Debate with Veteran

[Vengle]

Agreed. There is also always space for error on our part.

To me, if a brother is willing to learn, humble, and of the same spirit, having brotherly love, I won't reject him by any means. I am very willing though, to go back and forth about understanding and wisdom I perceive to be important for us to be able to walk in Christ! :lol:

Yes, that is what I mean when I said, "It appears that in this world the body of Christ has taken the sins of the world to itself literally that it might shake and rattle that corn to get loose from this world those that are at least potentially teachable."

I believe the shaking loose for many is now but the bulk of their teaching will be in that millennium.

That is what I see also as the resurrection to judgment of the as yet unrighteous. It is not about trying to destroy but to salvage. That is who the loving God we serve is and what he is about. He differentiates between them and the wicked. He only destroys wicked ones. Though a person who due to their fallen flesh yet remains stuck in unrighteousness, until they prove wicked in their spirit, he will not destroy them.

We do not have an unrighteous God. We have a God who is the epitome of love and loves mercy and justice.

Many of our doctrines have painted him harsh but he is not. He is fair and loving.

 

[Prentis]

Yes, that is what I mean when I said, "It appears that in this world the body of Christ has taken the sins of the world to itself literally that it might shake and rattle that corn to get loose from this world those that are at least potentially teachable."

I believe the shaking loose for many is now but the bulk of their teaching will be in that millennium.

I think I understand what you are saying, only I am confused on one point. If I understood right, the teaching you are talking about that happens in the millenium is doctrinal teaching (since this is what was disagreed on and where the comment came) :huh:

I would say it's about life. The Lord desires to teach us to walk in this life, and good doctrine, truth, reveals to us how it works, but ultimately it's about us actually walking in it. In the millenium, I think the saints are trained to rule and reign so that they be ready to do so when the new creation comes. To me doctrine is important now, but for the sole purpose of teaching us to be as he is, it is not an end, but a means.

 

[Vengle]

I think I understand what you are saying, only I am confused on one point. If I understood right, the teaching you are talking about that happens in the millenium is doctrinal teaching (since this is what was disagreed on and where the comment came) :huh:

I would say it's about life. The Lord desires to teach us to walk in this life, and good doctrine, truth, reveals to us how it works, but ultimately it's about us actually walking in it. In the millenium, I think the saints are trained to rule and reign so that they be ready to do so when the new creation comes. To me doctrine is important now, but for the sole purpose of teaching us to be as he is, it is not an end, but a means.

Yes, the ransom has covered them now in this life IF they faithfully try and it is that their inability to get it completely right in this current world's life is not due to a love of wickedness in their heart.

 

[Prentis]

Yes, the ransom has covered them now in this life IF they faithfully try and it is that their inability to get it completely right in this current world's life is not due to a love of wickedness in their heart.

Agreed, only I thought we were talking about those who follow God, not the nations. Now I'm confused again! :huh: :lol:

My understanding of it is like this. In revelation it says there are two judgements, first the house of God, and then after a thousand years, the ressurection and judgment of the nations. My understanding is that this life is enough for God to measure our hearts whether we knew him or not.

If we are of the house of God, we are judged according to fruit. Did we grow and persevere, and produce many talents with the one given us? Or did we shame our master and beat his other servants in his absence (ie, not walking in brotherly love)? Some go to shame, some to glory. Vessels of honor, and vessels of dishonor.

To those who did not come to the knowledge of God, he will say to some 'When I was naked, you clothed me, when I was hungry, you fed me...', and to others, 'when... you did not...', and both will respond 'When Lord? When did we see you?' because they did not know him, but their works revealed their hearts. These go either to life or to the second death. Not glory, and not shame. Life and death.

PS. This goes further with the fact it is not about knowledge, or doctrine, but about what we do, whether we love, or hate, whether we obey or disobey. Those who know are responsible for more. Both can fail with what they have, the requirement is simply different.

 

[Vengle]

Any true elect co-ruler to be did reach perfection in their life before their death. They are able to stand on their own merits of righteousness at that point as they have won that crown of righteousness. So the righteous in that verse about the resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous is speaking in terms of how they are able to stand in their own merits.

It is not speaking of imputed righteousness which is only used to give us a foothold with God to get us started on the way to actually becoming righteous.

