 |
 |
|
That's the reason why I drive a Rolls Royce. I'm following Jesus' steps. -- Frederick Price, Ever Increasing Faith on Trinity Broadcasting Network, December 9, 1990 |
|
 |  |
Preterism: The Heavens: Conscience or Cosmos?
Posted on Thursday, February 21 @ 07:25:58 PST by Norman Voss |
|
by Tami Jelinek We have been studying “the heavens” as a metaphor in Scripture for God’s people. More specifically, we have looked at examples of the phrase “the heavens and the earth” referring to God’s people in covenant relationship with Him. In the Old Heavens and Old Earth, “the heavens” refers to the guilty consciences of God’s people under the judgment of “the old earth”, or Old Covenant law. In the New Heavens and New Earth, “the heavens” refers to the cleansed, guilt-free consciences of God’s people under “the new earth”, or the New Covenant law of Christ.
Please see Brian Maxwell’s article, The Heavens and the Earth, for a thorough study of how this metaphor is consistently repeated in Scripture. It is not my purpose to reiterate what has already been written; but rather after acknowledging the prevalence and consistency of “the heavens” as a reference to the hearts, minds, or consciences of God’s covenant community, it is my purpose to explore some significant ramifications of how we as Christians, and especially how we as preterists who acknowledge “the New Heavens and New Earth” as a present reality, understand the nature and scope of this New Creation.
At this juncture before continuing, I would simply like to stipulate to the fact that not every passage in Scripture where the words “earth”, “heaven” or “heavens” are used is to be understood metaphorically. We will be focusing here on passages with clear covenantal contexts and references. But there are certainly places where this language refers to elements of the cosmological creation, and the context usually makes this distinction plain. Sometimes we will encounter responses which amount to accusations that we are using shallow and sloppy exegesis, ignoring factors such as literary genre and context. These accusations are baseless and serve only to divert attention away from the focus of our study, which is the preeminence of Christ and His Kingdom in the Scripture. This is a spiritual Kingdom, or a Kingdom of conscience. “The New Heavens and New Earth” is synonymous with the “Kingdom of Heaven”, which is synonymous with the “New Creation”. Therefore, to globalize or universalize “the New Heavens and New Earth”, as many preterists do, is to deny its particular, exclusive and regenerated nature. In the study which follows we will see how this error has significant consequences to our theology, and more specifically, to the purity of the gospel. “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation.”
Click to read the entire article
|
| |
 |
|
Average Score: 3 Votes: 6
|
|
 |
^^Go to Top - E-mail to Friend - Print - View PDF - Subscribe - Comments RSS
Re: The Heavens: Conscience or Cosmos? (Score: 1)
by Starlight on Thursday, February 21 @ 08:43:44 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | Tami,
Excellent article and thanks for pointing us back again to the centrality of faith in Christ the faithful one as the focus of relationship with God the creator of the New Covenant.
I believe where so many of our brothers and sisters get off is just as you state they are still in a literal physical mindset and look at the scriptures globally instead of relationally. One of the reasons for this is a misapplication of Romans 5:12
(Rom 5:12 YLT) because of this, even as through one man the sin did enter into the world, and through the sin the death; and thus to all men the death did pass through, for that all did sin;
So many look to this as a biological passing on of the Death even though Adam the first of Old Covenant beginnings is never said to be a biological progenitor of sin. What is said is that he brought “death” to the “covenant” and it was imputed to all men because “all did sin” and only through the covenant would all men be redeemed. So your understanding that it is only through the New Creation/Covenant can man’s sinfulness be address still stands. The purpose of God’s chosen people was to bring this redemption but the first Natural Man of the Covenant (Adam) failed while the second Spiritual Covenantal Adam (Christ) did not. Adam was simply the first of the Covenant plan of redemption and that covenant plan with the Tree of Life is still there for us to come into that city that the worthies of old were waiting for. It still must be entered into through faith.
This erroneous misunderstanding of Romans 5:12 leads many to apply a universal physical context to Adam in Genesis thus contributing to the Universal application by some when they attempt to understand the implications of death’s imputation upon all mankind. Many fail to notice as you have so ably shown in your article that a Covenantal Jew is only one who is so in the heart.
Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But HE IS A JEW WHO IS ONE INWARDLY; and circumcision is that which is OF THE HEART, BY THE SPIRIT, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God. (NAS)
Rom 9: 6 It is not as though God's word had failed. For NOT ALL WHO ARE DESCENDED FROM ISRAEL ARE ISRAEL. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children. On the contrary, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned."8 In other words, IT IS NOT THE NATURAL CHILDREN who are God's children, but IT IS THE CHILDREN OF THE PROMISE who are regarded as Abraham's offspring.
Thus recognizing that the collective body “all” does not infer every physical person we now can better understand Rom 11:26. And so ALL ISRAEL WILL BE SAVED.
Blessings
Norm
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Barry on Thursday, February 21 @ 16:52:25 PST
- by Starlight on Thursday, February 21 @ 17:23:46 PST
- by Barry on Thursday, February 21 @ 17:45:55 PST
- by Starlight on Friday, February 22 @ 05:12:03 PST
- by Barry on Friday, February 22 @ 07:17:32 PST
- by Barry on Friday, February 22 @ 10:52:32 PST
- by Starlight on Friday, February 22 @ 20:38:32 PST
- by Barry on Friday, February 22 @ 21:15:30 PST
- by Starlight on Sunday, February 24 @ 07:04:59 PST
- by davo on Sunday, February 24 @ 08:06:18 PST
- by Starlight on Sunday, February 24 @ 13:43:41 PST
- by davo on Monday, February 25 @ 23:17:09 PST
- by Barry on Sunday, February 24 @ 13:10:09 PST
- by Starlight on Sunday, February 24 @ 19:42:09 PST
- by Barry on Monday, February 25 @ 07:11:18 PST
- by Starlight on Monday, February 25 @ 09:52:53 PST
- by Barry on Monday, February 25 @ 11:00:12 PST
- by Starlight on Monday, February 25 @ 14:55:31 PST
- by Barry on Monday, February 25 @ 16:03:48 PST
Re: The Heavens: Conscience or Cosmos? (Score: 1)
by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:02:10 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | Tami writes:
...The unredeemed do not reside in the New Heavens and New Earth where righteousness dwells.
This is the same argument that the Idealist uses about age to come.
30will fail to receive many times as much in this age and, in the age to come, eternal life."
This is my point. There is righteousness in the garden in the NH and NE. So righteousness DOES dwell in the NH and NE
There is eternal life in Christ in the age to come. You BOTH (you and idealists) disregard this / and assume that there are no more steps.
Tami writes:
the New Heavens and New Earth, the “former shall not come to mind”; in the New Jerusalem, ”the former things have passed away.” Therefore we conclude that these two are synonymous. Furthermore, all things are made new only for those in Christ. Only those in Christ are a new creation:
2 Corinthians 5:17 If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. (NKJV)
So we see that the New Heavens and New Earth is the New Creation in Christ
How did you jump to the conclusion that when the bible says "new creation" it means "New Heavens and New Earth"?
Tami writes:
They are either ‘physicalizing’ (by globalizing) the Kingdom of Heaven, which is antithetical to its biblically defined nature;
Tami - what do these verses mean?
8Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.
15The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, which said:
"The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ,
and he will reign for ever and ever."
Tami says that the heavens are believers and the earth is the covenant.
23 Sing for joy, O (Heavens / BELIEVERS CONSCIENCE), for the LORD has done this;
shout aloud, (O earth / COVENANT) beneath. <= I didn't know covenants shouted Tami.
Tami just because you see personification it doesn't make it about people. Maybe thats your Quaker education kicking in.
You are still asserting with no logical proof. Like with new creation = new heavens. Like personification is literal people (when it does not work - see above - if earth means covenant like you say then covenant's shout)
Assertion: Something declared or stated positively, often with no support or attempt at proof.
Again...
Isaiah 26
2 Open the gates
that the righteous nation may enter,
the nation that keeps faith.
10 Though grace is shown to the wicked,
they do not learn righteousness;
even in a land of uprightness they go on doing evil
and regard not the majesty of the LORD.
Exact same picture as...
2 Peter 3
13But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness. 14So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him.
