The Ones Who Are Left…

[Oseas]

Revelation 11:v.15and18 ;
15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.
18 And the nations will be angry., and GOD's wrath is come,...

Revelation 5:v.10 - And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we will reign on the earth.

Matthew 5:v. 5 - Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

On the other hand, out side of GOD's kingdom there will be the hell's fire, a furnace of fire. And they will shout, saying: Lord, Lord, we have prophesied in thy name; in thy name we have cast out devils; in thy name we have done many wonderful works. Lord, Lord, open to us. I never knew you that work iniquity. They will cry/wail and will gnash of teeth.

 

[Naomi25]

All I know is that The LORD gave us several witnesses of an event in His Word which 'some' brethren choose to think they each read the same. It's like they think there's no need to closely read the other verses in other Books or Chapters, since they would be reading over the same account over and over again. That is FAULTY reasoning, and actually laziness on the Bible student's part.

I don’t deny that there are both lazy and inept bible students out there. But assuming a person is one just because they might disagree with you is a tad presumptuous.
In point of fact, I think it very important to be careful how we read a passage, how we compare it, how we consider the words used. But in light of that, in this particular instance, I’m not just looking at the absence of a single, or perhaps 4 words, I’m looking at several things; I’m looking at what we know to be true about the gospels. What we know to be true about the discourse in question. About what we know to be true about the event in question from other passages that speak OF it.

.
Reason is, is because not all the Bible witnesses of the 'same' event are written... the same. One Chapter can have some points the other Chapters do not, and visa versa. The Matthew 24:29-31 and Mark 13:24-27 Scripture versions of the same event are exactly like that, they contain a difference between them, and it's as I have said; one contains Christ gathering His saints from the heavenly, and the other version contains Christ's gathering of His saints from the earth (that are still alive).

Yes…this is exactly the point I was making. We must not expect each witness account to be recorded in the exact same manner. But that does not mean they are not recording the same ‘discourse’. This is why, when we can be sure it is still the same discourse (and not another speech about another topic), we can compare it across the gospels. Thus, as I said above, when we KNOW it to be the same discourse, to be the same event discussed, we collate the data given by Christ, consider other revelation given by other authors like Paul about the event in question, and arrive at the conclusion that if Matthew left out “the earth” is was not particularly because he was attempting to point out it would be a separate event. If Christ had made an issue about these events being separate, then we could, and should, expect to see it also recorded in some manner in the other gospels and also mentioned by Paul somewhere. We don’t.

.
And that difference was ALSO shown by Apostle Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4:

1 Thessalonians 4:13-14 = Christ gathering the "asleep" saints at His coming, He brings them with Him, which means they come with Him from Heaven -- the Matthew 24:31 gathering of the saints from heaven.

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 = Christ gathering His saints from the earth; they are "caught up" to Him in the clouds = the Mark 13:27 gathering of the saints from the earth.


Your not being aware of that difference of 2 separate groups of the saints being gathered in 1 Thessalonians 4 would explain why you don't understand those 2 groups of saints gathered by Jesus per His Olive discourse.

Ok. I seriously need a face palm or head slap emoji. Are you saying that this WHOLE thing has been about the fact that there are 2 PEOPLE groups (saved dead and saved alive) being described, rather than 2 type of events (heaven and earth)?
Because…you’ve been hitting the ‘heaven and earth’ thing like a drum…but just now, it seems you’re accusing me of not getting that there are 2 different people groups.

Ok…to clarify. OF COURSE these passages talk about a gathering of BOTH the dead in Christ and the alive in Christ. OF COURSE I see that.
However…I ALSO see that both the OD passages AND 1 Thess 4 speak of these events being one event. Yes, the ‘dead in Christ’ go ‘first’…we also see this in 1 Cor 15:52…but there is nothing…absolutely nothing in any of these passages to suggest that its not a single event, a ‘one-two’ event.

 

[Aunty Jane]

In essence, I believe the parable is simply saying: ‘the world will go on, and people will be allowed to live, choosing whom they will follow, up until the end of the age.’ It’s at that point that they will be gathered, divided, one from another, and judged.

In view of Jesus' words at Matthew 7:21-23....I believe that we are staring down the barrel of that judgment in the very near future.
What about you?

Just claiming Jesus as our "Lord" is really not enough. What does Jesus say in regard to those who tell him all the things they did "in his name"? What laws are these "Christians" breaking?

 

[farouk]

Hi Jane, thanks for you post, it was most interesting.

I’ve had a similar discussion about this parable with backlit. He too believes the parable points to the ‘weeds’ being fake believers. And, this certainly may be the case. However, as I said to him, I don’t know that I’m quite willing to go that far, based upon the text alone. Parables, I think, are not often supposed to be pushed or plumbed further than the story it is, in their own way, rather simply giving. In this case, we are only told that the ‘field’ is the ‘world’.
Now, that certain includes the ‘church’ and those who are in it, both true and false believers. So in a way, you’re absolutely correct.
But we would also have to say that ‘world’ also covers everyone. And if we truly think about it, the field must mean the world, if Christ allows the time frame to be ‘til the end of the age’. Simply because every single person IN the world has the potential to become a member of Christ’s body (a wheat and not a weed!) at some point in their life.
In essence, I believe the parable is simply saying: ‘the world will go on, and people will be allowed to live, choosing whom they will follow, up until the end of the age.’ It’s at that point that they will be gathered, divided, one from another, and judged.

Hi @Naomi25 I guess as with a lot of discussions there is the dispensational question of whether the background assumptions to the parables in the Gospels are really relating directly to the church; there can be immensely valuable spiritual lessons which do not necessarily fully fit the situation of the church, between Pentecost and the Rapture.

 

[Naomi25]

So how are you, Ma'am? Still one of my favorite avatars, LoL.

Let me give you an answer that you may not have been expecting (though I don't have the time to read through 11 pages, so forgive me if someone put this forward already):

The phrase "bind them into bundles" is equivalent in meaning to "gather them into groups," and look what it says in Matthew 24 regarding what the false Christs will do:

If anyone says to you, "Behold, the Christ is here, or there," do not believe it. For there will arise false Christs and false prophets, and they will show great signs and wonders so as to mislead if possible even the elect. Behold, I have told you beforehand. If therefore they say unto you, "Behold, He is in the wilderness," do not go forth, or "Behold, He is in the private rooms," do not believe it. For as the lightning comes forth from the East and shines as far as the West, so too shall the coming of the Son of Man be. For wherever the corpse may be, there will the vultures be gathered. (Matthew 24:23-28)

The phrase "wherever the corpse may be, there will the vultures be gathered" is a way of saying the false Christs will be mere mortal men made of flesh and blood, and not capable of manifesting the glory of God across the entire sky. Their teachings will also lead to spiritual uncleanness, which is why Jesus references spiritual uncleanness here (i.e. "corpses"). Jesus is the True Bread of Life, but consuming their teachings will be like feeding upon rotten flesh, something highly offensive to the Jewish ear as a spiritually unclean thing to do, and thus an indirect reference to their being indwelt and used by unclean spirits.

But these "vultures" will be gathered into groups around the different false Christs that arise, because they will come forth performing demonically-empowered signs and wonders, ones so great that they deceive if possible even the very elect. The parable you cited above is actually called the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares, which was spoken prophetically of the Gnostics in particular, who professed themselves to be "Christians" and appeared to be on the outside, but within they were false believers, similar to how tares look like wheat on the outside but are not. Gnosticism gave rise to the first false Christs in New Testament times, and will again in the end-times, so the entire thing fits. Through supernatural powers they will gather the tares into "bundles" or groups of followers first, and then Christ when He returns will gather unto himself the harvest and it will be taken to His "barn," i.e. Heaven.

I realize that doesn't help you any with your amillenialism, LoL (as it could still go either way), but I think that's what the parable is actually referring to.

God bless, and don't change your avatar anytime soon. It's still my favorite.
- H

Hi! I’ve heard a couple of takes a little like this, but this is a little different, with the Gnostic, signs and wonders thing tossed in. As I’ve said to them…its interesting. And possibly right. I’m certainly not declaring my understanding of the parable (let alone my ‘idea’ for the thread) to be automatically right. I actually like having different ideas and thoughts to chew on, so, you know, even if I actually think…”mmm, don’t know that it DOES mean that”, I’ll still turn it over.
And, well, for what its worth…not sure that I’d call myself an Amillennialists anymore. I’m eschewing labels. I think I’d have to confess I still agree with some of the things they see. But not all of them. I’m open to a more literal approach in some areas.

 

[Naomi25]

In view of Jesus' words at Matthew 7:21-23....I believe that we are staring down the barrel of that judgment in the very near future.
What about you?

Oh golly. There’s so many people who love to trumpet “any day now”, that for a long while I refused to even think about it (even though I longed for it). But if I had to be honest…yes, I think it could be near. I mean, I also acknowledge that things could get a whole lot worse. Things tend to cycle, and just because things are getting bad for us now, doesn’t mean things won’t settle again. But…it seems to me that the birth pangs are now world-wide. They’re not restricted to certain countries or corners of the globe. Globalism has meant that it is simply easier and easier for our problems to be your problems. Economic woes are tied together.
Let me put it this way; the world is ripe for it…it would be as easy as exhaling for it to slip into what needs to happen next…and most wouldn’t blink, let alone fight.
So, while I can’t be positive (and who can be, no one knows the mind of God), my feeling is yes. But I won’t be shaken if it’s a no.

. Just claiming Jesus as our "Lord" is really not enough. What does Jesus say in regard to those who tell him all the things they did "in his name"? What laws are these "Christians" breaking?

Well, yes, I agree. I was thinking of “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved”. But those truly his know that calling and believing…trusting…loving…must be the same.

 

[Naomi25]

Hi @Naomi25 I guess as with a lot of discussions there is the dispensational question of whether the background assumptions to the parables in the Gospels are really relating directly to the church; there can be immensely valuable spiritual lessons which do not necessarily fully fit the situation of the church, between Pentecost and the Rapture.

Well, yes…that would be a question, wouldn’t it??!
It’s funny, farouk…I’ve been re-reading over all the ‘rapture’ passages, deliberately divorcing myself from my previously held biases…and, you know…I can see how folks read them either way. And…it’s not really a case of forcing the text, not outrageously, it truly does seem to depend on how and which understanding you come to it with. There are a few instances where I’d still say ‘I can’t see this passage saying something else’….but the others..?
It does seem to lead us back to our hermeneutical approach. Which is right, which is wrong. Which has the most holes…can they be merged? At present…I’m not sure…in terms of eschatological system. I’m not sure any are a good fit. For instance: I think Dispensationalists are right to view a future for Israel - people and land…but I’m not sure if the reasons they see for it are completely correct. I think Amillennialists are correct in saying the Millennium is now, but I don’t think they’re entirely correct on some of the issues that come with that, or at least, their traditional teachings on it.
So…hmmm. It could be that both these parables and the OD is for Israel…I’m still trying to sort it all out, and right now, I’m open to the possibilities and trying to let God guide me and I study it all.

 

[farouk]

Well, yes…that would be a question, wouldn’t it??!
It’s funny, farouk…I’ve been re-reading over all the ‘rapture’ passages, deliberately divorcing myself from my previously held biases…and, you know…I can see how folks read them either way. And…it’s not really a case of forcing the text, not outrageously, it truly does seem to depend on how and which understanding you come to it with. There are a few instances where I’d still say ‘I can’t see this passage saying something else’….but the others..?
It does seem to lead us back to our hermeneutical approach. Which is right, which is wrong. Which has the most holes…can they be merged? At present…I’m not sure…in terms of eschatological system. I’m not sure any are a good fit. For instance: I think Dispensationalists are right to view a future for Israel - people and land…but I’m not sure if the reasons they see for it are completely correct. I think Amillennialists are correct in saying the Millennium is now, but I don’t think they’re entirely correct on some of the issues that come with that, or at least, their traditional teachings on it.
So…hmmm. It could be that both these parables and the OD is for Israel…I’m still trying to sort it all out, and right now, I’m open to the possibilities and trying to let God guide me and I study it all.

@Naomi25 I hear what you say....

And for me really a lot of it is as much about "who?" as well as chronologically "when?"

(So many keep eschatologists are keenly taken up vividly with "when?"...)

 

[farouk]

I don’t deny that there are both lazy and inept bible students out there. But assuming a person is one just because they might disagree with you is a tad presumptuous.

@Naomi25 Good point.....

 

[Waiting on him]

@Naomi25 I hear what you say....

And for me really a lot of it is as much about "who?" as well as chronologically "when?"

(So many keep eschatologists are keenly taken up vividly with "when?"...)

I wish you could help me understand this, everyone sees the AOD as a futuristic event. In the two accounts given both state in Matthew and Mark that Jesus is having a private conversation with Matthew Mark Peter and James, and explains to the four. When you see the AOD flee into the mountains of Judea.
My question is how does the modern church read this scripture and assume it’s spoken to them personaly?

 

[farouk]

I wish you could help me understand this, everyone sees the AOD as a futuristic event. In the two accounts given both state in Matthew and Mark that Jesus is having a private conversation with Matthew Mark Peter and James, and explains to the four. When you see the AOD flee into the mountains of Judea.
My question is how does the modern church read this scripture and assume it’s spoken to them personaly?

Hi @Waiting on him Sorry; I must be half-asleep; what are you referring to by AOD....?

 

[Waiting on him]

Hi @Waiting on him Sorry; I must be half-asleep; what are you referring to by AOD....?

Abomination of desolation, just get with me later. Get your rest.

 

[farouk]

I wish you could help me understand this, everyone sees the AOD as a futuristic event. In the two accounts given both state in Matthew and Mark that Jesus is having a private conversation with Matthew Mark Peter and James, and explains to the four. When you see the AOD flee into the mountains of Judea.
My question is how does the modern church read this scripture and assume it’s spoken to them personaly?

@Waiting on him Well, the Lord Jesus spoke this before the Cross, Resurrection and Pentecost; so clearly it's not directly about the church; and much of the Gospels' context is Jewish; I do think Luke 21 and Matthew 24 clearly speak of tribulation saints after the church has gone...

How people in the church want to lump it all together, I don't know...

 

[Waiting on him]

@Waiting on him Well, the Lord Jesus spoke this before the Cross, Resurrection and Pentecost; so clearly it's not directly about the church; and much of the Gospels' context is Jewish; I do think Luke 21 and Matthew 24 clearly speak of tribulation saints after the church has gone...

How people in the church want to lump it all together, I don't know...

Okay I’ve looked at this many times and can’t see this as anything other that Jesus telling Peter Mark James and John that they themselves would witness the Abomination of desolation.


Mark 13:1-14 KJV
[1] And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here ! [2] And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. [3] And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, [4]
Mark 13:1-14 KJV
[1] And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here ! [2] And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. [3] And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, [4] Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled? [5] And Jesus answering them began to say, Take heed lest any man deceive you: [6] For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ ; and shall deceive many. [7] And when ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars, be ye not troubled: for such things must needs be; but the end shall not be yet. [8] For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these are the beginnings of sorrows. [9] But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them. [10] And the gospel must first be published among all nations. [11] But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost. [12] Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death. [13] And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. [14] But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

 

[Aunty Jane]

There’s so many people who love to trumpet “any day now”, that for a long while I refused to even think about it (even though I longed for it). But if I had to be honest…yes, I think it could be near. I mean, I also acknowledge that things could get a whole lot worse.

I know that because "the end" seems to be taking an inordinate amount of time in human terms, from the perspective of a timeless God...this is not so.

"For a thousand years are in your eyes just as yesterday when it is past,
Just as a watch during the night." (Psalm 90:4, 2 Peter 3:8)

Peter also wrote...
2 Peter 3:3-4
"First of all know this, that in the last days ridiculers will come with their ridicule, proceeding according to their own desires 4 and saying: “Where is this promised presence of his? Why, from the day our forefathers fell asleep in death, all things are continuing exactly as they were from creation’s beginning.”

So its no wonder that people are a bit jaded about it, because it has not yet arrived to fulfill eager expectations......taking too long in human terms it seems. Some take the position that if it hasn't come for 2000 years, it never will.....that sort of thinking is a trap.

The Prophet Habakuk (2:3) gives us some more clues....
For the vision is yet for its appointed time,
And it is rushing toward its end, and it will not lie.
Even if it should delay, keep in expectation of it!
For it will without fail come true.
It will not be late!"

So we see some overriders mentioned there....."even if it should delay" means that to us it might seem to be taking a long time coming...
"Keep in expectation of it" because "it will without fail come true"....."it will not be late" because for God it will come right on time according to his schedule, not ours.

Jesus said the same thing....
"But know one thing: If the householder had known in what watch the thief was coming, he would have kept awake and not allowed his house to be broken into. 44 On this account, you too prove yourselves ready, because the Son of man is coming at an hour that you do not think to be it."

This is no time to let our guard down.....like the parable of the ten virgins, they all went to sleep, but the ones who brought extra oil for their lamps went in to the marriage feast, and the others were locked out. The bridegroom arrived in the middle of the night. What is that telling us?
Who will have no oil for their lamps?

Let me put it this way; the world is ripe for it…it would be as easy as exhaling for it to slip into what needs to happen next…and most wouldn’t blink, let alone fight.
So, while I can’t be positive (and who can be, no one knows the mind of God), my feeling is yes. But I won’t be shaken if it’s a no.

I don't think I can remember a time in my life when the whole world was imploding.....politically, morally, economically, and spiritually. Its ripe all right!

Well, yes, I agree. I was thinking of “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved”. But those truly his know that calling and believing…trusting…loving…must be the same.

So in view of Jesus' words at Matthew 7:21-23, what does it mean to "call on the name of the Lord"? Which "Lord" is that?
Paul says in Romans 10:13-14...
" for “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
14 How then are they to call on Him in whom they have not believed? How are they to believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher?"

At first glance it may seem as if calling on the name of Jesus is what is implied here, but Paul was quoting Joel 2:32, which in the Tanakh, clearly identifies "the LORD" as "יְהֹוָ֖ה" (Yahweh) three times in that verse. So, what if people have been taught to call on the wrong name? What if believing Jesus is the only "Lord" in the Bible, is an error? What if Jesus has been teaching us to worship his God and Father all this time and the church blended Father and son into one entity so long ago, that no one questions it? The weeds sown will be errors. Big ones. This is actually blasphemy.....

The law that Christians are therefore breaking IMV, is the first of the Ten Commandments.....

Which says...."Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

The word in Hebrew rendered "before", means "beside,...in addition to, together with, beyond, above, over,"....So no other "god" can be "beside" the true God, "in addition" to Him, or even "together with" him.
Could that possibly mean that all who accept the triune god of Christendom are calling on the wrong name?...and therefore the wrong god?

If the "weeds" have been growing since the second century, then how many people all these centuries later would question the church's teaching of the triune god, the concept of which was not introduced into Catholic doctrine until the 4th century?

Jesus was Jewish and the concept of a triune god was in direct contradiction to the Shema.....in Deuteronomy 6:4.

Could this explain why Jesus said that "few" are on the road to life? (Matthew 7:13-14) The "many" whom Jesus rejects he says are are law breakers.

Think about it....

 

[Oseas]

Matthew 22v.9 to 14


Matthew 22:v.8 to 14

8... The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy.

9 Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.

10 So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.

11 And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:

12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.

13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

 

[Aunty Jane]

I wish you could help me understand this, everyone sees the AOD as a futuristic event. In the two accounts given both state in Matthew and Mark that Jesus is having a private conversation with Matthew Mark Peter and James, and explains to the four. When you see the AOD flee into the mountains of Judea.
My question is how does the modern church read this scripture and assume it’s spoken to them personaly?

It is important to see that prophesies can have a present and future application.....this is seen in the end times prophesies in Matthew.
Jesus spoke of the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in his day and the AOD at that time was the Romans army who came came to destroy Jerusalem.

Predicting this terrible destruction by the Romans in 70 C.E., he said: “Because the days will come upon you when your enemies will build around you a fortification with pointed stakes and will encircle you and distress you from every side, and they will dash you and your children within you to the ground, and they will not leave a stone upon a stone in you, because you did not discern the time of your being inspected.” (Luke 19:41-44)

The coming destruction of Jerusalem and her temple most certainly would have meant the end of the Jewish system back then. With no holy city and no holy temple, the Jewish priesthood no longer operating....Jesus' words at Matthew 23:37-39 came true. She was abandoned by God.

Jesus told his disciples to "flee to the mountains" when they saw the Roman army surrounding the city in 66CE, but there seemed to be no way to escape. Inexplicably the Romans left for no apparent reason, giving the Christians time to follow Jesus' instructions. Those who obeyed and remained out of the city and its surrounds, were saved when the Romans came back four years later and laid siege to the city causing a great tribulation of death and suffering for the Jews. But a greater one was to come....(Matthew 24:21)

The AOD back then was the Roman army "standing in the Holy Place".....God's Temple. But the end of the Jewish system was also pictorial of the end of the devil's world rulership in our day....the "time of the end" spoken about in Daniel.

Daniel foretold the march of world powers down to our day and we are living in the time of the last ruling kingdoms of this world. (Daniel 2:44)
For a large part of the world's population, their worship is important to them.....but is their worship important to God if they are worshipping the wrong gods, and offending the Creator by their false religious beliefs and practices?

"Babylon the great", is satan's world empire of false religion. How do we know this? Because when the nations turn on her to destroy her, these elements actually mourn her passing...the political and commercial segments are seen 'standing at a distance' saying "too bad, too bad" at her complete destruction. (Revelation Ch 18) But it is God who put it into their minds to do it.
God's people were instructed to "get out of her" before that sudden event takes place.

This Prostitute has a "kingdom over the Kings of the earth"....so her spiritual adultery is currying friendship with the world instead of friendship with God. (James 4:4) By this, she makes herself God's enemy.
The World Council of Churches identified the League of Nations (now known as the UN) as "the political expression of God's Kingdom on earth"...looking to it to bring about world peace.....but this is the AOD standing in the Holy Place.....a worldly substitute for God's Kingdom.

That is how I see these things.

 

[Naomi25]

So in view of Jesus' words at Matthew 7:21-23, what does it mean to "call on the name of the Lord"? Which "Lord" is that?
Paul says in Romans 10:13-14...
" for “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
14 How then are they to call on Him in whom they have not believed? How are they to believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher?"

At first glance it may seem as if calling on the name of Jesus is what is implied here, but Paul was quoting Joel 2:32, which in the Tanakh, clearly identifies "the LORD" as "יְהֹוָ֖ה" (Yahweh) three times in that verse. So, what if people have been taught to call on the wrong name? What if believing Jesus is the only "Lord" in the Bible, is an error? What if Jesus has been teaching us to worship his God and Father all this time and the church blended Father and son into one entity so long ago, that no one questions it? The weeds sown will be errors. Big ones. This is actually blasphemy.....

The law that Christians are therefore breaking IMV, is the first of the Ten Commandments.....

Which says...."Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

I’m not quite sure I’m with you on this. Consider:

Romans 10:9-10
[9] because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. [10] For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.

It seems very much to me, that Paul, while perhaps quoting the OT, he is, like often happens in the NT, applying it directly to Christ. Paul calls Christ ‘Lord’. He says justification is contingent upon belief and confession of said belief, in Christ.

Now…one concedes that a proper theology of God is important. The idea of the Trinity being one Godhead, and therefore allowing Paul to also call Christ “Lord”…applying Joel to him, does not negate the notion that they are separate persons within the Godhead.
But…when we read scripture carefully and thoroughly, while Jesus does indeed point us to the Father, and what he does is to glorify the Father, he in no way rejects or forbids worship of himself as God. This is because as the second member of the Trinity, he too is God, and thus for us not to worship him would be blasphemy. No…a correct theology of God, and the members of the Trinity, show us that we glorify God by worshiping his Son through the power of the Spirit.

John 13:31-32
[31] When he had gone out, Jesus said, “Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in him. [32] If God is glorified in him, God will also glorify him in himself, and glorify him at once.

John 14:13
[13] Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

John 14:26
[26] But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

So…all in all, by worshiping Christ as the Son, we ARE glorifying the Father, who we acknowledge and thank for sending the Son. We cannot be having ‘another God’ above ‘the Father’, because they are One. One God. But, as I said, proper theology would separate the persons.

.
The word in Hebrew rendered "before", means "beside,...in addition to, together with, beyond, above, over,"....So no other "god" can be "beside" the true God, "in addition" to Him, or even "together with" him.
Could that possibly mean that all who accept the triune god of Christendom are calling on the wrong name?...and therefore the wrong god?

If the "weeds" have been growing since the second century, then how many people all these centuries later would question the church's teaching of the triune god, the concept of which was not introduced into Catholic doctrine until the 4th century?

Jesus was Jewish and the concept of a triune god was in direct contradiction to the Shema.....in Deuteronomy 6:4.

Could this explain why Jesus said that "few" are on the road to life? (Matthew 7:13-14) The "many" whom Jesus rejects he says are are law breakers.

Think about it..

So…are you suggesting the doctrine of the Trinity is in error?
I think, just very briefly, based upon the chapters I’ve quoted from above, that I see that as unlikely. We see direct references to all three members of the Trinity, all given ‘personhood’…”he” (even the ‘Helper’). We are clearly given a structure; the Helper reminds and ‘teaches’ us the things Jesus has said…he points us to Jesus; Jesus’ work on the cross and his gospel message. In our accepting and worshipping of Jesus, Jesus then glorifies the Father. But, Jesus tells us, while there is this structure, Christ is ‘in’ the Father, just as the Father is ‘in him’. In fact, we can also say the same about the Spirit, making up the Trinity.

John 14:16-17
[16] And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, [17] even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.

John 14:20
[20] In that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you.

John 14:23
[23] Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.

So, we see that both God the Father and Christ himself are “in us” by the Spirit dwelling in us.
Basically, in this short chapter, we see that each member of the Trinity has separate roles. We see them given personhood. And we see them linked in divinity. We know that there is but one God, but scripture does seem to, overwhelmingly, when you’re aware of it, point towards 3 persons.

 

[Davy]

I strongly disagree with your claim, Jesus was the firstfruit of the resurrection, and he was raised in a tangible body of flesh and bone, that ate physical food upon this earth, the believer will receive this same glorified body, we shall be like him

Haven't you read Genesis 18 and 19 where The Lord and the two angels with Him that met Abraham were able to eat man's food?

Apostle Paul showed Lord Jesus' flesh body was TRANSFIGURED to the resurrection body...

1 Cor 15:44-47
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
KJV

The "last Adam" is about Lord Jesus' body being transfigured to "a quickening spirit"!

Makes sense too, since Lord Jesus was a Spirit prior to His being born in the flesh through woman. What Judaism believes (like you do) is an old tradition from not understanding the revelations in The New Testament. The spiritual body, or resurrection, manifests with a body 'like'... our present flesh body, but it is not a flesh and blood body...

1 Cor 15:49-50
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
KJV

 

[Davy]

You deny the future bodily resurrection of the dead in Christ, a basic fundamental belief in the Christian faith

And now you are telling LIES against me, for I have never, ever, denied the resurrection!

You simply don't like your FALSE DEAD IN THE GROUND THEORY FROM THE JEWS being messed with! That's why you are now angry at me!

I've already shown from Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:42-50 that Christ's resurrection was to "a quickening spirit", which goes with what Paul taught there about the resurrection being to a "spiritual body".

But you'd rather keep your stupid, ignorant false belief from the orthodox Jews that the "asleep" saints of 1 Thessalonians 4 are still out in the back yard in the ground! Such a silly and primitive doctrine that is NOT written in God's Word.

Luke 23:42-43
42 And he said unto Jesus, "Lord, remember me when Thou comest into Thy kingdom."
43 And Jesus said unto him, "Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with Me in paradise."
KJV