The Ones Who Are Left…

[quietthinker]

Perhaps nothing. But you asked about the daggers coming out when we were discussing the quenching of the Spirit.

and so you give and example of how you morph the conversation to keep the confusion rolling.

 

[ScottA]

and so you give and example of how you morph the conversation to keep the confusion rolling.

Explain that.

 

[quietthinker]

Explain that.

read back over your posts objectively.

 

[Naomi25]

Not sure what you mean, because that's not really a parable Apostle Paul was giving about the gathering to Jesus Christ when He comes. I suggest you go over the 1 Thessalonians 4 chapter more carefully, and it is hard linked to what Jesus said in Matthew 24:31 and Mark 13:27.

Forgive me, but I thought you were referencing the parable Jesus told in Matt 13…the one about the wheat and the tares. And the fact that it discusses this age and the next, but not an intermediary one (the Millennium).
So…no…I was not referring to a ‘parable Paul told’ in 1 Thess 4. I agree; its not a parable at all.

 

[ScottA]

read back over your posts objectively.

I've read them. If you have a point, make it. Your move.

 

[Naomi25]

I was not posing an argument, but filling in the details, that you might see more clearly and come to question the partial information that you are looking at as incomplete.

Nonetheless, if you want to believe that Jesus' body is not One with Him (God), not biblical, that is your choice.

Well….you could attempt to provide biblical proof that Christ’s body (the church) is one with God, rather than ‘in’ him. All verses/passages you’ve provides thus far only supports my view; that Christ and the Father are one. That the body is one. That through the Spirit we are ‘in’ Christ and he ‘in’ us. But we are not one with he and the Father. To be one with them is to claim divinity.
Are you claiming divinity?

 

[ScottA]

Well….you could attempt to provide biblical proof that Christ’s body (the church) is one with God, rather than ‘in’ him. All verses/passages you’ve provides thus far only supports my view; that Christ and the Father are one. That the body is one. That through the Spirit we are ‘in’ Christ and he ‘in’ us. But we are not one with he and the Father. To be one with them is to claim divinity.
Are you claiming divinity?

You are answering the question yourself...and you still don't see it.

If..."Christ and the Father are one" as you just said...and...we are Christ's body...come on now...what should that tell you? Should that tell you that Jesus and His body are not one? Does that make any sense at all? I mean, come on...the Father is One, Jesus is One, they are One together, the believers are one body, one spirit, one bride--"the two shall become one"... Is any of this getting through?

I thought you were debating some greater complex issue--not this. I guess I thought you could put the simpler stuff together without me stating the obvious.

"The two become one."

 

[Naomi25]

No, that is wrong. The scriptures themselves say that the scriptures need to be discerned spiritually.

Yes…the argument always seems to go something like this: “my authority to disregard/change/add to/interpret as I choose/special revelation…comes FROM the scriptures themselves”

Your problem is this: you believe the bible is telling you to “listen to your spirit-led interpretation!”
But when that interpretation goes against other clearly taught things IN that very same scripture, then why…blessed why…do you think the beginning command would mean jack in the first place?
“Yes…I’m going to give you spiritual leave to follow your own heart…even though I tell you that the heart is desperately wicked above everything else”.

Thus, the importance of things being revealed or discerned spiritually can ONLY be of importance IF they hold up and confirm what we find in scripture. And friend…what you are selling is NOT in scripture.

No...the Spirit has the correct interpretation. But, yes, I can tell you it by the same Spirit. And when I do that which is exactly according to scripture, you default to name calling. You know, I really want to see this through, but you are making it difficult. You.

Name calling? I…don’t recall calling you stupid. Oh…wait. That’s what you did to me. Or…were you implying that I was simply too ignorant of what I was speaking about…but that is semantics really, stupid is as stupid does, don’t you think?

.
I don't know all about that 'ism stuff, but I do know that God is spirit, we who are His are born of His spirit, we go to Him, and we will be like Him. All biblical. But it all results in name calling? Just an observation...but there is no love in that result.

Mister…it overjoys me when I can have a polite conversation about interesting biblical matters. I always strive to be upbeat and polite. But I don’t take attitude, and I don’t duck bad doctrine, I call it…fairly…as I see it. And as I “called” the fact that I disagreed with your ‘take’ on Oneness and how the bible used it, I believe it was you who began the name calling and attacks. Shall I refresh:

“So, you are not being honest with me, or even yourself.” ——- Here, you call me a liar.

“You (after accusing me of being selective and grabbing hold of a belief) are forcing me to use scripture against scripture to show your error.” —— Here you accuse me of accusing YOU of something that, in point of fact, you threw at ME first! (Post #302)

“I have no problem reconciling all scripture--but you are only supporting what you believe and apparently not wanting to hear every proof.” —— Here you accuse me of refusing to even listen to you…hardly the truth, I’ve been openly discussing the topic with you and not refusing to hear a thing….you’re free to post as you choose.

“Why go on with pages and pages of partial information as you have. If you don't understand, say so, but don't just present just a part of the information and and argue about what you do not know.” ——- And here you call me to idiotic to know what I’m talking about, and that, apparently is why I don’t see things your way.

.
I have given the other scriptures, reconciled them (unlike your own argument), and explained that all physical foreshadowings are not the actual event, but that Jesus' ascension is the real event. And I also (as do the scriptures) explained how it cannot be physical or in the flesh.

I’m sorry, but no…no you have NOT reconciled them. To reconcile them you must provide proof that this ‘Oneness’ you are speaking of exists between God…and man. It does not. Every verse and passage you presented was clearly speaking of a oneness between the Father and Christ (within the Godhead), or between the body of Christ (within humans). So no…very much NO reconciliation…

.
But you bring up another point, of why would the resurrection be spiritual if they are already spirit? That is a good and fair question.

The reason is, that it may appear that we are being resurrected "to" God, and we are. But more importantly, we are being resurrected "from" the world (and its elements, which are destine to be dissolved with fervent heat, and with fire). This again is why flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God...and this alone should satisfy the scriptural need to know the actual truth.

“This alone should satisfy the scriptural need”….? My need for what? Textual proof for the whole idea? Biblical backing for any of the ideas you’ve presented?
You do realise that this is what you’ve been doing….giving an opinion and then telling me that it should satisfy my spiritually felt needs. Because it makes sense!
Sense is all well and good. But if it’s not in scripture, if it cannot be found even whispered within the pages, then I call a bad smell.

.
I don't have "a side", I am for all truth...which I have indeed supported. Your not hearing it, does not make it "insupportable." As for the "hush up", you simply reject what I have given you to fill in those things which would give you a true and complete scriptural picture...and if it were not so, if you were not rejecting the scriptural additions that I have brought to the table, we would not be debating. And I am not calling you stupid...stubborn maybe, but definitely emotional. After all, you have resorted to 'ism and name calling. Which is so typical... all truth has been promised by the very means I am advocating...and your response is to fight. This is the same behavior that killed the prophets of old. This is fruit, bad fruit.

As for biblical proof, I gave it...and was willing to give so much more.
Of course.

Sir….if what you have presented is your biblical proof and your ‘complete scriptural picture’, then I happily and with much gusto will let you walk on by and reside in your happy little world where you believe fully that you have all truth known to you and only you.
I wish you well.

 

[Naomi25]

You are answering the question yourself...and you still don't see it.

If..."Christ and the Father are one" as you just said...and...we are Christ's body...come on now...what should that tell you? Should that tell you that Jesus and His body are not one? Does that make any sense at all? I mean, come on...the Father is One, Jesus is One, they are One together, the believers are one body, one spirit, one bride--"the two shall become one"... Is any of this getting through?

I thought you were debating some greater complex issue--not this. I guess I thought you could put the simpler stuff together without me stating the obvious.

"The two become one."

Are you claiming divinity?

 

[ScottA]

Are you claiming divinity?

I shouldn't take you seriously...so I'll pretend I don't already know...in which case my answer would be: "Yes, if He'll have me."

But seriously, in addition to everything else I have quoted, Paul said "for me to live is Christ." Double check with Paul and see if he really meant something so divine, and get back to me. Then I will answer your question.

Yes…the argument always seems to go something like this: “my authority to disregard/change/add to/interpret as I choose/special revelation…comes FROM the scriptures themselves”

Your problem is this: you believe the bible is telling you to “listen to your spirit-led interpretation!”
But when that interpretation goes against other clearly taught things IN that very same scripture, then why…blessed why…do you think the beginning command would mean jack in the first place?
“Yes…I’m going to give you spiritual leave to follow your own heart…even though I tell you that the heart is desperately wicked above everything else”.

Thus, the importance of things being revealed or discerned spiritually can ONLY be of importance IF they hold up and confirm what we find in scripture. And friend…what you are selling is NOT in scripture.


Name calling? I…don’t recall calling you stupid. Oh…wait. That’s what you did to me. Or…were you implying that I was simply too ignorant of what I was speaking about…but that is semantics really, stupid is as stupid does, don’t you think?


Mister…it overjoys me when I can have a polite conversation about interesting biblical matters. I always strive to be upbeat and polite. But I don’t take attitude, and I don’t duck bad doctrine, I call it…fairly…as I see it. And as I “called” the fact that I disagreed with your ‘take’ on Oneness and how the bible used it, I believe it was you who began the name calling and attacks. Shall I refresh:

“So, you are not being honest with me, or even yourself.” ——- Here, you call me a liar.

“You (after accusing me of being selective and grabbing hold of a belief) are forcing me to use scripture against scripture to show your error.” —— Here you accuse me of accusing YOU of something that, in point of fact, you threw at ME first! (Post #302)

“I have no problem reconciling all scripture--but you are only supporting what you believe and apparently not wanting to hear every proof.” —— Here you accuse me of refusing to even listen to you…hardly the truth, I’ve been openly discussing the topic with you and not refusing to hear a thing….you’re free to post as you choose.

“Why go on with pages and pages of partial information as you have. If you don't understand, say so, but don't just present just a part of the information and and argue about what you do not know.” ——- And here you call me to idiotic to know what I’m talking about, and that, apparently is why I don’t see things your way.



I’m sorry, but no…no you have NOT reconciled them. To reconcile them you must provide proof that this ‘Oneness’ you are speaking of exists between God…and man. It does not. Every verse and passage you presented was clearly speaking of a oneness between the Father and Christ (within the Godhead), or between the body of Christ (within humans). So no…very much NO reconciliation…


“This alone should satisfy the scriptural need”….? My need for what? Textual proof for the whole idea? Biblical backing for any of the ideas you’ve presented?
You do realise that this is what you’ve been doing….giving an opinion and then telling me that it should satisfy my spiritually felt needs. Because it makes sense!
Sense is all well and good. But if it’s not in scripture, if it cannot be found even whispered within the pages, then I call a bad smell.


Sir….if what you have presented is your biblical proof and your ‘complete scriptural picture’, then I happily and with much gusto will let you walk on by and reside in your happy little world where you believe fully that you have all truth known to you and only you.
I wish you well.

I have answered every question, not with opinion or conjecture, but honestly and biblically, and your responses are getting ugly. By this measure you shall also be measured.

 

[Naomi25]

I shouldn't take you seriously...so I'll pretend I don't already know...in which case my answer would be: "Yes, if He'll have me."

If you cannot take that question seriously, we’ve reached the very heart of the issue.
And, well, you’ve answered it anyway.

John 10:30-33
I and the Father are one.”
The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”

When Jesus claimed ‘Oneship’ with the Father, he was claiming to be God. This is why the Jews wished to stone him. Claiming to be God…one with God…divine…is no small thing. And, as I’ve repeated stated, you’ve yet to provide any bible verses that tell us we shall become divine OR we shall become ‘One’ with the Father and Christ.

But, since you repeated claim you’ve provided proof…let’s have a look at the verses you’ve shared and what they DO tell us about ‘Oneness’, and see if they sand up to your claim that Christians are or become ‘One’ with God and become divine in nature (attribute).

John 17:21-23
that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me.
.

“So they may all be one”. Who is this “they” Jesus is talking about? It’s Christians. And is he asking the Father that we be ‘One’ with him, or the Father? Nope. He’s asking that we may be ‘one’ with one another. He want us ‘to be one’, just as ‘he and the Father are one’. So…here we have it; Jesus and the Father are ‘one’….and the ‘church’ is supposed to be ‘one.
No proof for you here.

Isaiah 59:1-2
Behold, the LORD’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save,
or his ear dull, that it cannot hear;
but your iniquities have made a separation
between you and your God,
and your sins have hidden his face from you
so that he does not hear.

This ‘proof’ of yours baffled me. It seems to me that before it could possibly mean what you need it to mean, you would first have to (and of course have not) argue and prove that ‘separation from God’ was from a place of ‘Oneness’ to begin with. And since your apparent definition of ‘Oneness’ is shared divinity, you would have to prove that in the Garden we shared equal divinity with God. Which would have meant we created…not were created. So…good luck with that.
Because…here’s the thing that I’m not quite sure you’re getting. To be ‘one’ with God MUST mean sharing his attributes. All of them. Which means we must be as almighty, all knowing, all-present…you get the picture. We were never that. We were created beings. Even when we were in ‘right’ relationship with God, we were never divine. And you’ll not find the bible verse to prove it.

Ephesians 4:2-4
with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—

.

‘One body’. Which body would that be? The Church. And we know, of course, that the ‘head’ of the ‘body’, is Christ. Now….is the ‘body’ ‘One’ with the ‘head’?

Ephesians 4:15-16
Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love.

Nope. We’re “joined”, “held together”, “equipped”….but not “one”. Indeed, we’re to “grow up into him who is the head”. Sounds very much like being “in” him. Having the Holy Spirit dwelling within us and working out God’s plan of salvation in our lives.
No proof for you in these passages.

.
Philippians 2:5-6
Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,

There’s just nothing for you here. Paul is talking to other Christians and telling them of the sort of mindset that ought to have; the sort of thinking that Christians can claim and have access to through the saving work of Christ. He goes on to say WHY we get such a humble, loving, serving mindset from Christ. Christ…who WAS in the form of God, did not hold fast to that title, that level of enthronement above…but humbled himself.

There is nothing here about Christians being ‘One’ with God. No proof for you here.

.
John 10:30
I and the Father are one.”

Again, I would think this is self explanatory; ‘I and the Father’. There is NO proof that Christians are to become divine here…no ‘Oneness’ with God or Christ here.

1 Corinthians 12:13
For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

Once more, there is clearly a distinction being made. There IS one Spirit…we are not one WITH the Spirit. The ‘one body’ we (Christians) are baptised into is the Church…and it is clearly emphasised here that THAT is what is being spoken about here; the ‘oneness’ is the harmony we ought to share upon entering the Church; NOT that we become ‘one’ with God, but that any distinction between human is dissolved; neither Jew nor Greek, slave or free.
No proof for you here.

So please…please tell me again how your “proofs” show that we become “One” with God. Because, NONE of these verses tell us this. And that is not a biased reading of these verses, it’s just plain ol’ common sense reading with good English.

But seriously, in addition to everything else I have quoted, Paul said "for me to live is Christ." Double check with Paul and see if he really meant something so divine, and get back to me. Then I will answer your question.

That passage is Paul pondering on his death. He wonders if his time to die has come…wonders if God has more work yet for him on earth. He longs in his heart to ‘depart’ (die), for that means ‘to be with Christ, for that is far better’…but acknowledges that “to live is Christ, to die is gain”. He means that while he lives, he lives FOR Christ, for Christ’s work, the work of the Kingdom, which he counts as joy. To die is almost a selfish want, a gain, a desire! But to live is to strive faithful at work!!

There is SOO nothing in this passage that talks about becoming ‘One’ with God, becoming ‘divine’, or any other bizarre thing you’ve claimed. And just so you know…I DID re-read the passage (checked with Paul). The passage, like all the others, are clear, easy to understand and have ZERO indications of what you want it to.

But…as usual, I do invite you to try and show it. It’s not there, so I doubt you can…but…

I have answered every question, not with opinion or conjecture, but honestly and biblically, and your responses are getting ugly. By this measure you shall also be measured.

Sure. ‘Every question’. Except the really important one…which is: “please provide actual biblical evidence that SAYS we’ll become ONE (divine) with God. As I’ve shown above, those attempts are as limp as a soggy noodle.

 

[Davy]

Forgive me, but I thought you were referencing the parable Jesus told in Matt 13…the one about the wheat and the tares. And the fact that it discusses this age and the next, but not an intermediary one (the Millennium).
So…no…I was not referring to a ‘parable Paul told’ in 1 Thess 4. I agree; its not a parable at all.

Well, I kind of was covering that tares in the fire idea too.

Lord Jesus simply did not cover the "thousand years" period of Revelation 20 in His parable of the tares of the field. Doesn't mean His future reign over the wicked for that period isn't real.

John 5:28-29
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
KJV

Lord Jesus showed there that 'both' resurrection types happen on the day of His future return.

Zechariah 14, and Revelation 22:14-15 also reveals the wicked are still present when the new Jerusalem with a Millennial sanctuary is established on earth at His return.

The Ezekiel 44 chapter also reveals the "dead" outside the holy city at that future time. Those aren't literally dead in graves, it is put for the 'spiritually dead', those souls who will still have mortal souls and still subject to the "second death" at the end of the thousand years. (And don't be deceived because sacrifices are mentioned there, because that is Old Testament Scripture, and a reference to our sacrifice of love since Jesus became our one Perfect Sacrifice forever wouldn't fit there in Ezekiel).

 

[ScottA]

When Jesus claimed ‘Oneship’ with the Father, he was claiming to be God. This is why the Jews wished to stone him. Claiming to be God…one with God…divine…is no small thing. And, as I’ve repeated stated, you’ve yet to provide any bible verses that tell us we shall become divine OR we shall become ‘One’ with the Father and Christ.

You go on and on...which is not necessary.

"The two become one" (which I have said already), meaning that as the body and bride of Christ, not only have we been raised up with Him, but we are One with Him, and therefore One with the Father (as they are One)...and therefore, yes, as you say: God.

But in your misguided beliefs, you have made the Son not whole, but divided and without His body and bride--you have separated what God has joined together.

 

[Daniel Veler]

Come to understanding of the first resurrection and all the parts to it and when each one occurs then you’ll have your answer.

revelation 20
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years

were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

 

[Daniel Veler]

Come to know the first resurrection and those that are they then you’ll have your answer.
Revelation 20
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years
were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

 

[Daniel Veler]

Sorry about the double post

 

[Naomi25]

Well, I kind of was covering that tares in the fire idea too.

Lord Jesus simply did not cover the "thousand years" period of Revelation 20 in His parable of the tares of the field. Doesn't mean His future reign over the wicked for that period isn't real.

John 5:28-29
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
KJV

Lord Jesus showed there that 'both' resurrection types happen on the day of His future return.

Zechariah 14, and Revelation 22:14-15 also reveals the wicked are still present when the new Jerusalem with a Millennial sanctuary is established on earth at His return.

The Ezekiel 44 chapter also reveals the "dead" outside the holy city at that future time. Those aren't literally dead in graves, it is put for the 'spiritually dead', those souls who will still have mortal souls and still subject to the "second death" at the end of the thousand years. (And don't be deceived because sacrifices are mentioned there, because that is Old Testament Scripture, and a reference to our sacrifice of love since Jesus became our one Perfect Sacrifice forever wouldn't fit there in Ezekiel).

I’d have to…perhaps somewhat reluctantly p) agree that there biblical validity for a Millennial period from some of these OT passages, just in how they speak of it. Where I struggle with it is how we then come to the NT and find nothing similar; we have this age, and the age to come; this age being now, with sin and death and rebellion…the age to come being eternity with none of those things.
When it all really comes down to it: I’m not in love with my ‘doctrine’ enough to be disappointed if I’m wrong. If Jesus returns and sets up a Millennial Kingdom, I suspect I’ll deal very well!

 

[Naomi25]

You go on and on...which is not necessary.

"The two become one" (which I have said already), meaning that as the body and bride of Christ, not only have we been raised up with Him, but we are One with Him, and therefore One with the Father (as they are One)...and therefore, yes, as you say: God.

But in your misguided beliefs, you have made the Son not whole, but divided and without His body and bride--you have separated what God has joined together.

I would not NEED to go “on and on” if you would simply stop skirting the issue….which is the glaringly obvious reality that the passages you are attempting to use to support your ideas do not say what you say they do.

I have repeatedly asked for you to show me from scripture where you get your idea, and I must, at this time, conclude that you cannot. That all you have is the odd interpretations of the passages you have presented that I reject. I reject them because they clearly do not mean…or even say clearly, what you are attempting to make them say or mean. Context, context, context. And that is what you seem to lack. You’ve taken all of those passages and stuffed them into the context you wish for them; seeing them speaking of your ‘oneness’ with Christ.

Well; if that’s the best you have, and we’re not likely to get any further..as fun as it’s been, I have much more worthy things to do with my time, and you clearly don’t like my ‘wordiness’.

 

[ScottA]

I would not NEED to go “on and on” if you would simply stop skirting the issue….which is the glaringly obvious reality that the passages you are attempting to use to support your ideas do not say what you say they do.

I have repeatedly asked for you to show me from scripture where you get your idea, and I must, at this time, conclude that you cannot. That all you have is the odd interpretations of the passages you have presented that I reject. I reject them because they clearly do not mean…or even say clearly, what you are attempting to make them say or mean. Context, context, context. And that is what you seem to lack. You’ve taken all of those passages and stuffed them into the context you wish for them; seeing them speaking of your ‘oneness’ with Christ.

Well; if that’s the best you have, and we’re not likely to get any further..as fun as it’s been, I have much more worthy things to do with my time, and you clearly don’t like my ‘wordiness’.

Your rejection of "the two become one"--the mystery of marriage made clear by Paul, is your problem, and between you and God.

Meanwhile, I have stated it, not out of context at all, but correctly, just as Paul did.

 

[Daniel Veler]

Have you ever thought what the Lord was telling us was the lost we’re going to mingle with the saved. There among our churches.