the main reasons Scripture shows:

1. Because God works through broken people and sinful situations

The Bible is full of cases where God brings good out of sinful or tragic origins:

Judah and Tamar (Genesis 38)

Rahab the prostitute (Joshua 2)

David and Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11)

Jephthah the illegitimate son (Judges 11)

Moab and Ammon becoming nations fits this pattern:

👉 God does not erase people because of the sins of their parents. He often brings entire peoples into His plans despite sinful beginnings.

2. Because the children themselves were innocent

Scripture is clear:

Ezekiel 18:20 “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.”

The boys, Moab and Ben-Ammi, were not guilty of their mothers’ deception. God’s justice does not destroy children for their parents’ sins.

Thus:

👉 Their birth was sinful, but their existence was not.

3. Because God had promised Abraham descendants and influence

Moab and Ammon descend from Lot, Abraham’s nephew.

God had promised Abraham:

His family would multiply

All nations connected to him would be blessed (Genesis 12:1–3)

Even though Moab and Ammon often opposed Israel later, they still existed within the broader Abrahamic family line.

God allowed Lot’s offspring to flourish because:

👉 God keeps covenant even when humans fail.

4. Because God intended to use Moab and Ammon in Israel’s story

These nations played important roles:

They served as tests of Israel’s obedience

Israel was forbidden to harass Moab and Ammon (Deuteronomy 2:9, 19).

God used Moab at times to discipline Israel

(See Judges 3:12–14)

Most importantly: The Messiah’s lineage comes through Moab

Ruth was a Moabite. She became the great-grandmother of King David (Ruth 4).

That means:

👉 Jesus Christ has Moabite blood in His earthly ancestry.

God used a nation born from incest to bring forth the Savior of the world.

That is sovereign grace on display.

5. Because God’s mercy is greater than human sin

Even in morally dark stories, God preserves life and continues His plan.

Moab and Ammon becoming nations shows:

God does not cancel people because of their origins

God redeems deeply broken family histories

God’s purposes cannot be stopped by human failure

This is a major biblical theme:

👉 Human sin is real, but God’s mercy is bigger.

Question 5: Why wasn’t Adam and Eve populating the world considered incest?

1. God created only one man and one woman

If humanity began with a single couple (Genesis 1–2), then:

Their children had to marry siblings.

Otherwise the human race could not have continued.

There was literally no other option.

God does not call people to obey a law that would make human life impossible.

Thus:

👉 Early sibling marriage was necessary, natural, and not sinful.

Incest was not yet forbidden—because it could not be avoided.

2. Incest became a sin later, when God gave the Law

Incest laws were given 1,500 years after creation, in the Law of Moses (Leviticus 18).

Before these laws, Scripture records:

Abraham married his half-sister Sarah (Genesis 20:12)

Nahor married his niece (Genesis 11:29)

These relationships happened before God prohibited close-kin marriage, and the Bible never condemns them.

3. Early human genetics were different

Theologically and scientifically, many Christian scholars explain that:

Adam and Eve’s DNA would have had no harmful mutations at creation

Early humans had far less genetic corruption

Marrying close relatives was not dangerous or morally problematic

Over generations, the accumulation of mutations increased the biological dangers of inbreeding.

By the time of Moses:

Close-kin marriage posed significant health risks

Humanity was numerous enough that sibling marriage was no longer needed

God outlawed it for moral and physical protection

Thus:

👉 Incest became sinful when it became harmful, unnecessary, and dangerous—not before.

4. Sin is defined by God’s revealed will

Sin is not just an act—it’s violating God’s law (1 John 3:4).

Since:

God never forbade sibling marriage in Adam’s time, and

It was required for humanity to grow,

It was not sinful.

Just as:

Eating pork wasn’t sinful for Noah

But was sinful for Israel under the Mosaic law

And not sinful again in the New Testament

Sin changes when God’s covenant instructions change, because sin is defined by His command.