So those of us who have not yet achieved perfection of spirit though we do our best to support Christ's bride (like as bride's maids) are spoken of there as to our true state, which is unrighteous. So the unrighteous includes both those of the world not yet come to Christ but who are not wicked and we who though we are not yet righteous of our own merit are trying faithfully as we can to serve God.

God continues to cover us with his righteousness on into that millennium. And there is much more.

 

[Vengle]

Ya see, this is what the OT is telling us about when it speaks of those lost sheep of the house of Israel as they come in our of the nations they bring the valuables of the nations along with them.

And so it says that foreigners would attend their flocks for them. The 144,000 are those lost sheep who proved to the end to be God's Israel of faith and are fully prepared to rule in righteousness with Christ.

The scriptures say their sons would be appointed as princes in all the earth. Thus we see the foreigners that came in with those elect out of all nations like valuable spoil from those nations are now shepherding the flocks under the lead of the Saints of God who rule as king/priests with Christ. These foreigners are yet drinking from the fountains of the water of life who are the Saints of God (the 144,000).

And their being steadied in their relationship as brides maids to the 144,000 provides organization for all the rest that will also come in from out of the nations, leading them also to drink of those fountains of the water of life, Christs true body.

The goal is that bu the end of that millennium all will have conquered and won that crown of righteousness in Christ.

Any that have not will have proved they are wicked . Their part will then be the second death from which there is no resurrection.

 

[Prentis]

Any true elect co-ruler to be did reach perfection in their life before their death. They are able to stand on their own merits of righteousness at that point as they have won that crown of righteousness. So the righteous in that verse about the resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous is speaking in terms of how they are able to stand in their own merits.

It is not speaking of imputed righteousness which is only used to give us a foothold with God to get us started on the way to actually becoming righteous.

So those of us who have not yet achieved perfection of spirit though we do our best to support Christ's bride (like as bride's maids) are spoken of there as to our true state, which is unrighteous. So the unrighteous includes both those of the world not yet come to Christ but who are not wicked and we who though we are not yet righteous of our own merit are trying faithfully as we can to serve God.

God continues to cover us with his righteousness on into that millennium. And there is much more.

Hmmm... I would not say we learn to stand by our own merit. Rather I would say we learn to abide in Christ. We remain nothing but vessels, but what matters is what the vessel contains. If we are vessels of gold, refined in the fire, we can then be counted worthy of containing Christ. We must be refined in our character and transformed into his image so that we could contain the weight of his glory without flinching.

Then, we will be able to walk in His righteousness, and truly be His righteousness, because we will do his works, or rather he through us, as we abide perfectly in him, and he in us.

 

[us2are1]

Yes of course but you're missing something here.
Israel is his covenant people and are doing his will even if more than half are living in sin.
but where is Israel:? In Britain in the Isles of the sea


Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

Hosea 13:!4
Yah will ransom his people from the grave and destroy Gehenna

Isa 45:17 But Israel shall be saved in the LORD with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end.


Yahweh has provided his salvation for all Israel.

Only those who are in Christ are Israel. Even those of faith who were before the virgin birth including Abraham.

 

[Vengle]

Hmmm... I would not say we learn to stand by our own merit. Rather I would say we learn to abide in Christ. We remain nothing but vessels, but what matters is what the vessel contains. If we are vessels of gold, refined in the fire, we can then be counted worthy of containing Christ. We must be refined in our character and transformed into his image so that we could contain the weight of his glory without flinching.

Then, we will be able to walk in His righteousness, and truly be His righteousness, because we will do his works, or rather he through us, as we abide perfectly in him, and he in us.

That is because you are not understanding what it means to stand on the merit of ones own righteousness. That is not saying that our righteousness is different from God's. It is saying that we no longer need be excused for sin because we then do image him the way we are meant to do and we do so perfectly without his having to hold our hand all the time like a little immature child.

Thank you for pointing that out though as it would be better if I stated it more clearly to eliminate the confusion. I now see that the phrase is confusing the way I stated it.


He covers us with his righteousness for now because we are like little children needing that over-looking of much of what we do. Any loving parent of a child does that for their child. And if he did not attribute his righteousness to us on the basis that like a little child we are respecting him and letting him teach us he would have to destroy us because we would have no way to learn.

Look at his attributing us with his righteousness as the same thing as a parent believing in the potential of their child to want to learn from them how to do well in life. But he is not gullible so he shows that parental affection and love toward us on the basis of poof that we do desire to be that obedient child to him. That proof is faith because if we have genuine faith in him then we will listen to him and keep growing in our love for him so that we also keep maturing to the point where we become a reflection of his righteousness without his having to always hold us by the hand.

