The Transition from Time...to Eternity.

[robert derrick]

I quoted you with quotation marks, and you call me a liar for not using quotes.

Really, Let me look.

"So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.” Again, "is", not "until the death of the body" as you say."

Are we really going to have to play games like this? You can at least quote something specific of mine, that you twist this fallacy out of.

Then you yourself do the very thing you accuse me of.

Any representation of the OSAS past resurrection teaching, is in my own words learned from long ago from Christians such as yourself. But, without all the jargonese.

Like the man said, Too many secrets, because of too many words.

I say again:

1. Your basic error is dismissing the need of the resurrection of our mortal bodies, in order to be like God in heaven now and forever.

2. You say the 'resurrected' body is another spiritual body, that you have already recieved in heavenly places. And so, the resurrection is past already, and does not include the mortal body we still have on earth.

Therefore, this teaching that the resurrection is past, makes the soul untouchable and unjudgeable by anything you do on earth, in word or deed with your mortal body:

1. Doctrinally, you teach your soul and spiritual body can never be condemned and separated from the life of Christ, no matter how much sinning you may still do with your mortal body on earth.

2. Doctrinally, you teach we have eternal life and salvation and justification and immortal spiritual bodies now, by faith alone, even while we may be drunken, fornicating, thieving and/or cursing vilely in anger and wrath.

Is there anything you don't agree with here?

I'm not saying you do these things. Nor am I saying you don't live righteously and do well. I am saying you believe and teach this stuff for gospel and doctrine of Christ.

Do you or don't you?

I certainly don't.

 

[ScottA]

Really, Let me look.

"So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.” Again, "is", not "until the death of the body" as you say."

Are we really going to have to play games like this? You can at least quote something specific of mine, that you twist this fallacy out of.


Any representation of the OSAS past resurrection teaching, is in my own words learned from long ago from Christians such as yourself. But, without all the jargonese.

Like the man said, Too many secrets, because of too many words.

I say again:

1. Your basic error is dismissing the need of the resurrection of our mortal bodies, in order to be like God in heaven now and forever.

2. You say the 'resurrected' body is another spiritual body, that you have already recieved in heavenly places. And so, the resurrection is past already, and does not include the mortal body we still have on earth.

Therefore, this teaching that the resurrection is past, makes the soul untouchable and unjudgeable by anything you do on earth, in word or deed with your mortal body:

1. Doctrinally, you teach your soul and spiritual body can never be condemned and separated from the life of Christ, no matter how much sinning you may still do with your mortal body on earth.

2. Doctrinally, you teach we have eternal life and salvation and justification and immortal spiritual bodies now, by faith alone, even while we may be drunken, fornicating, thieving and/or cursing vilely in anger and wrath.

Is there anything you don't agree with here?

I'm not saying you do these things. Nor am I saying you don't live righteously and do well. I am saying you believe and teach this stuff for gospel and doctrine of Christ.

Do you or don't you?

I certainly don't.

You are still violating your own accusations of not quoting, by summarizing what you think others believe and lumping it into one accusation against me. That's called hypocrisy.

Therefore, I will not engage you further.

 

[ScottA]

fwiw our translation “eternity” really comes from “aion: a space of time, an age” whereas they had a term for “forever,” namely aidios

Strong's Greek: 165. αἰών (aión) -- Age, eternity, world, forever, everlasting

biblehub.com

Strong's Greek: 126. ἀΐδιος (aidios) -- Eternal, everlasting

biblehub.com

nobody wants to talk about that tho lol

"Eternity" is just a word, a word that we now use to define synonymously with "everlasting" or "not having beginning or end." Wordsmithing does not nullify the common meaning or understanding of what is meant here.

Regardless, by definition, time has and end, whereas "eternity" or the "everlasting" kingdom of God does not. Rather than defining the words used, the point of the thread is to address the transition that occurs when each of us leaves this world--that is, when the clocks stop and we pass from this world wherein time is the rule, to exist where it is not the rule.

Why? Because "weeping and gnashing of teeth" will otherwise be like cosmic road rash.

 

[bbyrd009]

"Eternity" is just a word, a word that we now use to define synonymously with "everlasting" or "not having beginning or end." Wordsmithing does not nullify the common meaning or understanding of what is meant here

hmm, funny that you would say “everlasting,” being as how that is how aidios is defined :)
unfortunately, every instance of “eternal” that you can Quote came from aion, not aidios
“a space of time, an age”

 

[bbyrd009]

Regardless, by definition, time has and end

wadr this sounds all deep and philosophical and stuff maybe, but little kids already have no time, at least in a very real, practical sense, do they not?

whereas "eternity" or the "everlasting" kingdom of God does not

well as we have already just seen, your “eternity” comes from a discredited source, either that or we all misunderstand the meaning of “eternal,” right?

gotta get to work, see you there for the rest

 

[bbyrd009]

the point of the thread is to address the transition that occurs when each of us leaves this world

well wadr we are supposed to do that right now, are we not

that is, when the clocks stop and we pass from this world wherein time is the rule, to exist where it is not the rule.

ah yes, "death, more abundantly." im fam
"exist" implies "objective evidence" though, got any?
id even accept Scripture, although not necessarily your interp, a la "eternal"

Why? Because "weeping and gnashing of teeth" will otherwise be like cosmic road rash.

now here we might be in agreement lol, which i only say bc We do not yet know what we will become
however, ever found yourself kicked to the curb, and being very unhappy at being excluded?
ok, have a good day scott

 

[bbyrd009]

i would be finding out how to put on immortality right now if i were you :)
and then, if you would be so kind, tell me how lol

 

[Zao is life]

I am not challenging traditional Christian doctrine, but explaining what has not been fully understood of the scriptures. I am not debating.

