Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so a 1000 yr reign on this earth is false

[WPM]

God Says it is literal.

Not so. That is your opinion. I disagree.

 

[David in NJ]

I mean, maybe this millennium happened on the new Earth, not the old Earth.

I didn't cause any trouble.that's my understanding, and I think it's the most likely scenario, because there can't be a bottomless pit on the old earth.

You caused no trouble for me.

Believe everything that God has spoken.

Many people come to false conclusions because they have not read/studied/prayed over all the scriptures.

Most people pick and choose what they want to believe from the Bible.

 

[David in NJ]

Not so. That is your opinion. I disagree.

Believe God's Opinion = It is called Truth, the Word

 

[WPM]

Believe God's Opinion = It is called Truth, the Word

Do you believe in corroboration?

 

[WPM]

You caused no trouble for me.

Believe everything that God has spoken.

Many people come to false conclusions because they have not read/studied/prayed over all the scriptures.

Most people pick and choose what they want to believe from the Bible.

Yeah right! Everybody does that but you.

 

[WPM]

Believe God's Opinion = It is called Truth, the Word

What is your hermeneutics?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Stop acting like the Devil.

Grow up, boy.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I mean, maybe this millennium happened on the new Earth, not the old Earth.

I didn't cause any trouble.that's my understanding, and I think it's the most likely scenario, because there can't be a bottomless pit on the old earth.

The new earth follows the thousand years (see Revelation 20-21). The new earth appears after this earth passes away (see Revelation 21:1).

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Not so. That is your opinion. I disagree.

He thinks He is God or at least was appointed to speak for God. He needs to be humbled. I suggest he humble himself before God has to do it.

 

[soberxp]

The new earth follows the thousand years (see Revelation 20-21). The new earth appears after this earth passes away (see Revelation 21:1).

Do you think the order is a thousand years, and then the new Earth?
I don't think so. Those who have risen with Christ should be in the new heaven and new earth.

 

[WPM]

But, for some reason, Jesus had no interest in doing that? How does that make any sense? You don't think Jesus wanted to set an example for us?


Why are you setting Jesus and Paul against each other as if they taught contradictory things? You said this previously:


So, why would Paul pray for unbelievers if Jesus didn't? Did Paul not want to emulate Jesus? Was he contradicting the example that Jesus gave him? No, that can't be it because he followed the example of Christ.

1 Corinthians 11:1 Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.

So, by praying for unbelievers, was Paul being a hypocrite by not following the example of Christ or are you missing something here? I vote for the latter.

Let's examine John 17 more carefully to see the context of what Jesus was saying.

John 17:6 “I have revealed you to those whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word. 7 Now they know that everything you have given me comes from you. 8 For I gave them the words you gave me and they accepted them. They knew with certainty that I came from you, and they believed that you sent me. 9 I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours. 10 All I have is yours, and all you have is mine. And glory has come to me through them. 11 I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name, the name you gave me, so that they may be one as we are one. 12 While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.

The first thing to understand about this passage is that Jesus was talking about His disciples specifically here and not about believers in general, as you falsely believe. We know that in the passage above He is only praying for His disciples because He later in verse 20 said "My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message".

So, with this understanding of the context in mind, what was Jesus really saying when He said "I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours."? Was He saying He was praying for believers and not praying for unbelievers as you falsely think? Absolutely not. He was simply saying that He was praying for His disciples to be protected and was not praying that for anyone else at that particular time. He had a particular purpose for His disciples. He prayed that they would be protected so that they could serve that purpose which was to bring the gospel to all of Israel and then to the whole world. In no way, shape or form did Jesus ever teach that He never prayed for unbelievers or that His followers should not do so. Otherwise, Paul would've been sinning by praying for unbelievers.

For goodness sakes, why would Jesus not want to pray for all of those He died for? He died for the sins, not of ours only, Scott, but of the whole world (1 John 2:1-2). But, after dying for the whole world, including unbelievers, He no longer cared about them and would not have wanted to pray for them? Of course not. He wants them to be saved and that's why He died for their sins.

No, no, no bro. Repeatedly, Jesus spoke of all that the Father has given Him will come to Him and believe. This is divine election. This election is something that the carnal mind reacts to. It thinks it is unfair. But God will have mercy on whom He will, and harden who He wishes. That is a fact! That is because he is God . He is in control. He calls the shots. He elected in the Old and He is doing it in the New.

 

[WPM]

Do you think the order is a thousand years, and then the new Earth?
I don't think so. Those who have risen with Christ should be in the new heaven and new earth.

The figurative thousand years is now.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Do you think the order is a thousand years, and then the new Earth?

Yes, because the thousand years takes place on this earth and it says in Revelation 21:1 that the new earth appears after this earth passes away.

Revelation 21:1 Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,”[a] for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.

I don't think so.

Why do you think the new earth somehow appears before this earth passes away despite Revelation 21:1 indicating that the new earth only appears after this earth first passes away?

Those who have risen with Christ should be in the new heaven and new earth.

They will be. But, the new heaven and new earth is eternal. There will be no more death there (Rev 21:4).

The thousand years does not follow Christ's return. It's not a literal thousand years, but is figurative for the New Testament time period (up until Satan's little season). It relates to Jesus reigning, right? When did He begin to reign? Long ago.

Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, no, no bro.

Address my points specifically, bro. You are not doing that..again. You are not specifically addressing even one thing I said in my post. What exactly did I say that you are saying no to? Quote it and tell me how you interpret the passages I was referring to. Are you disagreeing that the passage I quoted from John 17 was addressed specifically to the disciples? Don't make me guess as to what exactly you are disagreeing with in my post.

Repeatedly, Jesus spoke of all that the Father has given Him will come to Him and believe. This is divine election.

I was talking to Scott and not intending to bring you into this again, but here we go again, I guess.

You once again say something as if I said otherwise. Where did I say otherwise? This is not where we disagree. You continue to not understand what we actually disagree about for whatever reason. So, you end up making one strawman argument after another.

But, the question we need to answer is how does the Father determine who to give to Jesus?

Take Cornelius and his family, for example. And Lydia as another example. The Father gave them to Jesus, right? So, did the Father pick them to give to Jesus for no discernible reason from the foundation of the world? No. They were already worshipers of God before they were given to Jesus. Remember what Jesus said about those who believed Moses? They would also believe in Him.

John 5:46 If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.

So, God does not just randomly pick people to give to Jesus (or however you think it is that He determines that), He gives to Jesus those who already believe or show a willingness to believe.

This election is something that the carnal mind reacts to. It thinks it is unfair. But God will have mercy on whom He will, and harden who He wishes. That is a fact!

Again you say something as if I disagree with it, but I don't! Stop this! Take more time to read what I say and learn what I actually believe so that you stop making repeated strawman arguments.

Calvinism is based on cherry picked scripture instead of all of scripture. It draws conclusions from the verse you are referencing while not taking other scripture like Romans 11:30-32 into consideration. Yes, God has mercy on whom He will and hardens who He will. I agree with that 100%. I mean, it says that explicitly in scripture, so why would I not agree with it? But, what does it mean exactly? That God randomly has mercy on some and hardens the rest? No! Absolutely not! That would contradict the fact that He wants to have mercy on all people! (Romans 11:30-32)!

When God hardened Pharoah's heart and went back and forth between hardening his heart and him hardening his own heart, what was the condition of Pharaoh's heart when that all started? It was already hardened as evidenced by the fact that he wickedly kept the Israelites as his slaves. God didn't just randomly pick Pharaoh to harden. He picked him because he was already hardened and he wanted to "display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth" (Romans 9:17). And who can argue with that? God can do that if He wants to, of course. The potter can do what He wants with His clay. But, what He doesn't do is keep some from having the opportunity to be saved. That contradicts the fact that He wants all people to repent and to be saved and to have mercy on all people.

That is because he is God . He is in control. He calls the shots.

Bro. Did you learn nothing from our previous discussion earlier about what I believe? I don't think you are reading what I'm saying carefully at all. I specifically said in that discussion that I agree with this when you said this before. But, here you are saying it again as if I disagree with this! But, what does it mean for God to call the shots? That man is not responsible to decide how to respond to the shots that God calls? One shot that God calls is to command all people everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30). If man is responsible to use his free will to decide whether to repent or not does that mean God is not calling the shots? No! It's God calling the shot that man is responsible to repent, not man.

He elected in the Old and He is doing it in the New.

By what basis is His election? Election is to salvation. Salvation is conditional upon God's gracious offer of salvation and man's response to that offer. Election is not random or whatever you think it is. It is conditional and not unconditional.

 

[WPM]

Address my points specifically, bro. You are not doing that..again. You are not specifically addressing even one thing I said in my post. What exactly did I say that you are saying no to? Quote it and tell me how you interpret the passages I was referring to. Are you disagreeing that the passage I quoted from John 17 was addressed specifically to the disciples? Don't make me guess as to what exactly you are disagreeing with in my post.


I was talking to Scott and not intending to bring you into this again, but here we go again, I guess.

You once again say something as if I said otherwise. Where did I say otherwise? This is not where we disagree. You continue to not understand what we actually disagree about for whatever reason. So, you end up making one strawman argument after another.

But, the question we need to answer is how does the Father determine who to give to Jesus?

Take Cornelius and his family, for example. And Lydia as another example. The Father gave them to Jesus, right? So, did the Father pick them to give to Jesus for no discernible reason from the foundation of the world? No. They were already worshipers of God before they were given to Jesus. Remember what Jesus said about those who believed Moses? They would also believe in Him.

John 5:46 If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.

So, God does not just randomly pick people to give to Jesus (or however you think it is that He determines that), He gives to Jesus those who already believe or show a willingness to believe.


Again you say something as if I disagree with it, but I don't! Stop this! Take more time to read what I say and learn what I actually believe so that you stop making repeated strawman arguments.

Calvinism is based on cherry picked scripture instead of all of scripture. It draws conclusions from the verse you are referencing while not taking other scripture like Romans 11:30-32 into consideration. Yes, God has mercy on whom He will and hardens who He will. I agree with that 100%. I mean, it says that explicitly in scripture, so why would I not agree with it? But, what does it mean exactly? That God randomly has mercy on some and hardens the rest? No! Absolutely not! That would contradict the fact that He wants to have mercy on all people! (Romans 11:30-32)!

When God hardened Pharoah's heart and went back and forth between hardening his heart and him hardening his own heart, what was the condition of Pharaoh's heart when that all started? It was already hardened as evidenced by the fact that he wickedly kept the Israelites as his slaves. God didn't just randomly pick Pharaoh to harden. He picked him because he was already hardened and he wanted to "display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth" (Romans 9:17). And who can argue with that? God can do that if He wants to, of course. The potter can do what He wants with His clay. But, what He doesn't do is keep some from having the opportunity to be saved. That contradicts the fact that He wants all people to repent and to be saved and to have mercy on all people.


Bro. Did you learn nothing from our previous discussion earlier about what I believe? I don't think you are reading what I'm saying carefully at all. I specifically said in that discussion that I agree with this when you said this before. But, here you are saying it again as if I disagree with this! But, what does it mean for God to call the shots? That man is not responsible to decide how to respond to the shots that God calls? One shot that God calls is to command all people everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30). If man is responsible to use his free will to decide whether to repent or not does that mean God is not calling the shots? No! It's God calling the shot that man is responsible to repent, not man.


By what basis is His election? Election is to salvation. Salvation is conditional upon God's gracious offer of salvation and man's response to that offer. Election is not random or whatever you think it is. It is conditional and not unconditional.

God has unconditionally chosen a people according to His infinite wisdom and knowledge from eternity. These are in the Lamb's book of life the foundation of the world.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

God has unconditionally chosen a people according to His infinite wisdom and knowledge from eternity.

Can you expand on this? What does this mean exactly? Is this one of those mysteries that Calvinism teaches? Somehow, God decided not to reveal to us how He determines who He would save and who He would condemn to hell with no opportunity to be saved? We just have to trust He has His reasons that He inexplicably didn't want to share with us?

These are in the Lamb's book of life the foundation of the world.

I believe you are misinterpreting what it means for names to be written in the Lamb's book of life from the foundation of the world. It is not that everyone who would ever have their name in the book had their names written there before the foundation of the world. It says "FROM the foundation of the world", not "BEFORE the foundation of the world".

Revelation 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

That means that the book began to be written with names added to it from the foundation of the world. From the time the world began, in other words. Adam and Eve were the first 2 names written in the book of life and many others have been written in it since then.

Think about this. Based on my understanding of what Calvinism teaches, you believe that every name of every person who would ever be saved was already written in the book of life before the foundation of the world and the book was set in stone and could never be changed after that. Is that correct? If so, what do you make of verses like these:

Psalm 69:27 Charge them with crime upon crime; do not let them share in your salvation. 28 May they be blotted out of the book of life and not be listed with the righteous.

Revelation 3:5 The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels.

These verses indicate that it's possible for someone's name to be blotted out of the book of life. How could anyone's name be blotted out of the book of life if the book was already finished being written before the foundation of the world?

 

[WPM]

Can you expand on this? What does this mean exactly? Is this one of those mysteries that Calvinism teaches? Somehow, God decided not to reveal to us how He determines who He would save and who He would condemn to hell with no opportunity to be saved? We just have to trust He has His reasons that He inexplicably didn't want to share with us?

Absolutely. He is God and He knows best. He doesn't have to explain his mysteries to us.

I believe you are misinterpreting what it means for names to be written in the Lamb's book of life from the foundation of the world. It is not that everyone who would ever have their name in the book had their names written there before the foundation of the world. It says "FROM the foundation of the world", not "BEFORE the foundation of the world".

Revelation 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

That means that the book began to be written with names added to it from the foundation of the world. From the time the world began, in other words. Adam and Eve were the first 2 names written in the book of life and many others have been written in it since then.

Think about this. Based on my understanding of what Calvinism teaches, you believe that every name of every person who would ever be saved was already written in the book of life before the foundation of the world and the book was set in stone and could never be changed after that. Is that correct? If so, what do you make of verses like these:

You are fighting with Scripture. You are actually playing word games to support your position. It matters little whether it is "FROM" or "BEFORE the foundation of the world." Same reality.

Psalm 69:27 Charge them with crime upon crime; do not let them share in your salvation. 28 May they be blotted out of the book of life and not be listed with the righteous.

Revelation 3:5 The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels.

These verses indicate that it's possible for someone's name to be blotted out of the book of life. How could anyone's name be blotted out of the book of life if the book was already finished being written before the foundation of the world?

Psalm 69:27-28 relate to Israel's book of the living. This is not “the book of life.” This was an earthly book that kept a record of Israel's population. To be blotted out of Israel's book of the living was to have your name blotted out from under heaven.

We see that in Deuteronomy 9:13-14. Moses said “I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people: Let me alone, that I may destroy them, and blot out their name from under heaven: and I will make of thee a nation mightier and greater than they.”

Many times, God erased the wicked out of the land of the living for disobedience.

In Exodus 32:32-33 we read: “And Moses returned unto the LORD, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.”

Moses was not pleading to be removed from the Lamb’s book of life. That would be insane. Israel's book of the living was what it says a book of the living. It and “the book of life” are clearly two completely different books. It is like comparing apples with oranges.

Revelation 3:5 does not say they will be blotted out it says the opposite: "I will not blot out his name out of the book of life."

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Absolutely. He is God and He knows best. He doesn't have to explain his mysteries to us.

I don't mean to offend, but I find this to be a cop out response that is typical of Calvinism. Scripture has a great deal to say about salvation, but somehow nothing about how salvation is determined by God? I don't buy it.

Do you also say that it's a mystery as to why God punishes unbelievers for eternity? It can't be because of them making the wrong choice about whether to believe or not because Calvinism says that salvation is of God alone and faith is given by God rather than coming from man. So, why does He punish people for not repenting and believing if they have no choice in the matter? That's just a mystery? Does that line up with God wanting all people to repent and to be saved?

You are fighting with Scripture.

No, you are.

You are actually playing word games to support your position.

I am not. I quoted the scripture. No games here. Don't act like you are talking to someone like Doug here. I don't play games with scripture and you know that. You KNOW that.

It matters little whether it is "FROM" or "BEFORE the foundation of the world." Same reality.

It matters a great deal. From the foundation of the world means it started being written when the world began. Before the foundation of the world means it was already written before the world even began.

Psalm 69:27-28 relate to Israel's book of the living. This is not “the book of life.” This was an earthly book that kept a record of Israel's population. To be blotted out of Israel's book of the living was to have your name blotted out from under heaven.

Give me evidence that such a book ever existed.

You seem to be ignoring the context of the passage. A book of the living as a record of Israel's population would have included both the righteous and wicked and one's inclusion would not have been based on whether he or she was righteous or not. Read the passage again.

Psalm 69:27 Add iniquity unto their iniquity: and let them not come into thy righteousness. 28 Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous.

Notice here that the book of the living was a book that was intended to only contain the names of "the righteous". That's why those who were adding "iniquity unto their iniquity" needed to have their names blotted out of it. That lines up with the Lamb's book of life that only contains the names of the righteous (those who are saved) and does not line up with a book that records people who were living in Israel, which would have included both the righteous and the wicked. A book recording the population of Israel would not be based on whether someone is righteous or not, but whether they were living in Israel or not.

This is just another example of how Calvinism takes scripture out of context.

Revelation 3:5 does not say they will be blotted out it says the opposite: "I will not blot out his name out of the book of life."

Yes, I know that, but you're missing the point. Why would He even say that if it was not possible for someone's name to be blotted out of the book of life? What a strange thing for Him to say if that was not even possible.

Revelation 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

What if someone does not overcome? If overcoming means He will not blot your name out of the book of life, then not overcoming would mean He will blot your name out of the book of life. There was no point in saying that He wouldn't blot their name out of the book of life if that wasn't even possible. It would go without saying in that case. The Calvinist interpretation of Revelation 3:5 makes Jesus's statement meaningless and pointless, in my opinion. Of course He would not blot out anyone's name out of the book of life if that's not even possible.

Why would Jesus make such an obvious point as that since everyone would already know that if it was not possible for someone's name to be blotted out of the book of life?

 

[soberxp]

Why do you think the new earth somehow appears before this earth passes away despite Revelation 21:1 indicating that the new earth only appears after this earth first passes away?

Do you think the Revelation is a parable spake?

I don't think the new Earth appears before the old Earth passes away, I just think that the new Earth only appeared after old Earth passes away. But new earth always there somewhere we can't see it.

Revelation.20:4 20:5 20:6
I don't think the first resurrected saints is on the old earth.
The figurative thousand years is past, now, future.
2 Peter 3:8
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

As you said:
"It relates to Jesus reigning, right? When did He begin to reign? Long ago."

Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

 

[Scott Downey]

I agree with the scriptures, of course, but disagree with your interpretations of them.

You say "being born of God precedes our receiving and believing in Him". That is not taught anywhere in scripture. Look at this passage...

John 20:19 On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jewish leaders, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” 20 After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord. 21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

A person is born of God when they receive the Holy Spirit. The disciples received the Holy Spirit some time after Jesus's resurrection when He showed up in the house or building they were in. Certainly, the disciples already believed in Jesus well before this happened, so how can you say that we are born of God before we receive and believe in Him?

Then look at this passage...

Ephesians 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: 12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. 13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Notice here that believers are "sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise" AFTER they believed and trusted in Christ. Surely, no one is born of the Holy Spirit before being sealed with the Holy Spirit.

So, you are drawing conclusions from the scriptures you referenced without making sure that your conclusions do not contradict other scripture. You need to look at all of scripture before drawing your conclusions.

John 1:13 does not mean that man's will has no part in salvation as if man is not required to choose to believe or not. No, it means just what it says. We are not born of blood. We are not born of the will of the flesh. We are not born of the will of man. Instead, we are born of God. And we are born of God after receiving and believing in Christ.

No on who is born again of God (of the Spirit) would ever say they are instead born of blood or of the will of man. When we are born of the Spirit it involves something that the Spirit does within us, and not something man does, after we have put our trust in Christ.

Has to do with the natural carnally minded man which while it may be intrigued by Christ will not believe in Him.

Romans 8 shows this

5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.

6 For to be [b]carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7 Because the [c]carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be.

8 So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

9 But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.

Enmity against God will not allow the carnal mind to believe in Christ.