The kingdom of God.

[Checkpoint]

Some seem to think it is entirely future, while others give the impression they are always thinking of it as present, and to not be looking at the future in kingdom terms at all.

Jesus had much to say about the kingdom, including this:

Luke 16:

6 The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is being zealously urged into it.

So, where do you stand as to whether it is present, future, or has both a present and a future aspect?

On what basis?

According to which scriptures?

[nobspeople]

[Replying to tam in post #991]

What do you mean, so?

No. To help you understand, I said "Seems rather pointless, really." to which you 'explained' "It is based on a promise to Abraham". Promises can also be pointless. Your response deserved a 'so what' at best as it was yet another excuse - a very lackluster one at that - which doesn't address the point of it being, well, pointless.

I don't recall God ever saying, "Listen to what many various 'churches' teach".

I don't recall God saying much anything other than 'do this and don't do that'. To be honest, that's only what others SAID god said.
But one with a thinking mind would likely say if this is God's word, and if God has one iota of involvement with what he 'said' being taught, it would be taught correctly.
But it seems that you're saying we can't rely on these church leaders to teach humanity what's correct or right.
Which makes sense, seeing all the utter mess they're making in the world these days. But hey, if God can't create a world that man can't mess up, why would we think he can create a form of worship that man's not messed up, too, right?

People are free to choose who they listen to, though.

LOL What a absolutely despicable way to excuse your slave master god from any responsibility.
Absolutely despicable in every way possible (and maybe in ways heretofore not thought possible).

"It's not God's fault because these people are teaching his word poorly"

Disgusting. Vile and disgusting.

Back to the point at hand: the 144K. Promise or not, if God knows the exact number, he knows who's going to 'make it'. Which means ZERO free will, as Christians define it.
It means predestination.
It means fate.
That may trouble believers and they will look for excuses (your response shows this to be factual), twist words and definitions (even create their own) and chide those who don't know how to 'read and understand God' as they do, all the while never explaining how this is not fate - how God hasn't already chosen who will and won't be part of this number.

But thanks for trying.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #991]

What do you mean, so?

No. To help you understand, I said "Seems rather pointless, really." to which you 'explained' "It is based on a promise to Abraham". Promises can also be pointless. Your response deserved a 'so what' at best as it was yet another excuse - a very lackluster one at that - which doesn't address the point of it being, well, pointless.

You also said that it might be favoritism. Regardless, I don't see how 144 000 from Israel being reserved based on a promise to Abraham (due to love) is pointless. I don't even see how a person can find fault here.

So perhaps you should explain what you think makes this pointless?

Because this is a promise based on love. Love for Abraham, and therefore also for his household. How can that be pointless?

I don't recall God ever saying, "Listen to what many various 'churches' teach".

I don't recall God saying much anything other than 'do this and don't do that'. To be honest, that's only what others SAID god said.
But one with a thinking mind would likely say if this is God's word, and if God has one iota of involvement with what he 'said' being taught, it would be taught correctly.
But it seems that you're saying we can't rely on these church leaders to teach humanity what's correct or right.

That is correct. Christ is the Truth. Christ is the One whom God said to listen. Unless you can show where God said to listen to various church leaders - especially to listen to them blindly - there is no justification for blaming God.

Everyone makes mistakes of course, but once seen, one can correct that mistake, right?

Even in what is written, God said "This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to Him." That Son also warned that there would be false prophets, false teachers, many claiming to come in His name, but whom He never knew.

Which makes sense, seeing all the utter mess they're making in the world these days. But hey, if God can't create a world that man can't mess up, why would we think he can create a form of worship that man's not messed up, too, right?

"But a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for the Father is seeking such as these to worship Him. God is spirit, and His worshipers must worship Him in spirit and in truth.”

People are free to choose who they listen to, though.

LOL What a absolutely despicable way to excuse your slave master god from any responsibility.
Absolutely despicable in every way possible (and maybe in ways heretofore not thought possible).

Seriously? That statement is something you find despicable in every way possible and maybe in ways previously not thought possible?


Are you NOT free to choose who you listen to?

Can you NOT listen to Christ instead of "various churches/church leaders"? At the very least can you not test their words against His (even if just in what is written)?

"It's not God's fault because these people are teaching his word poorly"

I never claimed they were teaching 'his word' in the first place.

Disgusting. Vile and disgusting.

False teachers, false prophets, religions taking advantage of people, etc... sure, that is vile and disgusting. The following is horrible and shocking as well:

A horrible and shocking thing has happened in the land. The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule by their own authority. My people love it so, but what will you do in the end? Jeremiah 5:30-31


Christ warned us that such would come (false teachers and prophets), but God said to listen to His Son. Giving a warning and direction on who to listen TO is not vile and disgusting. That is something one does out of love.