Revelation 21
1Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God,
23The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. 24The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. 25On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there. 26The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it. 27Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:16:27 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:32:26 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 10:13:35 PST
- by Jhedges on Thursday, February 21 @ 10:22:19 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 10:27:35 PST
- by Jhedges on Thursday, February 21 @ 11:07:04 PST
- by chef on Thursday, February 21 @ 11:21:06 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 11:34:03 PST
- by chef on Thursday, February 21 @ 11:38:44 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 11:40:55 PST
- by Starlight on Thursday, February 21 @ 12:05:12 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Thursday, February 21 @ 16:33:16 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 16:37:51 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Friday, February 22 @ 06:05:44 PST
- by Jhedges on Thursday, February 21 @ 10:14:04 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 10:20:25 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 10:34:57 PST
- by flannery0 on Thursday, February 21 @ 11:49:17 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 12:14:00 PST
- by flannery0 on Thursday, February 21 @ 12:23:50 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 13:10:55 PST
- by flannery0 on Thursday, February 21 @ 13:29:28 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 15:00:31 PST
- by JL on Thursday, February 21 @ 15:23:01 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 15:33:54 PST
Re: The Heavens: Conscience or Cosmos? (Score: 1)
by Virgil on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:05:22 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | Tami, this is good stuff. :) I do have a question for you though. As I mentioned before in conversations with other people, why is Universalism such a bad conclusion to preterist eschatology IF that indeed ends up being the conclusion?
I see a problem with the way a lot of peoples thinking happens in this context, which is kind of backwards:
1. People know universalism to be false and really really bad and scary.
2. People learn about preterism.
3. They start asking questions about redemption, and universal reconciliation.
4. They back off the questions because the conclusions about those items were already reached. (see step 1)
Shouldn't it be more like this?
1. People know universalism to be false and really really bad and scary.
2. People learn about preterism.
3. They start asking questions about redemption, and universal reconciliation.
4. They back off ask the questions because the conclusions about those items were already not reached and they want to learn more and explore the possibilities offered by universal atonement. (no step 1) |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:23:43 PST
- by Virgil on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:27:20 PST
- by flannery0 on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:26:57 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:43:49 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:48:22 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 11:29:41 PST
- by Virgil on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:45:01 PST
- by flannery0 on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:50:47 PST
- by Virgil on Thursday, February 21 @ 11:09:29 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:52:05 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 09:58:06 PST
- by leo724 on Friday, February 22 @ 18:39:06 PST
- by Virgil on Thursday, February 21 @ 11:08:15 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Thursday, February 21 @ 16:42:31 PST
- by Starlight on Thursday, February 21 @ 11:15:20 PST
- by Virgil on Thursday, February 21 @ 11:36:52 PST
- by Starlight on Thursday, February 21 @ 16:42:19 PST
- by Virgil on Thursday, February 21 @ 17:04:22 PST
- by Starlight on Friday, February 22 @ 06:12:31 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Thursday, February 21 @ 16:47:45 PST
- by Virgil on Thursday, February 21 @ 17:15:39 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Thursday, February 21 @ 17:49:16 PST
- by Paige on Thursday, February 21 @ 18:23:53 PST
- by Virgil on Thursday, February 21 @ 18:29:43 PST
- by Paige on Thursday, February 21 @ 18:45:55 PST
- by tom-g on Monday, February 25 @ 17:18:22 PST
Re: The Heavens: Conscience or Cosmos? (Score: 1)
by Paige on Thursday, February 21 @ 10:52:40 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | Tami,
I'll try to make my comments as brief as possible. I appreciate the effort you put into writing this article, and am thankful you have made it widely available.
Let me begin with your premise of "...acknowledging the prevalence and consistency of “the heavens” as a reference to the hearts, minds, or consciences of God’s covenant community..." Going with that, would we then understand that the "old heavens" as referencing the hearts, minds, and consciences of God's OC community? If that is truly the case, then I would like to explore some of the ramifications I see in connection with your article.
First off, I would state that I see evidence that the hearts, minds and consciences of OC people did not seem to stay inside the bounds of that community. IOW, just as we see darkness and light in the OC world, this translated to the OC mindset that saw life in a certain way. It is obvious (to me) that the old heavens and earth directly affected the way one lived and saw life in the OC age. In that world, one was either IN or OUT. This constituted to being in Covenant, and therefore "Jew and circumcised", or out of covenant, which made you Gentile and uncircumcised. Genesis 1 gives us a description of a heaven and earth where light and darkness are not only apparent, but they are divided. Genesis 2 shows us that God puts Adam into a garden that is already touched by, and within, a world denoting division and disparity (greater/lessor; male/female etc.). So, in this world, the "in" group looked around them and saw only the "out" group. (Note: Would not these people be seen, at the very least, as those sharing in the OC age?) Division and disparity eventually worked its way inside, and the "in" group, split. What happened after the split? Ten tribes eventually got officially labeled "out." It is my contention that this condition was inevitable and unavoidable. It was the outworking of death and condemnation (covenantal), in the age it reigned.