Summary

Adam and Eve’s children populating the earth would NOT have been considered incest because:

There were no other humans to marry (necessity).

God had not yet forbidden close-kin marriage (no law = no sin).

Human genetics were uncorrupted, so it was not harmful.

Sin is defined by God’s revealed command, which came later.

Question 6: Why is the Bible not in Chronological order? It seems it would make it easier to understand.

The Old Testament is not arranged in chronological order because its books were organized according to type, purpose, and tradition, not date.

1. The Old Testament is arranged by category, not by time

The books fall into three major groupings (in both Jewish and Christian Bibles):

A. Law (Torah / Pentateuch)

Genesis–Deuteronomy Foundational teachings and origins

B. History

Joshua–Esther Narrative of Israel’s national life

C. Poetry & Wisdom

Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon Writings for worship, wisdom, and reflection

D. Prophets

Major Prophets: Isaiah–Daniel Minor Prophets: Hosea–Malachi

Because the Bible groups books this way, many of them overlap in time.

2. Multiple books cover the same time period

Example: 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles describe many of the same events.

Jeremiah, Ezekiel, or Daniel overlap with Kings and Chronicles.

Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah overlap with each other.

Job is likely one of the earliest books, yet appears in the middle of the OT.

Thus: The writers were arranged by purpose, not timeline.

3. Prophetic books aren’t placed based on when the prophets lived

They are grouped by Major (longer) and Minor (shorter) prophets.

Not by date.

For example:

Joel might be very early

Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah overlap

Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi belong after the exile

But they appear in the Bible grouped by length and tradition, not chronology.

4. Jewish tradition shaped the arrangement

The Jewish Scriptures (the Tanakh) have three divisions:

Torah (Law)

Nevi’im (Prophets)

Ketuvim (Writings)

This structure was based on:

The authority of the books

Their use in worship

Their literary style

Christians later kept all the same books, but rearranged the order to end with the prophets leading into the coming of Christ.

Thus: The order reflects theology, not timeline.

5. Many books were written after the events they describe

For example:

Kings and Chronicles were compiled long after many events occurred.

Some prophetic books were organized as collections, not strict diaries.

This makes chronological ordering difficult because:

The writing date is not always the same as the event date.

6. The Old Testament is a library, not a timeline

It contains:

Law codes

Poetry

Songs

Wisdom sayings

History

Prophetic sermons

Personal letters

Memoirs

National archives

No library organizes its books strictly by time—you organize by type.

So does the Old Testament.

Summary

The Old Testament is not in chronological order because:

It is arranged by genre, not date.

Many books overlap in time.

Prophets are grouped by length and tradition, not chronology.

Jewish Scripture order shaped the Christian Old Testament.

Books were written later than their events.

The OT is a library, not a timeline.

If you'd like, I can provide a chronological order of the OT books, or even a timeline chart showing where every book fits historically—just tell me!

Like the Old Testament, the NT is arranged by category, not by date of events or writing.

1. The New Testament Is Arranged by Genre

A. The Gospels (Matthew–John)

These are grouped together because they tell the story of Jesus' life and ministry. But they were not written in this order.

Most scholars agree the rough writing order was:

Mark (around A.D. 50–60)

Matthew or Luke (A.D. 60–70)

John (A.D. 80–95)

But the Bible places Matthew first because of its strong links to the Old Testament.

B. History (Acts)

Acts is the only historical narrative of the early church, so it stands alone after the Gospels.

C. Letters of Paul (Romans–Philemon)

Not arranged by date—these letters are arranged:

Generally by length (longest to shortest)

Then by church letters before personal letters

But the earliest NT book is likely 1 Thessalonians, not Romans.

D. General (Catholic) Epistles (Hebrews–Jude)

These are letters by several different apostles:

Hebrews

James

1 & 2 Peter

1, 2 & 3 John

Jude

They’re grouped by author and theme, not by chronological order.

E. Revelation

Placed last because it deals with the end of God’s redemptive plan, even though other books (like John’s letters) may have been written around the same time.

2. The Books Were Written at Different Times

Here is a rough timeline:

Earliest Books

James (A.D. 40s)

1 Thessalonians (A.D. 50–51)

Galatians (A.D. 48–55)

Middle Period

1 & 2 Corinthians

Romans

Luke

Acts

Later Books

John

1–3 John

Revelation

The New Testament does not follow this timeline in order.

3. The Chronology of Events Is Not Followed Either

For example: Paul’s earliest letters appear late in the NT

Acts, which describes early church events, comes before Paul’s letters even though some letters were written during Acts

Revelation is placed last because of its theme, not because it is necessarily the last book written (though it probably is)

Question 7: Why did human life span significantly drop after the flood?

The Bible does not give a single explicit reason for the drastic drop in lifespans after the Flood, but Scripture plus theological reasoning gives four major explanations that most biblical scholars and conservative theologians agree on.

God Himself intentionally shortened human life because of sin (Biblical or Judicial reason)

Genesis 6:3 KJV 1900

And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

God declaring the new, normal maximum lifespan for mankind.

Before the Flood:

Wickedness multiplied

Human sin flourished for centuries

Long life gave sinners more time to corrupt the world

So God reduced lifespan to:

Limit human evil

Reduce the influence of wickedness

Keep humanity humble and dependent on Him

Fulfill Psalm 90:10 (70–80 years as the typical lifespan)

👉 Shorter life was a judgment on sin and an act of God’s holiness. But also a mercy—less time to accumulate evil and suffering.

2. The pre-Flood world was physically different (protective canopy gone) Environmental reason

IFB teaching often includes the Genesis canopy theory, championed by many early fundamentalists.

Before the Flood:

A water vapor canopy surrounded the earth (Gen. 1:6–8)

This shield filtered out harmful UV radiation

It created a uniform, mild climate

Human bodies aged much slower

Lifespans naturally reached 900+ years

During the Flood:

“The windows of heaven were opened” (Gen. 7:11)

The canopy collapsed

Earth’s environment became harsher

After the Flood:

👉 More radiation + harsher climate = shorter lifespan.

This fits the immediate genealogical drop:

Shem – 600

Arphaxad – 438

Peleg – 239

Abraham – 175

Moses – 120

After Moses – about 70–80

The enviroment drastically changed, causing quicker aging

3. Genetic deterioration increased after the Flood (Genetical Reason)

Adam and Eve had perfect genetics

Sin corrupted creation (Romans 8:20–22)

Mutations increased slowly at first

The Flood bottleneck (8 people) caused rapid genetic decline

After the Flood:

👉 Weakened human bodies = shorter lifespan.

This matches the IFB belief that:

Sin brings death (Romans 5:12)

The effects of the Fall worsen over time

Modern humans are far removed from Edenic purity

4. The theological purpose changed (Purpose-of-humanity reason) Theological Reason

Before the Flood:

God allowed long lives to quickly populate the earth.

People had centuries to multiply and build civilization.

After the Flood:

Humanity was already established.

Long life was no longer necessary and could even allow wickedness to grow again.

Genesis 6:5–7 shows that long human life contributed to increasing evil.

So God reduced lifespans to:

limit the impact of sin

prevent another global moral collapse

keep humanity dependent on God

👉 Shorter lives are part of God’s judgment on sin and His mercy toward humanity.

Summary: Why did lifespans drop after the Flood?

Biblical Reason:

God declared He would shorten lifespan (Genesis 6:3).

Environmental Reason:

The world changed dramatically after the Flood.

Genetic Reason:

A genetic bottleneck introduced faster mutational decay.

Theological Reason:

God limited long lifespans to restrain sin and redirect humanity.

Any follow up questions that I can try to answer?