Back to the point at hand: the 144K. Promise or not, if God knows the exact number, he knows who's going to 'make it'. Which means ZERO free will, as Christians define it.
It means predestination.
It means fate.

A - I have no further comment on the 'fate' idea except from what is in my last post. You're just repeating your assertion.

B - You keep ignoring the part where there is more than 144 000. There are just 144 000 guaranteed and reserved from twelve tribes of Israel.

That may trouble believers and they will look for excuses (your response shows this to be factual),

I would not be troubled if it were correct (if there was not free will, then there is no accountability, and a lot of people prefer that idea), so I am not making 'excuses'. Granted, I think blaming God for doing something God never told you to do is 'making excuses'. Even this response seems to be an excuse: that the only reason a person must believe in free will is because they would be troubled otherwise.

twist words and definitions (even create their own) and chide those who don't know how to 'read and understand God' as they do, all the while never explaining how this is not fate - how God hasn't already chosen who will and won't be part of this number.

This has been explained. Just because you do not see or accept that explanation, does not mean that it was not explained.

I'm just not sure why the idea of 144000 being guaranteed from Israel (though the great crowd holds much more than just the 144 000, a number that no one can count) is so bothersome.


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #976]

We don't believe the literal nation of natural Jews plays any further role in bible prophecy. As a nation they are a rejected people, replaced in Gods purposes by spirit anointed Christians of various nationalities.

So how, in your view, are we to evaluate or interpret or apply, Isaiah 6:7-11?

I presume you are well aware that many Evangelicals apply it to the State of Israel being created on 14 May, 1948.

Anyway, please let me know your thoughts about that passage.

Thanks.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #976]

We don't believe the literal nation of natural Jews plays any further role in bible prophecy. As a nation they are a rejected people, replaced in Gods purposes by spirit anointed Christians of various nationalities.

So how, in your view, are we to evaluate or interpret or apply, Isaiah 6:7-11?

I presume you are well aware that many Evangelicals apply it to the State of Israel being created on 14 May, 1948.

Anyway, please let me know your thoughts about that passage.

Thanks.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #976]

We don't believe the literal nation of natural Jews plays any further role in bible prophecy. As a nation they are a rejected people, replaced in Gods purposes by spirit anointed Christians of various nationalities.

So how, in your view, are we to evaluate or interpret or apply, Isaiah 6:7-11?

ISAIAH 6:7-11 ESV

And he touched my mouth and said: “Behold, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away, and your sin atoned for.” And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here I am! Send me.” And he said, “Go, and say to this people: “‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’ Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” Then I said, “How long, O Lord?” And he said: “Until cities lie waste without inhabitant, and houses without people, and the land is a desolate waste

I dont believe this passage has anything to do with the post-Messianic rejection of the nation of Israel. The context is Isaiah's commission as a Prophet around 778 BCE predicting the peoples stubborness and the subsequent destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians.

History testifies that they would return to their Homeland and rebuild the temple which happened under Govenor Zerubbabel in the 6th century BCE. So the Babylonian exile did not mark a PERMANENT rejection of the nation but their later rejection'of the Messiah would.

I presume you are well aware that many Evangelicals apply it to the State of Israel being created on 14 May, 1948.

Yes I am aware,of that. I believe they are wrong (see above)

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

GOD'S KINGDOM , THE 144, 000 and .... SPIRITUAL ISRAEL

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #976]

We don't believe the literal nation of natural Jews plays any further role in bible prophecy. As a nation they are a rejected people, replaced in Gods purposes by spirit anointed Christians of various nationalities.

So how, in your view, are we to evaluate or interpret or apply, Isaiah 6:7-11?

ISAIAH 6:7-11 ESV

And he touched my mouth and said: “Behold, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away, and your sin atoned for.” And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here I am! Send me.” And he said, “Go, and say to this people: “‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’ Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” Then I said, “How long, O Lord?” And he said: “Until cities lie waste without inhabitant, and houses without people, and the land is a desolate waste

I dont believe this passage has anything to do with the post-Messianic rejection of the nation of Israel. The context is Isaiah's commission as a Prophet around 778 BCE predicting the peoples stubborness and the subsequent destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians.

History testifies that they would return to their Homeland and rebuild the temple which happened under Govenor Zerubbabel in the 6th century BCE. So the Babylonian exile did not mark a PERMANENT rejection of the nation but their later rejection'of the Messiah would.

I presume you are well aware that many Evangelicals apply it to the State of Israel being created on 14 May, 1948.

Yes I am aware,of that. I believe they are wrong (see above)

You have answered well the question I seemingly posed. I much appreciate your care and attention.

I say "seemingly" because I failed to give the correct Isaiah reference. My further failure to quote it ensured neither of us realised my mistake.

I apologise to you.

This is the correct passage:

Isaiah 66:7-11

7 “Before she was in labor, she gave birth;
before she was in pain, she delivered a boy.
8 Who has heard of such as this?
Who has seen such things?
Can a country be born in a day
or a nation be delivered in an instant?

Yet as soon as Zion was in labor,
she gave birth to her children.

9 Shall I bring a baby to the point of birth and not deliver it?”
says the LORD.
“Or will I who deliver close the womb?”
says your God.

10 Be glad for Jerusalem and rejoice over her,
all who love her.
Rejoice greatly with her,
all who mourn over her,

11 so that you may nurse and be satisfied
at her comforting breasts;
you may drink deeply and delight yourselves
in her glorious abundance.

Who do you think these verses are talking about, and what is or was the specific event?



To learn more please go to other posts related to...

GOD'S KINGDOM , THE 144, 000 and .... SPIRITUAL ISRAEL

[/quote]

[JehovahsWitness]

Isaiah 66:7-11

7 “Before she was in labor, she gave birth;
before she was in pain, she delivered a boy.
8 Who has heard of such as this?
Who has seen such things?
Can a country be born in a day
or a nation be delivered in an instant?

Yet as soon as Zion was in labor,
she gave birth to her children.

9 Shall I bring a baby to the point of birth and not deliver it?”
says the LORD.
“Or will I who deliver close the womb?”
says your God.

10 Be glad for Jerusalem and rejoice over her,
all who love her.
Rejoice greatly with her,
all who mourn over her,

11 so that you may nurse and be satisfied
at her comforting breasts;
you may drink deeply and delight yourselves
in her glorious abundance.

Who do you think these verses are talking about, and what is or was the specific event?

I believe this is a prophecy with a double fulfillement. The first fulfillement as when the exiled Jews in Babylon were liberated by Cyrus the Great in 537 B.C.E. In that year as if by a miracle the nation was born, seemingly without warning, to rebuild the temple and once more be free to worship their God.


The second (and major) fulfillment was, I believe when true Christians were liberated in a spiritual sense from Babylon the Great in 1919. After being spiritual "captives" spirit born again Christians were once more free to Worship God in an approved state as a spiritual nation. In short it is when true worship was once again restored on earth after the great apostacy of the second century CE .


Bible LECTURE : https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#e ... 10_3_VIDEO

[onewithhim]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #975]

It's that simple. The Bible says that the 144,000 will be taken out of ALL nations. (Revelation 5:9,10) Not just Israel.

Why, in your view, are those verses about the 144,000?

Because they are described in the 14th chapter. The people in the 5th chapter are ones that "sing a new song," and are out of every nation, "made to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth." So are the people in chapter 14. There they are also described as singing "a new song" and have been bought from the earth as a very special group "before the throne," just as those described in chapter 5.

Clear and specific, which I find pleasing, but, regrettably, not all is accurately according to Revelation 5 and 14.

1). Those who sang the song differ.

In 5 it was "the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders"; in 14 it was "the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth".


2). You wrote, of those in chapter 5: "made to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth" So are the people in chapter 14.

That is nowhere in chapter 14!

Is it?

There is more, but this will do for now.

Who else would be singing this new song that no one was able to master except them? Who else would be considered "firstfruits to God and to the Lamb"? Is there another group that will rule as kings over the earth? How many "first fruits" are there? Logically, there is one group that will rule as kings and who are "first fruits" with Jesus...that is, the first among mankind to be resurrected to heaven. It is not reasonable to say there are two special groups who will rule with Jesus.

[onewithhim]

...
So, where do you stand as to whether it is present, future, or has both a present and a future aspect?
...

I believe this:

"The Kingdom of God doesn't come with observation; neither will they say, 'Look, here!' or, 'Look, there!' for behold, the Kingdom of God is within you."
Luke 17:20-21

How can a government be within someone? This kingdom IS a government (see Isaiah 9:6,7 and Daniel 2:44). When Jesus said that the Kingdom of God is within you---it is more accurate in our vernacular to say "the Kingdom of God is in your midst"---he meant that he, the future King of God's government, was there in their midst. He represented that Kingdom. After all, he was the King-Designate.

[1213]

How can a government be within someone? ...

I think it means, the King is in your mind, person knows in the mind the King and his will and wants to do it.