Enter Christ, who came to usher in God's redemptive purpose and plan from the foundation of the world. In the transition of the ages, we see that God broke down the separation between the "ins" and the "outs". In fact, Paul tells us in Romans that God was using the "outs" to provoke the jealousy of the "ins" (11:11). It seems quite apparent to me that God had a plan and purpose for division and disparity within the creation that He subjected to vanity (Rom.8:20).
To sum up the above, I would say that the old heavens and earth was the very catalyst for how the old covenant age progressed. Even if one were to apply the scope of the old heavens and earth strictly covenantal; can one deny that those perceived as outside its bounds were also ruled and affected by it (as that age was commonly shared by all)? I don't think so.
This brings me now to a focus on the new heavens and earth. Throughout the NT, we see language employed to clue us in as to the passing of the old. John says, "the darkness is passing away, and the true light is already shining." (1 John 2:8) As you brought out in your article, "The former “heavens and earth” are not remembered in the New Jerusalem because the “former things” have passed away:
Revelation 21:4 And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away." 5 Then He who sat on the throne said, "Behold, I make all things new.""
I must ask then, how does this new consciousness reveal itself in the way it perceives its surroundings? I think I have shown very clearly how the old consciousness/old heavens and earth affected its age. In the new heavens and earth, it must be seen that darkness has passed away. Also, Rev.21:1 is careful to point out how there is "no more sea". As surely as division and disparity denoted the old heavens and earth, unity is clearly the marked characteristic of the new heavens and earth. It is a unity the
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by flannery0 on Monday, February 25 @ 06:46:53 PST
- by Paige on Monday, February 25 @ 17:31:15 PST
Re: The Heavens: Conscience or Cosmos? (Score: 1)
by chrisliv on Thursday, February 21 @ 12:41:25 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | Yeah,
Very nice article.
Only one point that I personally differ with, where it states:
"The above excerpts from Hebrews 9 and 10 were chosen to highlight something very important regarding the New Covenant Age which began at AD 70, as signified by the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem."
I think most Preterists will agree that the present or completed tense of verses in various places of Hebrews speaks of an already fulfilled New Jerusalem and New Covenant intercession pre-70 AD, like the ones cited in the article and like Hebrews 12:
22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
I know there is a tendency for Preterists to want to begin or end most things at 70 AD, but it seems obvious that virtually everything related to Christ's Kingdom began well-before 70 AD.
I even think King David reached through Time, via his Faith, to receive New Covenant forgiveness, as he was guilt of Adultery and Murder under the Old Covenant, which were both punishable by death.
Peace to you all,
C. Livingstone
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by flannery0 on Thursday, February 21 @ 13:04:48 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 13:18:00 PST
- by chrisliv on Thursday, February 21 @ 13:36:21 PST
- by Virgil on Thursday, February 21 @ 13:51:17 PST
- by chrisliv on Thursday, February 21 @ 14:26:05 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Friday, February 22 @ 06:19:02 PST
- by flannery0 on Friday, February 22 @ 06:25:15 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Friday, February 22 @ 06:29:41 PST
- by chrisliv on Friday, February 22 @ 09:14:47 PST
- by chrisliv on Thursday, February 21 @ 14:01:22 PST
- by MichaelB on Thursday, February 21 @ 15:05:44 PST
- by chrisliv on Thursday, February 21 @ 16:18:24 PST
Re: The Heavens: Conscience or Cosmos? (Score: 1)
by tom-g on Thursday, February 21 @ 17:58:01 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | Hey Tami,
I can certainly see what you are attempting to say but I wonder how you have arrived at your understanding that the compound phrase "Heaven[s] and Earth" is a metaphorical use of that phrase? How do you develop a metaphorical meaning for something that has no other meaning for which your definition becomes a metaphor?
Your meaning is in fact the real meaning and any other use of the phrase is its metaphorical meaning, deriving its metaphorical meaning from the real meaning.
If I beat swords into plowshares, these metaphorical words only have meaning because I know what swords and plowshares are. How then does your metaphorical use of heavens and earth have meaning if there is no literal meaning of the words as the source of the metaphorical meaning?