I know you know that is how it works. You are merely misunderstanding the expression "standing on the merit of their own righteousness. It means, "standing on the merit of ones own ability to consistently do God's righteousness because God's righteousness has truly become their righteousness." Thus the child has grown to become the true image of its father.

I believe you know that God is not trying to make us mindless vessels. That is basically what he is liberating us from. We have been mindless vessels and now he is teaching us to watch what we allow to be put in us. He is helping us to fill ourselves with his righteousness and teaching us to guard that righteousness that we do not lose it.

When we reach that point of full maturity where he no longer needs to teach us like little children how to be obedient, then we are standing on our own merit to be obedient to his righteousness and no longer need covering.

And when that is true, it is also true that we became his righteousness. Does that thought cause you to recall a scripture in your mind?

2 Corinthians 5:21 "For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him."

People want that to be now that we are God's righteousness. But notice that Paul is speaking future tense and says, "that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." Some will not make it. But that is his goal for us. Only then can we truly be his image and reflect his glory.

 

[veteran]

[sup]16[/sup]Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

Abraham the father of... Romans?

How then, considering scriptures as these, can this 'seed' be literal?

that which is of the law - Paul is pointing to his Hebrew brethren of literal Israel that were still deceived (blinded).

that which is of the faith of Abraham - Paul is pointing especially to believing Gentiles regarding the 'mystery' he taught of Salvation going to the Gentiles also.

So which category do Christ's Apostles, especially those like Apostle Paul, fall under?

They fall under the category of God's chosen people of literal Israel first, and then under that faith of Abraham like the Gentiles do. This is what God's choosing and election is about, Apostle Paul serving as one of the greatest examples of a chosen elect of the seed of Israel, mainly because of how Paul was persecuting Christ prior to Christ converting him on the road to Damascus.


Rom 1:16
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
(KJV)

Rom 2:10-13
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
(KJV)

Paul says to the Jew (Israelite) first, because that's who God first gave His Promise of Salvation to. It doesn't mean the Gentiles are saved with some lesser Salvation. Instead, it's about God's election of Israel. So trying to debate with God on His election choice to Israel is like a kid who gets in a line as second behind Israel keeps wanting to move in front of the line, while moving Israel who was there first back behind him. It's silly.

 

[Vengle]

You do a poor job of debating when you just go throwing stomping feet and slinging the doctrine of demons label on others.
We know what the mainstream believes. You really haven't looked at all the details carefully.

Yah is not happy with the seven churches according to scripture and the mainstream is part of those seven churches.

I am calling that doctrine what it is. If you wish to take it as though that is a slur against you that is you failing.

I see veteran's post #70 as well presented and pretty well on target.

Does that surprise you?

The only thing he said that I disagree with is his assumption when he said the following:

"it's about God's election of Israel. So trying to debate with God on His election choice to Israel is like a kid who gets in a line as second behind Israel keeps wanting to move in front of the line, while moving Israel who was there first back behind him. It's silly."

That is because he does not understand what we are saying.. There are pieces missing in his understanding and the lack of those pieces allows the picture to seem as it does to him. That is all it is. And therefore I do not see him as preaching the doctrine of demons there.

But when it comes to that separate race creation idea, I see that as a demon's doctrine because of its origin out of the backdoor of the evolution theory which is definitely devils doctrine.

As I think I said earlier, in trying to counter evolution you guys concluded that some of God's true teachings are false. That worked as well for Satan as if you simply accepted to believe evolution. Either way he side-tracked you from truth.

 

[whirlwind]

There is much that I agree with you about in this post whirlwind, except for the premise I know you are using which without realization alters fine detail.

Please take each subject separately. Do you agree that the flesh taken aboard the ark was more than elephants, giraffes and zebras? Do you agree that it was indeed....people? If your answer is yes then you see that Cain and/or his offspring could well have been saved from the flood. I submit that it was necessary for that to have happened as the Kenties, sons of Cain, are the tares and as such must be with us until this age ends.

I will try to remember to come back to that in a second but first I want to clarify that the devil's doctrine I see is the teaching you guys are doing that says God created the races independent of Adam. And I say that is a spawn of evolution because it was promulgated in a panicked attempt to refute evolution. Therefore evolution is backdoor responsible for the teaching.

