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?

[JehovahsWitness]

* spirit-anointed
* born again
* The bride of Christ
* The new Jerusalem
* Christ's "brothers" - Mat 25:40
* The little flock
* (spiritual) Israel - Rom 9:6
* Israel of God - Gal 6:16

...nowhere in scripture does it indicate that these appellations do not apply to ALL who follow Christ acceptably.

You are wrong on that.

Born again: When Jesus used this term he qualified it to apply to those to be in the "kingdom of heavens" The kingdom being anointed believers ruling obviously requires a domain over which they rule (the "dom" of kingdom). Jesus explained some would inherit the earth.

The bride of Christ John the Baptist spoke of "the friends of the bridegroom" indeed no wedding is complete without friends and family who are not part of the marriage contract rejoicing. Either John was the only human friend of that heavenly union or there would be others.

The first Resurrection. Those in heaven would benefit from the first Resurrection. He that says first indicates a second. There would be something different about the two resurrection (Since if there was no difference there woild only be one) If the first is to heaven (to "marry" Christ) the"the second" logically are not to marry Christ. Whoever they are they are not the bride.


The "little flock" Jesus said would be given the kingdom but he went on to say there would be other sheep NOT of this fold. There would be something different about this other group although they too would be his sheep and by implication followers of Jesus (Christians).

Spiritual Israel /Israel of God The Israelites inherited a promise given to Abraham, that by means of them All nations of the earth would bless themselves. They as a nation failed to live up to that promise so God "adopted" others but the promise demands ANOTHER group those that are blessed through/by means of the first.

Christ brothers In the illustration Jesus said the sheep would be granted eternal blessings because of their support for his "brothers". So we have a group identfied by Jesus as his brothers and a second group who are kind to them. If those Jesus promised a place in his Fathers home in heaven are his brothers, who are the sheep of Matthew 25?

There is so much more but it comes from reading, REALLY reading and respecting the bible. That scripture must fit together into a harmonious logic. Oprah once famously yelled "You get a car, you get a car, EVERYBODY gets a car!" And the churches of Christendom, by saying everyone goes to heaven, have diluted what is a very beautiful logical teaching, that this earth will one day return to its paradisaic condition and faithful humans will live forever on it. And by rejecting this basic teaching one cannot hear the whisper that would in the end times become a mighty roar, there are more coming, there will be a great multitude coming and they too will follow the lamb! - Revelation 7:9

JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

"In those days ten men out of all the languages of the nations will take hold, yes, they will take firm hold of the robe of a Jew saying: “We want to go with you, for we have heard that God is with you people" - [Zechariah 8:23

[tam]

Peace to you both,

* spirit-anointed
* born again
* The bride of Christ
* The new Jerusalem
* Christ's "brothers" - Mat 25:40
* The little flock
* (spiritual) Israel - Rom 9:6
* Israel of God - Gal 6:16

...nowhere in scripture does it indicate that these appellations do not apply to ALL who follow Christ acceptably.

You are wrong on that.

I don't think he is wrong, although I would state "Christian" (though I understand that is what Checkpoint may mean when he says "all who follow Christ acceptably").

Yours is the only religion I know of that interprets various passages to mean 'a second group of Christians', even though there is no reason (or need) for this. There was no 'second group of Christians' two thousand years ago, no teaching of some having a heavenly hope and some having an earthly hope. And the disciples all ate the bread and drank the wine (the body and blood of Christ). There was no teaching that some should eat and drink, and others should not, except for the warning Paul gave to some who were doing so unworthily - but that was about what was in their heart when they ate, and NOT about what 'calling' they had (earthly or heavenly).

Born again: When Jesus used this term he qualified it to apply to those to be in the "kingdom of heavens" The kingdom being anointed believers ruling obviously requires a domain over which they rule (the "dom" of kingdom). Jesus explained some would inherit the earth.

He actually said the "Kingdom of God".

But that distinction seems to be an issue/problem only for those who do not take into account (or see/accept) that the New Jerusalem (the Bride) comes down out of heaven and reigns upon the earth.

The bride of Christ John the Baptist spoke of "the friends of the bridegroom" indeed no wedding is complete without friends and family who are not part of the marriage contract rejoicing. Either John was the only human friend of that heavenly union or there would be others.

John the Baptist died before Christ instituted the new covenant.