If this sounds confusing that is probably because it is. I hope I am not repeating a question that has already been asked or stated more clearly.
Tom |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Virgil on Thursday, February 21 @ 18:10:29 PST
- by flannery0 on Thursday, February 21 @ 18:37:05 PST
- by tom-g on Friday, February 22 @ 06:11:25 PST
- by flannery0 on Friday, February 22 @ 06:22:51 PST
- by tom-g on Friday, February 22 @ 10:13:54 PST
- by flannery0 on Friday, February 22 @ 10:30:24 PST
- by tom-g on Friday, February 22 @ 11:41:52 PST
- by flannery0 on Friday, February 22 @ 12:30:40 PST
- by tom-g on Friday, February 22 @ 13:19:48 PST
Disagreements within the Community (Op-ed) (Score: 1)
by Spartan-117 on Friday, February 22 @ 12:03:26 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | I used to think it would be great to worship with a church that believed in fulfilled eschatology. However, now I don’t think that would necessary be such a good idea or possible. Why? Even if those who believe in a fulfilled eschatology agree on that, they disagree on so many other issues, doctrines, teachings, etc… that unity to have a class or worship seems highly unlikely.
Just recently I learned that instead of there being one book written to counter the Mathison one, there are three being written. Why - because the contributors can’t agree on other issues besides fulfilled eschatology, and so couldn’t have “their” articles in “that” book. This says much about the lack of unity or agreement within the fulfilled eschatology community – a group that states we know how to interpret Scripture correctly.
Let us just name a few disagreements within our community. Understanding and applying Genesis; literature rapture; the differing views on the resurrection; eternal conscious punishment or not; worship; baptism or not; etc… the list goes on and on.
If we agree on our eschatology, why do we not agree in other areas? Could it be that we are applying proper hermeneutics in eschatology but failing to do so in other subjects?
Take me for example, I just don’t see how anyone could possibly come up with Genesis 1 teaching anything other than the creation of the physical universe and all life on Earth. That to me, and I’m not alone (and I don’t agree with everything “YEC” teaches), is what is clearly taught by the context. When I read your comments or book on it being a “covenant” and see you not sticking to the whole context (what is real and what is imagery or whatever), it appears to me that you are going into the text with a pre-conceived idea, which has lead to a host of many other “clear” contradictions with Scripture. How can “others” take the “preterist” movement seriously when there is so much disagreement among us and we claim to be consistent in interpreting eschatology but have so much inconsistency in other areas of Scripture?
John
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by mazuur on Friday, February 22 @ 12:12:25 PST
- by tom-g on Friday, February 22 @ 13:49:20 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Friday, February 22 @ 14:58:32 PST
- by tom-g on Saturday, February 23 @ 10:05:31 PST
- by MiddleKnowledge on Saturday, February 23 @ 17:20:01 PST
- by tom-g on Sunday, February 24 @ 15:11:30 PST
Re: The Heavens: Conscience or Cosmos? (Score: 1)
by davo on Friday, February 22 @ 21:42:56 PST (User Info | Send a Message) |
Ignoring this “covenant context” at any point in redemption’s history will lead to a misunderstanding and misapplication of God’s promises. Unfortunately, as true as this is, this IMO is the very thing some of the assumptions and assertions made in the above article do. The whole bulwark of thought made to counter an "apparent" problem of "universalism" within prêterism is totally misguided because the prêterists who do this are in fact attacking 'Unitarian Universalism' and have completely MISSED the logical end that a consistent prêteristic approach reaches in understanding that the "covenant context" was relative to Israel in HER redemption – a redemption that in its "end-of-the-age" ministration and outworking was to include certain Gentiles as part of the "first-fruit saints"; all of which in the will of God was to accomplish the restoration of mankind – Israel was the means, and "outside" of Israel, the ends. In this regards spatial or non-spatial realities are a complete non-issue.
The exclusive language of Paul's stated "in Christ" motif is indicative of those "chosen" and "called out" to minister such redemptive fullness ON BEHALF OF the greater whole – of Israel and subsequently in reconciliation of all else beyond, period. There was reward and potential loss of reward for those so called into this end-time ministry.
This however is NOT the whole story. The "in Christ" reality encompasses both the specific as explained above AND the generic as it applied to Israel as a whole. Jesus was Israel's Messiah. Their national blindness to this fact in no way diminished the truth of Christ's Messiahship / kingship. Israel's blindness certainly diminished their Godly blessing, but even that was in the plan of God.
ALL NATIONAL ISRAEL regardless of individual faith were "in Christ" in that He was their national representative, i.e., their Messiah. Paul demonstrates most clearly that ALL Israel were encompassed "in Christ" – both obedient AND disobedient Israel. One CANNOT partake of that of which one is not a part:
1Cor 10:1-5 Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. But with most of them God was not well pleased, for their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.
Thus ALL ISRAEL were IN CHRIST collectively, redemptively; a redemption that came to its fullness in the Cross-Parousia event of AD30-70. A national redemption that wrought a nations-wide reconciliation and restoration of man.
The lack of understanding this distinction creates the "them / us" mentality that wrongly passes judgment etc. In times past this "them / us" judgment showed itself in terms of the "Jew / gentile" divide, whereas in times since this same critical spirit is reflected in terms of "Saved / lost".
The "Kingdom" is the DOMAIN and REIGN of God – is there anywhere beyond God's reach? [Psa 139:7-8]
The "City / Temple" is the SPIRITUAL HUB of the kingdom – wherein the priests of God dwell. [Rev 5:9-10]
The "Covenant" is the LANGUAGE of the kingdom – that which communicates the Divine intents of the kingdom best – love God by loving thy neighbour. [Jn 13:34]
There are many non-citizens in His Kingdom – we "the called" in witness, worship and works are mandated to minister the message of God's reconciling grace of to them; evangelism then, is about bringing those "outside" into the blessedness of citizenry in this life [Rom 5:17]. The essence of the Gospel is NOT about avoiding a supposed post death calamity; the essence of the Gospel is about the fullness LI
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by tom-g on Saturday, February 23 @ 06:13:43 PST
- by JL on Saturday, February 23 @ 07:32:16 PST
- by tom-g on Saturday, February 23 @ 08:31:19 PST
- by JL on Saturday, February 23 @ 08:43:05 PST
- by tom-g on Saturday, February 23 @ 09:12:49 PST
- by davo on Saturday, February 23 @ 08:04:09 PST
- by tom-g on Saturday, February 23 @ 09:06:31 PST
- by Paige on Saturday, February 23 @ 09:29:52 PST
- by tom-g on Saturday, February 23 @ 10:50:39 PST
- by davo on Saturday, February 23 @ 11:11:49 PST
- by Paige on Saturday, February 23 @ 11:55:19 PST
- by tom-g on Saturday, February 23 @ 22:59:37 PST
- by davo on Sunday, February 24 @ 05:14:55 PST
- by tom-g on Sunday, February 24 @ 14:12:16 PST
- by davo on Tuesday, February 26 @ 17:35:39 PST
- by Paige on Sunday, February 24 @ 10:34:48 PST
- by tom-g on Sunday, February 24 @ 14:59:36 PST
- by Paige on Sunday, February 24 @ 16:09:56 PST
- by davo on Saturday, February 23 @ 09:44:01 PST
Re: The Heavens: Conscience or Cosmos? (Score: 1)
by Barry on Saturday, February 23 @ 08:13:21 PST (User Info | Send a Message) | Hi Tami,
I feel that the article is very much a reaction to what is "perceived" to be the false precept of common (or comprehensive, or universal) grace.
Do you have the "conscience" of the Gentiles judged in the Parousia?
IE if yes how do you fit that into the old heavens and earth?
According to Romans chapter 2 and Acts Chapter 17 this is what happened. So where would you then stand on how this relates to the "heavens and the earth" as used in Acts chapter 17 which does involve also the Gentiles.
Do you have the consciousness of the Gentiles becoming a problem prior to Adam's bringing sin into the world?
Do you have Death being spread among the Gentiles prior to Adam bringing sin into the world?
This is an important question because is touches on how or how you do not see the comprehensive nature (aspect) of Adam.
Do you have the law passing away for the believers only?
Do the types and figures remaining valid against the conscience even when they have passed away?
How do you explain the promised passing away of both the "old world" AND THE LUST THEREIN?
Did the "old world" pass away for the believer only?
When exactly was the conscience judged, at the Parousia or at post mortem? As many lived through past the ending of types and figures concerning both those who over came and those that did not overcome that world until it's passing away.
Blessings Barry |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
|
|