This understanding has nothing to do with evolution Vengle. There is no evolution and I don't believe anyone knowing about Cain and his true identity has ever believed or taught evolution.

That panic has caused a frantic search of the scriptures to clear up ideas espoused by evolution that you have believed. Not that you have not believed. You have been sucked into seeing God programmed genetic variation as though it is evolving, when the simple answer is that God merely made the right combination of genes in Eve as he formed her that her genes would spur this variation when combined with Adam's through child birth.

That is impossible for......


Ecclesiastes 1:9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.


Oriental couples give birth to....oriental babies. African American couples give birth to....black babies. Caucasian couples give birth to....white babies. It was in the beginning and it is today...no new thing under the sun. To each God said, "after his kind," and it remains as such today.

I am not so concerned that anyone has trouble understanding what God was doing with Israel. What I call the devil's doctrine is specifically that promulgation which says God created the races independent of Adam. And I say it is futility to discuss anything else with those that believe that idea as it holds them blind to see what really took place as regards most else. it causes a building up of bad ideas upon bad ideas which gets one stuck.

All of the races today are traceable back to Noah's sons. And the few that you do not see clearly defined are because men do wander and men do break away with anti-social behavior and leave such spurious groups around as they travAll el through time.

All races were created on the sixth day. After the seventh day Adam was formed. Why? Why was he different than the others? Because through him would come Christ. The Bible is the story of this specific family.

What you understand as being traceable to Noah's sons isn't accurate. It too is impossible.

So I know before I say this next thing that you can only see it as the shed blood of Christ that it speaks of and the bringing all men together as only by Christ's blood. And while that is partly true it is only half the truth.

Acts 15: 26 "And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;"

That use of the word "made" is the same instance as the word "made" in verse 24 there.

And that one blood was also Adam. How can I say that with certainty?

The use of "one blood" [Acts 17:26] was inaccurately translated. "Blood" is not in the text. Rather it should be "one clay" for all mankind is flesh, the dust of the ground.

Romans 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Romans 5:14 "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come."

I'm not sure why you quoted the above. Yes, Adam was the figure of Christ who was to come. Christ came from this direct line.

I have deeply examined as a part of my past studies what you are espousing here in this thread.

I know it is difficult for you to be able to see that you have been duped. What you are espousing is one of the more subtle lies that Satan uses. It is no wonder it makes so much sense to all of you. But for you to carry this lie makes you responsible in part for those who do believe what you say and so also become confused.

So what can I do but shake my head and deal with the sadness that causes me on your behalf by letting go of wrangling about such lies with you? One must be wise enough to protect their own heart from breaking. Else that heart break can destroy them.

What you consider wrangling....others consider understanding. It is good to discuss it.



.

 

[whirlwind]

But doesn't it say we are grafted into Israel, and have the same inheritance?

But anyways, I really don't find this a big deal, we'll know in the end, all that matters is that we remain faithful servants.

Yes, Gentiles are grafted into Israel and have the same inheritance. But, that doesn't mean there are not two groups of 144,000,



Zechariah 4:2-3 And said unto me, What seest thou? And I said, I have looked, and behold a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and his seven lamps thereon, and seven pipes to the seven lamps, which are upon the top thereof: And two olive trees by it, one upon the right side of the bowl, and the other upon the left side thereof.


The two olive trees...one natural and one wild. The wild/Gentile, is grafted into the natural olive/Israel and together they are of the One body of Christ...the tree of life.


So, no matter if we are of the bloodline or grafted in, as you said...the importance is in remaining faithful servants.



.

 

[whirlwind]

There are not two groups of 144,000 Prentis.

They have grabbed that idea merely to refute things that conflict with what they wish to believe.

Who is "they?" As far as I know, I haven't seen anyone else on this forum speak of two groups.

May I ask, what do I wish to refute when I see the two groups? What do I wish to believe that has any bearing on understanding the two groups?

Use your reasoning: Revelation 14:3 "And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.

They have constructed a web of false ideas because the reality is that they are using their own wisdom to interpret instead of really hearing what is said.

No, "they" don't construct this on their own wisdom. Rather, the Words written are given meaning by the Holy Spirit. The difference in the two groups is written.


Those that sing the Song of Moses:

Revelation 7:4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.

Those that sing the New Song:

Revelation 14:3 And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.