The first Resurrection. Those in heaven would benefit from the first Resurrection.

At the first resurrection, those who have died (fallen asleep in Christ) will be resurrected, and those (in Christ) who are yet alive upon the earth, will be caught up to meet them in the sky (at His return). 1 Thess 4:16, 17

He that says first indicates a second. There would be something different about the two resurrection (Since if there was no difference there woild only be one) If the first is to heaven (to "marry" Christ) the"the second" logically are not to marry Christ. Whoever they are they are not the bride.

Indeed.

Many (non-Christans) have died since Adam (before and after Christ came to the earth), and these ones will take part in the resurrection of the dead (the second resurrection).

The "little flock" Jesus said would be given the kingdom but he went on to say there would be other sheep NOT of this fold.

And that He would call them ALSO, and that they would be ONE FLOCK, with one Shepherd.

There would be something different about this other group although they too would be his sheep and by implication followers of Jesus (Christians).

Yes, such as sheep other than the Jews (from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin) whom Christ called. He also called Samaritans (who are from the other ten tribes of Israel). He also called Gentiles (non-Israel people).

Nothing in His words suggests a second group of Christians almost two thousand years later. There is no reason to come to that conclusion except that a religion teaches it... and along with that teaching, entices people into disobeying Christ, into refusing His body and His blood, which He said to eat and to drink, saying even that unless one eats and drinks of His flesh and His blood, one has no life in them.

Spiritual Israel /Israel of God The Israelites inherited a promise given to Abraham, that by means of them All nations of the earth would bless themselves. They as a nation failed to live up to that promise so God "adopted" others but the promise demands ANOTHER group those that are blessed through/by means of the first.

Were the people who would be blessed by means of Israel, a second group of Israel within Israel? Or was it the non-Israelite nations that would be blessed by means of Israel? Just as non-Christians will be blessed according to how they have treated even a least one of the brothers of Christ ('whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me').

Christ brothers In the illustration Jesus said the sheep would be granted eternal blessings because of their support for his "brothers". So we have a group identfied by Jesus as his brothers and a second group who are kind to them. If those Jesus promised a place in his Fathers home in heaven are his brothers, who are the sheep of Matthew 25?

Anyone who has done those things for even a least one of His brothers, not realizing that they are also doing those things for Christ.


**

See, you and other jws know that more than just Christians enter into the Kingdom (as subjects of that Kingdom). So you must also know that there is no need for a 'second group of Christians' to fit all the questions you asked Checkpoint above. All those questions are answered by the non-Christians who are invited into the Kingdom (as subjects of the Kingdom).



And thank you for making mention of the following verse:


"In those days ten men from the nations of every tongue shall take hold of the robe of a Jew, saying, ‘Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.’” Zechariah 8:23


Christ is that Jew.



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

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #761]

Checkpoint wrote:

↑Tue Sep 22, 2020 12:21 am
...nowhere in scripture does it indicate that these appellations do not apply to ALL who follow Christ acceptably.

You are wrong on that.

Born again: When Jesus used this term he qualified it to apply to those to be in the "kingdom of heavens" The kingdom being anointed believers ruling obviously requires a domain over which they rule (the "dom" of kingdom). Jesus explained some would inherit the earth.

Not so, JW.

In John 3 he did not qualify it by making it only "apply to those to be in the "kingdom of heavens".

In John 3 he does not use the term "kingdom of heavens", but instead the term "kingdom of God".
.
He did not use only the term "born again", but also "born from above" and "born of the Spirit".

Jesus said unless you are "born again" of the Spirit, you cannot see(perceive) the kingdom of God, or enter it.

[JehovahsWitness]

...nowhere in scripture does it indicate that these appellations do not apply to ALL who follow Christ acceptably.

Not so, JW.

In John 3 he did not qualify it by making it only "apply to those to be in the "kingdom of heavens".

In John 3 he does not use the term "kingdom of heavens", but instead the term "kingdom of God".

Fair enough my new answer is as follows.

Born again: When Jesus used this term he qualified it to apply to those to be in the "kingdom of God" The kingdom God consisting of anointed believers ruling. A ruler (king) obviously requires a domain (DOM) over which they rule. Jesus explained some (obviously not of this ruling group) would inherit the earth.

He did not use only the term "born again", but also "born from above" and "born of the Spirit".