You have stated what is obvious among the multitudes, but I have stated what is more importantly higher and true according to Him whose prayer it is that all should be One, as God is One.

You can say or rather explain it away, by saying the Oneness is "in spirit." --Of course it is--"God is spirit!" But you have not explained just what it is to be "in Him." But I have explained, that the one man Adam became "of" him--of his loins, and of his "kind" many in the unfolding revelation of all things. But what is the Revelation of it all? I am telling you just what is written of the end--that the revelation in the form you have referred to as being that of many, is rather "the revelation of Jesus Christ" who is One.

But this matter is not according to the ways of this world--just as Jesus clarified of marriage, saying, "For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven." So, yes, "in spirit", even many, but One in a way that is not defined comparative to men...except as with Adam and Eve who were literally one in Adam being one man, but then became two, only to become of his kind One in Christ who is greater than Adam.

You cannot divorce the purpose of God from the creation, whether the creation exists in this present corruptible (decaying) form, or in the NHNE.

God's purpose has not changed and does not change. There is no shadow of turning with God. God's purpose is manifested in His creation, and His purpose did not change just because Adam disobeyed. Adam was commanded to be fruitful and to multiply and to fill the earth and subdue it because God's purpose is for billions of souls in bodies that never die all in unity, eating of one and the same tree of life (Jesus, the Word of God who is life), and drinking of the same spiritual drink (God's Spirit). Billions of humans, One God.

No human fathered Jesus. He is the one and only unique one, who was born into creation and took upon Himself human flesh. All other humans are born of the seed of human fathers and are all descendants of Adam. We are creature, not Creator. The Son of man is not God but the Son of God is God, and the person Jesus Christ the Son of man is the Son of God. He is unique, the One and Only.

"And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose." (Romans 8:28).

GOD'S PURPOSE

"And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, after our likeness.
And let THEM have dominion over the fish of the sea,
and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle,
and over all the earth, and over all the creepers creeping on the earth.”
(Genesis 1:26)

Psalm 8:3-9
"When I look at Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars which You have established;
what is man that You are mindful of him, and the son of man, that You visit him?
For You have made him a little lower than the angels, and have crowned him with glory and honor.
You made him rule over the works of Your hands; You have put all things under his feet:
all sheep and oxen, yes, and the beasts of the field;
the birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea, and all that pass through the paths of the seas.
O Jehovah, our Lord, how excellent is Your name in all the earth!"

Man was created in the image and likeness of God, but man is not God, and never will be.

27 And God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him. He created them male and female.
28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, Be fruitful, and multiply and fill the earth, and subdue it. And have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heavens, and all animals that move upon the earth.

God's purpose is for billions of souls in bodies that never die all in unity, eating of one and the same tree of life (Jesus, the Word of God who is life), and drinking of the same spiritual drink (God's Spirit). Billions of humans, One God.

Your theology is divorced from the purpose of God, which will never change.

 

[Wrangler]

it is completely rejected. Yet, does that very transition not await us all?

IMO, it is pointless to talk about such things that are beyond our frame of reference because it necessarily allows only speculation upon speculation.

 

[Zao is life]

"Eternity" is just a word, a word that we now use to define synonymously with "everlasting" or "not having beginning or end." Wordsmithing does not nullify the common meaning or understanding of what is meant here.

Regardless, by definition, time has and end, whereas "eternity" or the "everlasting" kingdom of God does not. Rather than defining the words used, the point of the thread is to address the transition that occurs when each of us leaves this world--that is, when the clocks stop and we pass from this world wherein time is the rule, to exist where it is not the rule.

Why? Because "weeping and gnashing of teeth" will otherwise be like cosmic road rash.

Those who are in Christ though faith in Christ and have dwelt in Him during this life are still in Him after they have fallen asleep in Christ, because He lives:

John 14
19 Yet a little while and the world does not see Me any more. But you see Me. Because I live, you shall live also.
20 At that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.

John 15:4-5
Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it remains in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.
I am the Vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, the same brings forth much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.

But Adam was created a human - a soul and body. Until the resurrection of the dead and the day all those who sleep in Christ are raised from the dead, they sleep in Christ.

It's a place of perfect peace but till then, NO LIMBS, NO FUNCTIONING. Simple as that. I don't think you realize how inextricably the resurrection is part of the gospel. Hardly anyone realizes just how many verses in the New Testament are dedicated to it, because generally speaking, Christians don't count.