And they are dividing the body of Christ by their belief.

How? How is this dividing anyone? Rather it is inclusive...not divisive.

The great crowd are those that have not as yet fully completed their sanctification in Christ and "NO MAN CAN NUMBER THEM."

That is why it goes on to say of the great crowd that they are yet being lead to the water of life.

17 "For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes."

The 144,000 are those fountains of water having completed their sanctification and being holy in Christ.

Proverbs 13:14 "The law of the wise is a fountain of life, to depart from the snares of death."

That is why Revelation also pictures them as big trees of righteousness dripping healing water from their leaves to heal the nations in the millennium.

They are one tree of life, the united body of Christ.

Revelation 22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

Revelation focuses on what takes place during that millennium, not after.

Yes, the 144,000...both groups are "holy in Christ." Yes, they are the One tree of life...the body of Christ.





.

Agreed. There is also always space for error on our part.

To me, if a brother is willing to learn, humble, and of the same spirit, having brotherly love, I won't reject him by any means. I am very willing though, to go back and forth about understanding and wisdom I perceive to be important for us to be able to walk in Christ! :lol:

In a previous post Vengle wrote.....They will have time later to learn the rest 'if they are faithful now'.

Here, Prentis wrote....There is also always space for error on our part.



There is much to learn from those statements.

We must all remain humble and willing to learn...no matter how much we each think we know.



.

 

[Prentis]

Yes, Gentiles are grafted into Israel and have the same inheritance. But, that doesn't mean there are not two groups of 144,000,



Zechariah 4:2-3 And said unto me, What seest thou? And I said, I have looked, and behold a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and his seven lamps thereon, and seven pipes to the seven lamps, which are upon the top thereof: And two olive trees by it, one upon the right side of the bowl, and the other upon the left side thereof.


The two olive trees...one natural and one wild. The wild/Gentile, is grafted into the natural olive/Israel and together they are of the One body of Christ...the tree of life.


So, no matter if we are of the bloodline or grafted in, as you said...the importance is in remaining faithful servants.

I'm not gonna argue with you. We agree on what matters... May the Lord sort the rest out!

Blessings to you!

That is because you are not understanding what it means to stand on the merit of ones own righteousness. That is not saying that our righteousness is different from God's. It is saying that we no longer need be excused for sin because we then do image him the way we are meant to do and we do so perfectly without his having to hold our hand all the time like a little immature child.

Thank you for pointing that out though as it would be better if I stated it more clearly to eliminate the confusion. I now see that the phrase is confusing the way I stated it.


He covers us with his righteousness for now because we are like little children needing that over-looking of much of what we do. Any loving parent of a child does that for their child. And if he did not attribute his righteousness to us on the basis that like a little child we are respecting him and letting him teach us he would have to destroy us because we would have no way to learn.

Look at his attributing us with his righteousness as the same thing as a parent believing in the potential of their child to want to learn from them how to do well in life. But he is not gullible so he shows that parental affection and love toward us on the basis of poof that we do desire to be that obedient child to him. That proof is faith because if we have genuine faith in him then we will listen to him and keep growing in our love for him so that we also keep maturing to the point where we become a reflection of his righteousness without his having to always hold us by the hand.

I know you know that is how it works. You are merely misunderstanding the expression "standing on the merit of their own righteousness. It means, "standing on the merit of ones own ability to consistently do God's righteousness because God's righteousness has truly become their righteousness." Thus the child has grown to become the true image of its father.

I believe you know that God is not trying to make us mindless vessels. That is basically what he is liberating us from. We have been mindless vessels and now he is teaching us to watch what we allow to be put in us. He is helping us to fill ourselves with his righteousness and teaching us to guard that righteousness that we do not lose it.

When we reach that point of full maturity where he no longer needs to teach us like little children how to be obedient, then we are standing on our own merit to be obedient to his righteousness and no longer need covering.

And when that is true, it is also true that we became his righteousness. Does that thought cause you to recall a scripture in your mind?

2 Corinthians 5:21 "For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him."

People want that to be now that we are God's righteousness. But notice that Paul is speaking future tense and says, "that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." Some will not make it. But that is his goal for us. Only then can we truly be his image and reflect his glory.

Ah see, I do agree with you. We are to stand because our character is as his. But by who's strength do we stand, Vengle? It's still his.