Jesus said unless you are "born again" of the Spirit, you cannot see(perceive) the kingdom of God, or enter it.

When Jesus used this term he applied it to those "born from above" and "born of the Spirit"." refering to those adopted as spirit sons of God and as a result of that adoption in line to inherit heavenly kingdom authority. Rulers obviously require subjects, thus we again come to two destinies one rulers and another of subjects Jesus explained some (obviously not of this ruling group) would inherit the earth.



Consider the previous post modified.

JW

[Checkpoint]

...nowhere in scripture does it indicate that these appellations do not apply to ALL who follow Christ acceptably.

Not so, JW.

In John 3 he did not qualify it by making it only "apply to those to be in the "kingdom of heavens".

In John 3 he does not use the term "kingdom of heavens", but instead the term "kingdom of God".

Fair enough my new answer is as follows.

Born again: When Jesus used this term he qualified it to apply to those to be in the "kingdom of God" The kingdom God consisting of anointed believers ruling. A ruler (king) obviously requires a domain (DOM) over which they rule. Jesus explained some (obviously not of this ruling group) would inherit the earth.

He did not use only the term "born again", but also "born from above" and "born of the Spirit".

Jesus said unless you are "born again" of the Spirit, you cannot see(perceive) the kingdom of God, or enter it.

When Jesus used this term he applied it to those "born from above" and "born of the Spirit"." refering to those adopted as spirit sons of God and as a result of that adoption in line to inherit heavenly kingdom authority. Rulers obviously require subjects, thus we again come to two destinies one rulers and another of subjects Jesus explained some (obviously not of this ruling group) would inherit the earth.


Consider the previous post modified.

JW

Yes, you have modified your previous post to me.

However, you continue to claim there are/will be, two groups of believers and two kinds of inheritance and two destinies.

[JehovahsWitness]

However, you continue to claim there are/will be, two groups of believers and two kinds of inheritance and two destinies.

Yes because that is what the bible teaches. Obviously if some humans will go to heaven to rule as kings in heaven and some will live as subjects on earth we have two groups. One can debate the identification of the two groups, and even what future awaits them, there is no doubt Jesus spoke about two groups of approved followers.

JOHN 10:16

And I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those too I must bring in, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd.

Indeed unless one believes Jesus and his co-rulers will be ruling over rocks and animals, two groups is intrincsic to the word "King-DOM"; a kingdom comprising as it does of a king(s) and those that are not kings but in the DOMain of the king(s).[/i].

The meaning of prophecies with two seemingly approved subjects interacting have long been the subject of debate amongst serious bible students, but not the fact that such passages exist.

JW




RELATED POSTS

Do all good people go to heaven?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 15#p878615

What expressions are used to described those that will go to heaven to rule as KINGS with Jesus?
viewtopic.php?p=1022185#p1022185

Does the bible indicate TWO groups of Christians?
viewtopic.php?p=1022185#p1022185

Are the groups of REV 7:4 and REV 7:9 the same ? [Tim]
viewtopic.php?p=825064#p825064

Who are the great crowd mentioned in the book of Revelation?
viewtopic.php?p=1003656#p1003656

Did Jesus speak about TWO groups of approved followers? [this post]
viewtopic.php?p=1022400#p1022400

Why do Jehovah's Witnesses believe only 144,000 individuals will go to heaven?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 94#p846594

WHY does God call some to heavenly life from the earth?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 97#p846997

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

HEAVEN , THE 144, 000 and ... THE GREAT CROWD

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #766]

Checkpoint wrote:

↑
However, you continue to claim there are/will be, two groups of believers and two kinds of inheritance and two destinies.

Yes because that is what the bible teaches.

Not at all.

I did not complete my last post, and indicated that, but instead of waiting for that completion, you answered anyway. It will therefore remain uncompleted.



But here now, briefly, is a little of what I had intended to complete it with:

Consider this one aspect of what is promised to all genuine believers; an inheritance, and why it is promised to them. Revelation 21:7.

We have become God's family, with all that that means. To do so, we must have been born again, from above, of the Spirit, of God.

Otherwise, we can neither see nor enter the kingdom of God, and thus do not have any family right or inheritance.

John 1:

12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—
13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

[IAMinyou]

* spirit-anointed
* born again
* The bride of Christ
* The new Jerusalem
* Christ's "brothers" - Mat 25:40
* The little flock
* (spiritual) Israel - Rom 9:6
* Israel of God - Gal 6:16

...nowhere in scripture does it indicate that these appellations do not apply to ALL who follow Christ acceptably.

You are wrong on that.

Born again: When Jesus used this term he qualified it to apply to those to be in the "kingdom of heavens" The kingdom being anointed believers ruling obviously requires a domain over which they rule (the "dom" of kingdom). Jesus explained some would inherit the earth.

The bride of Christ John the Baptist spoke of "the friends of the bridegroom" indeed no wedding is complete without friends and family who are not part of the marriage contract rejoicing. Either John was the only human friend of that heavenly union or there would be others.

The first Resurrection. Those in heaven would benefit from the first Resurrection. He that says first indicates a second. There would be something different about the two resurrection (Since if there was no difference there woild only be one) If the first is to heaven (to "marry" Christ) the"the second" logically are not to marry Christ. Whoever they are they are not the bride.


The "little flock" Jesus said would be given the kingdom but he went on to say there would be other sheep NOT of this fold. There would be something different about this other group although they too would be his sheep and by implication followers of Jesus (Christians).

Spiritual Israel /Israel of God The Israelites inherited a promise given to Abraham, that by means of them All nations of the earth would bless themselves. They as a nation failed to live up to that promise so God "adopted" others but the promise demands ANOTHER group those that are blessed through/by means of the first.

Christ brothers In the illustration Jesus said the sheep would be granted eternal blessings because of their support for his "brothers". So we have a group identfied by Jesus as his brothers and a second group who are kind to them. If those Jesus promised a place in his Fathers home in heaven are his brothers, who are the sheep of Matthew 25?

There is so much more but it comes from reading, REALLY reading and respecting the bible. That scripture must fit together into a harmonious logic. Oprah once famously yelled "You get a car, you get a car, EVERYBODY gets a car!" And the churches of Christendom, by saying everyone goes to heaven, have diluted what is a very beautiful logical teaching, that this earth will one day return to its paradisaic condition and faithful humans will live forever on it. And by rejecting this basic teaching one cannot hear the whisper that would in the end times become a mighty roar, there are more coming, there will be a great multitude coming and they too will follow the lamb! - Revelation 7:9

JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

"In those days ten men out of all the languages of the nations will take hold, yes, they will take firm hold of the robe of a Jew saying: “We want to go with you, for we have heard that God is with you people" - [Zechariah 8:23

I AM the KINGDOM of GOD with a VOICE that speaks for our CREATOR.

[Checkpoint]

However, you continue to claim there are/will be, two groups of believers and two kinds of inheritance and two destinies.

Yes because that is what the bible teaches. Obviously if some humans will go to heaven to rule as kings in heaven and some will live as subjects on earth, we have two groups.

Don't you realise what you are doing with that statement, JW?

What is obvious to me, is that you begin with an "if", which is effectively an assumption that your conclusion, two groups as identified by you, are in fact "what the bible teaches".

One can debate the identification of the two groups, and even what future awaits them, there is no doubt Jesus spoke about two groups of approved followers.

JOHN 10:16

And I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those too I must bring in, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd.

So, you are saying this scripture is an example of, supports, your thesis of two groups?

On the contrary, "they will become one flock", not two.

Indeed unless one believes Jesus and his co-rulers will be ruling over rocks and animals, two groups is intrincsic to the word "King-DOM"; a kingdom comprising as it does of a king(s) and those that are not kings but in the DOMain of the king(s).[/i].

The meaning of prophecies with two seemingly approved subjects interacting have long been the subject of debate amongst serious bible students, but not the fact that such passages exist.

JW

This contains nothing about what the Bible actually teaches.

[tam]

Peace again to you all,

[Replying to Checkpoint in post #762]

JW said:

Indeed unless one believes Jesus and his co-rulers will be ruling over rocks and animals, two groups is intrincsic to the word "King-DOM"; a kingdom comprising as it does of a king(s) and those that are not kings but in the DOMain of the king(s).[/i].

In no way does this require there to be a second group of "approved Christians". Even the WTS acknowledges that there are people other than Christians who will be resurrected and invited into the Kingdom (at least during the thousand years) - as subjects of that Kingdom.

(This is covered in my previous post, post 767)



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