1 Thessalonians 4
13 But I would not have you ignorant, brothers, concerning those who are asleep, that you be not grieved, even as others who have no hope.
14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will also bring with Him all those who have fallen asleep through Jesus.
15 For we say this to you by the Word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord shall not go before those who are asleep.
16 For the Lord Himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ shall rise first.
17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. And so we shall ever be with the Lord.
18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.

Definitely, all who fall asleep in Christ remain in Christ. No one can snatch them out of His hand. But sleeping in Christ is not the same as functioning.

God's purpose does not change. He created Adam a soul and body that should have lived forever. The last Adam has died in our place and has risen again. That's is our hope. This is the gospel. In the New Testament the gospel of the Kingdom of Christ, and of salvation, and of eternal life is not ever divorced from being alive forever in a body . Not even once. God's purpose is manifested in His creation. And in His creation of Adam.

 

[Zao is life]

I am not challenging traditional Christian doctrine, but explaining what has not been fully understood of the scriptures. I am not debating.

You have stated what is obvious among the multitudes, but I have stated what is more importantly higher and true according to Him whose prayer it is that all should be One, as God is One.

You can say or rather explain it away, by saying the Oneness is "in spirit." --Of course it is--"God is spirit!" But you have not explained just what it is to be "in Him." But I have explained, that the one man Adam became "of" him--of his loins, and of his "kind" many in the unfolding revelation of all things. But what is the Revelation of it all? I am telling you just what is written of the end--that the revelation in the form you have referred to as being that of many, is rather "the revelation of Jesus Christ" who is One.

But this matter is not according to the ways of this world--just as Jesus clarified of marriage, saying, "For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven." So, yes, "in spirit", even many, but One in a way that is not defined comparative to men...except as with Adam and Eve who were literally one in Adam being one man, but then became two, only to become of his kind One in Christ who is greater than Adam.

I answered your above post here

Posted in this same thread.

 

[bbyrd009]

God's purpose is for billions of souls in bodies that never die all in unity

maybe, but prolly not imo
i would at least leave some room for doubt there k

 

[bbyrd009]

IMO, it is pointless to talk about such things that are beyond our frame of reference because it necessarily allows only speculation upon speculation.

right? and almost always the speculation is posted as absolute truth too, notice that?

 

[Wrangler]

right? and almost always the speculation is posted as absolute truth too, notice that?

Yes. Not only is the speculation about what is unknowable asserted to be absolute knowledge, it is also asserted mysticism is the way one may know what is unknowable ...

A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma -- Churchill

From A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma -- Churchill Cartoon shows a man (labeled "Free World") gazing in perplexity at a map of Russia on which is superimposed a sphinx. The caption is a statement made by Winston Churchill about the Soviet Union in October 1939 after the signing of the Nazi-Soviet Pact and the beginning of World War II. Suggests that the Western world still does not understand the motivation behind many of the Soviet actions during the Cold War.

 

[ScottA]

wadr this sounds all deep and philosophical and stuff maybe, but little kids already have no time, at least in a very real, practical sense, do they not?
well as we have already just seen, your “eternity” comes from a discredited source, either that or we all misunderstand the meaning of “eternal,” right?

gotta get to work, see you there for the rest

That is not the limitation of what is, but of the language and of men's ability to define what is nonetheless self-evident. One cannot recover yesterday, or any other form of time passed. And by the word of God time was created and is passing away, and yet is not so described of His kingdom. Thus, there is no problem, except ones the few that some invent--and that is where your idea of philosophy lies.

 

[ScottA]

Billions of humans, One God.

Sorry, I am going to be brief, as I am leaving on a trip.

I do not deny the "us" and "we" or the multitude of angels that were before the world began, but your description of billions of "humans" is only accurate in the context of this world which is passing away. And the "purpose" is not stated having to do with any number of "humans" of flesh, but of One spirit, "in God."

As for the purpose, you have used "the man of sin" (being flesh) who is "revealed" to support your claim and rational...which does not at all define what remains.

 

[Wrangler]

That is not the limitation of what is, but of the language

Mysticism 101: Language is an obstacle to communication, like a vehicle is an obstacle to transportation.

 

[bbyrd009]

That is not the limitation of what is, but of the language and of men's ability to define what is nonetheless self-evident. One cannot recover yesterday, or any other form of time passed. And by the word of God time was created and is passing away, and yet is not so described of His kingdom. Thus, there is no problem, except ones the few that some invent--and that is where your idea of philosophy lies.

well, idt you really responded to the post, or at least didnt reply to it, but whatevs;
im wondering how it is that a reality of "no time" is self-evident to you?

 

[bbyrd009]

One cannot recover yesterday, or any other form of time passed

well, we can in a sense, via video, audio recordings, history, personal accounts, etc?
it's the future-mongering part that really gets...fortune-telly, imo

 

[amigo de christo]

speaking of divorce , i notice this generation is doing all to divorce GOD from HIS own words
and rather leading us to a god that seems to guide by EMOTIONS and feelings .