I understand you are saying we must become as he is, and because of that stand, and our issue is in wording. I call that the refining of our character. Maybe it's just me, but because the POWER by which we stand is still his, we should be careful not to claim it our own merit. We must be worthy, but if we do that, we have only done what we should, nothing more, we are still only vessels.

I completely agree, not mindless vessels. We must become wise, and strong to always go after him first and be as he is. When our heart always turns to him in this way, he strengthens us.

Good explanation of being the righteousness of God. We become his righteousness by proximity. When we are with him, and he does works through us, and we do his works (it is both), then we are his righteousness, because we truly are his hands, feet, eyes. We are his righteousness when we are his body!

If I understood you right, we see eye to eye, but have a different way of saying things... May we come to understand each other well, if it would please the Lord!

Yes, the 144,000...both groups are "holy in Christ." Yes, they are the One tree of life...the body of Christ

In a previous post Vengle wrote.....They will have time later to learn the rest 'if they are faithful now'.

Here, Prentis wrote....There is also always space for error on our part.



There is much to learn from those statements.

We must all remain humble and willing to learn...no matter how much we each think we know. .

Yes, I see humility as the trump card of all things. Whether we know much or little, humility is always safe. On those who have mercy, God has mercy, and the humble he lifts up.

It is also important to remember that it does not say 'I have the mind of Christ', but rather 'WE have the mind of Christ'. It is as a body. Yes, individually, we can become like Christ, but we still only are a piece of the puzzle, one part of the body.

Humility also enables brotherly love, it allows us to be able to consider that the other person might be saying the same thing, or might be right, even if it doesn't sound right. Different backgrounds and ways of thinking make for different ways of saying things, even though we might be of one Spirit, it is wise to be patient, kind, and to consider others above ourselves in all things.

 

[veteran]

Humility to God and His Son is what matters most. It's impossible to show humility to men that refuse to show humility to God by serving the traditions of men instead of His simple Word of Truth.

 

[us2are1]

Yes, Gentiles are grafted into Israel and have the same inheritance. But, that doesn't mean there are not two groups of 144,000,

Zechariah 4:2-3 And said unto me, What seest thou? And I said, I have looked, and behold a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and his seven lamps thereon, and seven pipes to the seven lamps, which are upon the top thereof: And two olive trees by it, one upon the right side of the bowl, and the other upon the left side thereof.


The two olive trees...one natural and one wild. The wild/Gentile, is grafted into the natural olive/Israel and together they are of the One body of Christ...the tree of life.

So, no matter if we are of the bloodline or grafted in, as you said...the importance is in remaining faithful servants.

There is not two groups of 144,000 because there is only one in scripture. Then if you go just a little bit further in Zacharia you will see that there are only two individuals there not two groups.

Zechariah 4
14 So he said, "These are the two anointed ones, who stand beside the Lord of the whole earth."






.

 

[TheWarIs1]

I am calling that doctrine what it is. If you wish to take it as though that is a slur against you that is you failing.

I see veteran's post #70 as well presented and pretty well on target.

Does that surprise you?

The only thing he said that I disagree with is his assumption when he said the following:

"it's about God's election of Israel. So trying to debate with God on His election choice to Israel is like a kid who gets in a line as second behind Israel keeps wanting to move in front of the line, while moving Israel who was there first back behind him. It's silly."

That is because he does not understand what we are saying.. There are pieces missing in his understanding and the lack of those pieces allows the picture to seem as it does to him. That is all it is. And therefore I do not see him as preaching the doctrine of demons there.

But when it comes to that separate race creation idea, I see that as a demon's doctrine because of its origin out of the backdoor of the evolution theory which is definitely devils doctrine.

As I think I said earlier, in trying to counter evolution you guys concluded that some of God's true teachings are false. That worked as well for Satan as if you simply accepted to believe evolution. Either way he side-tracked you from truth.

I think the doctrine of demons label here is just simple pathetic and showing what lunatics the mainstream teachers are.
They preach many falsehoods and claiming anything outside their beliefs are doctrines of demons when in reality a doctrine of demons would stray from the teachings of Christ as a savior.

I disagree with you and your labeling. I have no desire to hear your narrow minded and foolish ramblings anymore.

