2 edits
-Removed-
I'm not sure you can be broadly scripturally cohesive with these claims (although I'm sure you will think you are). I have some questions. As you have obviously thought this through and I suspect this positioning is part of your particular church sect's doctrinal teaching, can you please be precise and succinct.
I am pretty sure that if I go into the detail needed to explain you will not read. Twenty-five words or less here will be inadequate.
I'll think on your questions and think about whether the time to really address them will be wasted on you.
I mean you boasted about not reading to the end of my posts.
This doesn't exactly encourage dialogue with you.
2 edits
As you have obviously thought this through and I suspect this positioning is part of your particular church sect's doctrinal teaching, can you please be precise and succinct.
There are a few Statements of Faith that I could subscribe to about the teachings we receive in the local churches. I don't think this matter is included in any of them as an essential.
I mean that the nations being the healed people restored in the millennium and in the following age of the new heaven and new earth. And that they are distinct from the sons of God in the New Jerusalem.
I would have to double check. It is a non-essential. Christ reigning forever though or our being co-kings with Him from overcoming is not non-essential.
We are not sectarian.
All believers in Christ are welcomed to our table meetings.
You could not say this about most "sects" or denominations.
3 edits
-Removed-Succinct will probably cause problems of incomplete analysis of the issues. But some deserve here some reply - who don't boast about not reading what I write.
1) You differentiate between groups of people who are "born again" and those not born again but who are presumably saved from your view of hell. What other robust scriptures do you have to support this position?
One can understand this with no reference to the hell matter.
Adam was created with an everlasting life which he lost.
Some peoples on the earth will be the peoples over whom the sons of God who are regenerated reign,
They are restored to be as Adam and Eve were, with an everlasting life yet not indwelt with by God's life.
2) These people who are not born again and are therefore not spiritually regenerated - how do they exist in eternity within the "new creation" alongside those who are the Bride.
They exist by being "healed" by the leaves of the tree of life.
This is different from the "eating" of the fruit of the tree of life.
To be healed by the leaves means to be restored to be as God originally made Adam - very good, innocent, yet not indwelt by the life of God.
To eat of the fruit of the tree of life is to receive divine life into you to become one of the sons of God.
The sons of God of New Jerusalem reign forever and ever. They do not reign over each other. Some people restored to be as Adam and Eve were before they fell will be there.
These are the nations living around the New Jerusalem and walking in its light.
3) As they are not spiritually regenerated, what criteria differentiates those in the 'saved but not born again' group from those in the 'not-saved and not born again and going to eternal hell' group? And specifically, how is this accounted for in the attonement?
There is room in Scripture to understand that belief in God as Creator by some who know nothing else might justify them. See Romans 1.
Paul also says Christ brings vengence on those who :
1.) Do not know God.
2.) Who do not OBEY the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
This could be distinct catagories. It would cause some other passages to make more sense.
" ... the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with the angels of His power, in flaming fire.
Rendering vengence to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
They will pay the penalty of eternal destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His strength." ( 2 Thess. 1:7-9)
Originally posted by FMFHaving trouble following along, are you?
So these people supposedly in "revolt" are Christians?
Surely you are not suggesting that people who do not have the same beliefs as you are in "revolt" against the things you believe in?
Well, I daresay that is what happens when the only reason you follow anything is to condemn it. After all, why bother trying to actually understand what people are saying?
Originally posted by FMFYou're barking up the wrong tree here.
No and no? So the people you say are in "revolt" are neither believers nor non-believers, is that it?. This is incoherent. If you accept that people cannot be in "revolt" against a God figure they simply do not believe in, then who is it you reckon is in "revolt"?
If you don't "get" what is being discussed, it's no shame to say so.
The rest of us can tell you're not getting it. Apparently, you're the only one who thinks you do.
Originally posted by lemon limeNo, all of that I get.
It may be baffling (I've wondered about this too) but that is what the passage from Revelations is saying.
We've never had a thousand years of peace (without war) so it obviously isn't a reference to anytime in our past history. And if I'm not mistaken there are passages from the OT that describe a long stretch of time where lifespans will significantl ...[text shortened]... : Isaiah 65:20 (specific reference to lifespans)
[found within context of Isaiah 65: 17-25][/b]
It's only what I mentioned in my post that I didn't get. Sonship has provided the answer, but I would still like to hear it fleshed out a bit more.
Originally posted by sonshipThe more you post about this, the more I get. This post and the one before it help a lot.
How many people imagine that this passage means that the reborn sons of God saved will reign over each other forever and ever ?
[quote] [b]"And they will see His face, and His name will be on their foreheads.
And night will be no more; and they have no need of the light of a lamp and of the light of the sun, for the Lord God will shine upon them; and ...[text shortened]... ars could be deceived after such a period of blessing to revolt and join Satan's last rebellion.
Please, continue.
-Removed-Interesting that you shoehorn this concept in with the "saved from hell" concept. I'm taking the "saved from hell" bit as a given, since they wouldn't be around to participate in the millennial kingdom if they weren't.
Still, you ask some good questions that I wouldn't mind hearing the answer to myself.
2 edits
Originally posted by Suzianne, to divegeester(To divegeester, in case this isn't clear: )
This is the one thing that confuses me most about you.
You seem to preach the exact message of the Trinity and then you sit back and say "See? The Trinity is bull."
I don't get why you do this.
You know, I don't support this "bumping" of one's own posts to badger people into answering pointed questions, but this is still bothering me. You are currently having some sort of "throw-down" with sonship in another thread here over the Trinity concept, so, if you don't mind, I'll ask you what I wrote in this post again.
"You seem to preach the exact message of the Trinity and then you sit back and say "See? The Trinity is bull."
Can you further explain this? Everything you write about what you believe concerning the Godhead sounds exactly like the Trinity concept to me. What exactly IS your beef with the Trinity concept, when it sounds to me like you believe in it?
Originally posted by SuzianneI don't mean to butt in here......but, I would like to know as well. I am hesitant to post again, but...I am still seeking as much knowledge as I can regarding the Trinity, or Godhead.....and what is the difference. Thanks.
(To divegeester, in case this isn't clear: )
You know, I don't support this "bumping" of one's own posts to badger people into answering pointed questions, but this is still bothering me. You are currently having some sort of "throw-down" with sonship in another thread here over the Trinity concept, so, if you don't mind, I'll ask you what I wrote in th ...[text shortened]... What exactly IS your beef with the Trinity concept, when it sounds to me like you believe in it?