 

[veteran]

So let's consider more about our genetic makeup of how God created us. It's truly like whirlwind said, two people of one race do not produce offspring of another race. That has not changed one iota since God's creation. How do we know that? Because of what God gave to Moses about one of mixed blood that was not to enter into the congregation to their tenth generation per the Old Covenant (Deut.23:2). Why to the 10th generation? Because that's how long God set that for the mixing to be purged out. That's why when today, someone of a mixed race continues to marry only in one side, either their mother or father, the features of the other family side will begin to recede. That does not reveal evidence for evolution, but the opposite of evolution, even the going back to God's original creation.

Archaeological evidence for the races exist easily going back to 3800 B.C. with the difference between the ancient Sumerian people and Sargon (a Semite) that traveled to live among the Sumerians, and then later Semites that came there afterwards. The time of God creating Adam per the Bible's chronology was 4004 B.C., so that's only 204 years difference with Sargon and the ancient Sumerians. That exists to show at least those two different races of people like the Sumerians and Semites existed all the way back to Adam's days. And that was long before the flood of Noah's days.

Take a look at the example of the nations of Gen.10, specifically those of Canaan, the son of Ham, the son of Noah.

The sons of Canaan were Sidon, Heth, the Jebusite, the Amorite, the Girgasite, the Hivite, the Arkite, the Sinite, the Arvadite, and the Zemarites, and the Hamathites.



When we get to Genesis 15 about the peoples of the land of Canaan, there's a problem that appears, because The LORD mentioned 4 peoples among the Canaanites that no previous lineage from Seth, Ham, or Japeth was given ...

Gen 15:18-21
18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
19 The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites,
20 And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims,
21 And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.
(KJV)

You will NOT find any lineage for those four peoples in bold going back to the sons of Noah.

One of the biggest standouts of those four peoples in bold NOT descended from Noah's sons were the Rephaims. Here's what the International Standard Bible Dictionary says about those Rephaims ...


REPHAIM

(ref'-a-im), (re-fa'-im) (repha'-im, from rapha', "a terrible one "hence "giant," in 1 Chron 20:4, yelidhe ha-rapha', "sons of the giant"; the King James Version, Rephaims): A race of aboriginal or early inhabitants East of the Jordan in Ashterothkarnaim (Gen 14:5) and in the valley of Rephaim Southwest of Jerusalem (Josh 15:8). They associated with other giant races, as the Emim and Anakim (Deut 2:10-11) and the Zamzummim (verse 20). It is probable that they were all of the same stock, being given different names by the different tribes who came in contact with them. The same Hebrew word is rendered "the dead," or "the shades" in various passages (Job 26:5 m; Ps 88:10 m; Prov 2:18 m; 9:18 m; 21:16 m; Isa 14:9 m; 26:14,19 m). In these instances the word is derived from rapheh, "weak," "powerless," "a shadow" or "shade."
(from International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, Electronic Database Copyright ©1996 by Biblesoft)



The below verse reveals Rephaims was not just simply a name for a valley only, but that they were a people of whom a valley was named. In other Scripture they are associated with the 'giants', the name Rephaim actually being a proper name for the 'giants'.

Gen 14:5
5 And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer, and the kings that were with him, and smote the Rephaims in Ashteroth Karnaim, and the Zuzims in Ham, and the Emims in Shaveh Kiriathaim,
(KJV)

So when we were taught in Sunday School that all the peoples that made up the various nations after the flood descended from one of Noah's three sons of Seth, Ham, or Japeth, God's Word actually reveals that assumption is not really correct.

There is no documented lineage of those Kenites, Kadmonites, Rephaim, and Perizzite peoples from the sons of Noah.

To keep to the tradition of men that says all peoples after the flood descended from Noah, one must 'assume' those four peoples whose lineage origin is not documented in God's Word are from Noah's sons. With one of them, like the Rephaims, we pretty well already know per Scripture they definitely were NOT of Noah's sons at all. Many scholars will go ahead and simply add the Kenites, Kadominites, and Perizzites to the list of Canaan's sons, even though God's Word does not document it, their obviously being swayed by the tradition that all peoples descended from Noah after the flood. They have to do that well knowing they are not Biblically accurate in doing that.

I cannot do what they do, because I well know God gave those lists for a very good reason, otherwise they wouldn't be written there as such. So those who want to keep to the tradition of men that all peoples descended from Noah after the flood can do so if they wish, but I will not. I cannot deny what God is pointing to there, especially with the giants known as the Rephaims.

 

[us2are1]

acts 17
26 And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings,