The Second Death Destroys Man's False Amill Theory

[WPM]

You mean submit to all those false teacher leaders like I used to do in the 80s? Thanks, but no thanks. Not to mention, the churches in the 80s I used to attend were somewhat mega churches. Easy to get lost in the crowd and no one even acknowledging that you are there unless you come with a group of other believers. I usually came by myself, though.

Yes, every evangelical/pentecostal pastor is a false teacher. You are the only one with then truth. Talk about pride! Talk about deception!

 

[PinSeeker]

It will be this planet made new. It won't be an entirely new planet.

Good.

Understand? I never said otherwise.

But you did say, SI, "Perhaps you can show me where it says that Matthew 25:31-46 takes place on the earth? I would allow that it could take place on the new (renewed) earth, but you believe it will take place right on this earth as we know it without it first being burned up and renewed..." Read that carefully, SI. I mean, you know what you said and how you meant it. But look at it objectively if you can. You seem to say there that this planet will be completely destroyed and a new planet earth made. You seem to imply that the final Judgment will not take place on the earth, which begs the question, okay, where do you think it will occur if not on earth? And then it seems you differentiate between the old earth and the new earth, as if they are physically two different things/planets. And then the burned up and renewed thing... Yeah, it seems you're talking about a new planet being created, after the first is annihilated. In this case, SI, the problem was not my reading comprehension, SI, but rather your clarity.

I feel certain that you thinking so is not because of anything I said, but because you don't pay close enough attention to what I'm saying.

Not it.

Scripture teaches that our bodies will one day be changed and made immortal, right? It's not that we will have entirely new bodies, but rather that our current bodies will be changed. Are you aware that scripture also teaches that the heavens and the earth will be changed?

Hebrews 1:10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: 11 They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; 12 And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.

This says heaven and earth "shall perish", which contradicts your beliefs..

Only if you read it in the sense that you read it in, SI. No, it doesn't contradict my beliefs at all. That's the overarching theme of most of the things we're discussing... the sense in which those things should be understood. So yes, changed, but that can be understood ~ and should be, in my opinion ~ in a very different sense, which... I think I've been pretty clear about.

, but lines up well with what Peter wrote in 2 Peter 3:10-12. They will "pass away" (Revelation 21:1) and "shall be changed" (see Heb 1:12 above). That is similar to how our bodies die and in the future will be changed to be immortal. The earth will be changed and made new.

See now what you're saying here seems to be pretty close to how I would say it, what I have been saying, which is pretty funny, really.

Being made new means they may have some differences to what they are now. Therefore, that allows for there to literally no longer be any sea, you see.

But not this. The sea is representative of all evil, SI. The oceans will not disappear. <smile> I speak more fully to this below...

What else does it mean in Revelation 20:11 when it talks about Jesus being on His throne and heaven and earth fleeing from His presence and there being no place for them except that the judgment is not taking place in heaven or on earth?

So are you reversing course here again? The final Judgment will not take place on earth... either the old earth or the... renewed... earth? I mean, not to offend, but this is the kind of... well, at least seeming... inconsistency (to put it mildly) I'm talking about...

Continued...

 

[PinSeeker]

As I said, it could take place on the new earth, but not this earth as we know it. That's why I believe it takes place in the realm of eternity because it happens heaven and earth, as they are now, have passed away.

Eternity, SI, is the age to come. Come on, you know that. It's not a different... dimension, or something. Is that what you're saying?

You got it. That's exactly what I believe. It's almost shocking that you got that right. Maybe you're paying closer attention than I thought.

LOL! Maybe my reading comprehension skills are not so poor... LOL!

I do believe in the rapture as most Christians understand that term, which is that we (the church) will be bodily lifted up off the earth (caught up) to meet Jesus "in the air", as Paul wrote about in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17. I have no idea why you think I wouldn't believe in that. As you do sometimes, you claimed something without offering any explanation for why you are making that claim.

It's not a rapture. It's most assuredly a rapturous event, but it's not a rapture in the way a lot of folks perceive it.

Yes, believers would have to be removed from this planet for that to happen. And we will be.

LOL! Disagree. Heaven will come down to us (the new Jersusalem will come down out of heaven ! Revelation21)... after Jesus has won the final battle (not literalistic; Satan will finally be exposed for who/what he is and will be banished for good), and after the second resurrection (general; physical), and after Jesus has executed the final Judgment and sent those on His left (Matthew 25), unbelievers, away into judgment. This is how the earth will be renewed. Jesus in His final Judgment is the fire. No one will be "removed" or transported anywhere; the wicked will be banished to hell forever. And heaven and earth will finally be one... again, as it was in the beginning, before the Fall.

We first will be gathered to Christ in the air and then He will proceed to send fire down on to the earth, killing all of His enemies in the process.

Okay, well, you know I disagree with this; you're right that we will be gathered to Christ... I would say that we will go out to welcome Him and join Him in His return (if we are still alive; otherwise, we will come with Him when He comes), as when Royalty returns victorious from battle, as seen throughout Scripture. Again, He is the fire... our God is a consuming fire (Deut.4:24; Heb.9:29), He will defeat Satan and His minions, and then, in the fiery judgment of God... in the final Judgment... will consign those not in Christ to hell for eternity, where they will dwell in this judgment forever.

As Paul wrote, "the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2 Thess 1:7-8).

Right; same as above. Our God is a consuming fire. Yeah, I'm repeating myself. Sue me. <smile>

My belief is not dispensationalist-ish at all no matter what you say.

Well, you saying that your belief is not dispensational-ish on this is fair enough, but that doesn't make it so. People believe all sorts of things about themselves, right? But they can be mistaken, no? And that doesn't make them dumb, or stupid, or anything like that. But still, it is what it is. This is silly; let's just stop with the talk about dispensationalism, and dispensational-ish things and the like, how about that?

I have even explicitly told you that I don't believe the earth will be completely annihilated...

Right, and I heard you (multiple times), but you did say it would be literally burned up with literal fire. See above.

...yet you still say this to me. So, you clearly don't pay close attention to everything I say.

Oh wait... you just said I did... LOL! Make up your mind, man! <smile> Kidding...

I think it makes more sense to compare it to the changing of our bodies and not to 2 Corinthians 5:17 because it's talking about something physical being changed, not a spiritual change.

See, here you go. Let's talk about 2 Corinthians 5:17 for a moment, SI. Paul says, if you are in Christ, you are a new creation, the old has gone and the new has come. Assuming you are in Christ, you are... well, I'll say it this way... you have been radically changed. But the day you were changed, did you look ~ on the outside ~ any different physically than you did the day before? No, you didn't. But you were baptized ~ unbeknownst to you until after the fact actually ~ born again of the Spirit and baptized with the Holy Spirit and fire (Matthew 3:11; Mark 3:16). Did you have literal burns anywhere on your body? Well no, of course not. In the larger sense, when Jesus comes back, this is how all of creation will be changed, but it will not, afterwards, look any different than it does right now. And... the change in us, and the change in the world is/will not be merely spiritual. Yet again, our God is a consuming fire.

And I disagree that literally all things will be made new as you believe.

And that's fine; we disagree. But I guess to this I would say, no, I don't believe all things will be made new... Unbelievers will not, which I think you agree with, but if not, that's okay, too.

Some things will no longer exist rather than being made new, in my opinion. Like the sun, the moon and the sea. There will be no more need for them in the eternal new heavens and new earth.

You said that before, so I'll say what I said before... The sun, moon, and sea will still exist ~ and before replying to this read what I say like lieterally two inches below these words that you're reading right now VVVVVV ~ but the earth will shine with the full glory of God. What you say is just far, far too literalistic. We will still enjoy the warmth of the sun on a bright summer day, the glow of the moonlight on the midnight snow, and the occasional vacation at the beach of our choice, but in the full glory of God, even with the true Sun, Jesus.

The earth as a whole will be changed from what it was and made new...

Yes...

...and part of what will be changed about the earth is that it will no longer revolve around the sun or have any sea.

Well... <chuckles> ... I would agree, but in the sense that all of creation (and the people, of course) will glorify God perfectly as it should have all along, and in that way will revolve around the Son and God Himself... <raising eyebrows> ... and there will be no more evil found anywhere, which is how the people of ancient times viewed the sea, where evil dwells (this is why in Revelation 13 we "see" the beast rising up out of the sea). So again, I agree with what you say here, but... again, you're not dumb or anything like that; and I don't mean to insult you or your intelligence with this... you're seeing this as far, far, far smaller than it is.

You can stop any time you want, just like you have told me. Doesn't matter to me. If you no longer have anything to say that I'm interested in replying to, that's fine with me. I don't have anything to add to what I've already said at this point. You can respond to what I've said here or not. I don't care. But, I hope you understand that you've misunderstood my view to some extent and hope that it's more clear to you now after this post.

Sure. We can continue, SI, but I suggest we both tone it down. Like a lot. Me as well as you. Let's... both of us... you know, act like the faithful Christians we are. <smile>

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

LOL. You just keep believing that then if you want. No one can stop you.

Same to you. But seriously, let's both tone it down. A lot.

It was ridiculous to post that many all in a row, so that was nonsense.

To you. I get it. I could say the same thing to you. Let's tone it down.

You did not say that about yourself.

Okay well I am now. Let's tone it down. Again, a lot. Let's try to get back on good terms. Deal?

But, then you decided to go overboard by replying with gifs to about 10 of my comments in a row.

I told you why I did... to just put an end to all the shenanigans. And I mean me just as much as you.

Just for disagreeing with you?

No, not in the least.

I'm sure he did because I'm sure he doesn't disagree with everything you say. Even I don't. We're all Amills, after all, so we obviously all agree on some things.

Sure. But there are good Amills and there are bad Amills... OKAYOKAYOKAYOKAYOKAY! I'm kidding, man. Kidding.

I didn't say that. You didn't clarify who you were quoting there. I either haven't seen that yet or missed it.

Whatever.

Sure you do. <huge eye roll>

Whatever.

Let's get past all this... stuff... SI. You know, I'm not talking down to you, and I'm not on some high horse, but you know... blessed are the peacemakers... Yeah?

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Good.


But you did say, SI, "Perhaps you can show me where it says that Matthew 25:31-46 takes place on the earth? I would allow that it could take place on the new (renewed) earth, but you believe it will take place right on this earth as we know it without it first being burned up and renewed..." Read that carefully, SI.

No, you read that carefully. What is the earth as we know it? It has wickedness occurring on it, right? The new earth will be a place "wherein dwelleth righteousness" and not wickedness. So, the judgment will not take place on this earth as we know it where sin and death exists. That's the point.

I mean, you know what you said and how you meant it. But look at it objectively if you can.

I am and there's nothing I said which would indicate that I was referring to an entirely different planet.

You seem to say there that this planet will be completely destroyed and a new planet earth made.

LOL. Don't blame me for your reading comprehension problem.

You seem to imply that the final Judgment will not take place on the earth, which begs the question, okay, where do you think it will occur if not on earth?

I don't care what you think I seem to be saying. Now you know what I mean. So, move on.

And then it seems you differentiate between the old earth and the new earth, as if they are physically two different things/planets. And then the burned up and renewed thing...

Do you not know what the word "renewed" means? How can this earth be renewed if it's annihilated? The problem here is your lack of understanding of what the word "renewed" means and not with me not being clear enough.

Yeah, it seems you're talking about a new planet being created, after the first is annihilated.

If you knew what the word "renewed" means, then you wouldn't be saying that.

In this case, SI, the problem was not my reading comprehension, SI, but rather your clarity.

Wrong.

See now what you're saying here seems to be pretty close to how I would say it, what I have been saying, which is pretty funny, really.

Yes, it's funny in the sense that you should have understood what I was saying all along, if only you knew what the word "renewed" means.

But not this. The sea is representative of all evil, SI. The oceans will not disappear. <smile> I speak more fully to this below...

So, if the sea is not meant to be taken literally there, should we be like the preterists and also think that the new heavens and new earth mentioned just before that are not literal, either?

So are you reversing course here again? The final Judgment will not take place on earth... either the old earth or the... renewed... earth?

I didn't say that. You do have a reading comprehension problem. What I have consistently said is that it won't take place on this earth as we know it which has sin and death occurring on it, etc. And I said it could take place on the new earth, which I have consistently said is this earth renewed (changed). It says heaven and earth flee from His presence and there's no place found for them, so what does that tell you?

I mean, not to offend, but this is the kind of... well, at least seeming... inconsistency (to put it mildly) I'm talking about...

Wrong. It's just your reading comprehension problem rearing its head again. It's a problem that led you to think that WPM was talking about me instead of you. Pray for wisdom so that you can understand what others are saying and can understand what scripture teaches about these things (James 1:5-7).

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Eternity, SI, is the age to come. Come on, you know that. It's not a different... dimension, or something. Is that what you're saying?

I didn't say otherwise. What does a different dimension mean? I can't answer the question without knowing what that means. Stop making everything complicated. Right now, we have sin, death, crying, sorrow, pain and so on. Those things will not exist after the earth is renewed/changed. Is this hard to understand?

LOL! Maybe my reading comprehension skills are not so poor... LOL!

No, they're quite poor. Just not as poor as I thought. For some reason you described what I believe accurately there while not so much in other places. Oh well. LOL!

It's not a rapture. It's most assuredly a rapturous event, but it's not a rapture in the way a lot of folks perceive it.

What are you saying? Is being clear just not something you're interested in?

LOL! Disagree.

LOL! No kidding. LOL!

Heaven will come down to us (the new Jersusalem will come down out of heaven ! Revelation21)... after Jesus has won the final battle (not literalistic; Satan will finally be exposed for who/what he is and will be banished for good), and after the second resurrection (general; physical), and after Jesus has executed the final Judgment and sent those on His left (Matthew 25), unbelievers, away into judgment. This is how the earth will be renewed. Jesus in His final Judgment is the fire. No one will be "removed" or transported anywhere; the wicked will be banished to hell forever. And heaven and earth will finally be one... again, as it was in the beginning, before the Fall.

No one will transported anywhere? What is your understanding of us being caught up in the air?

Okay, well, you know I disagree with this;

Of course I know that.

you're right that we will be gathered to Christ... I would say that we will go out to welcome Him and join Him in His return (if we are still alive; otherwise, we will come with Him when He comes), as when Royalty returns victorious from battle, as seen throughout Scripture.

And what about that part about being caught up to Him in the air?

Right; same as above. Our God is a consuming fire. Yeah, I'm repeating myself. Sue me. <smile>

I think I should sue you. To repeat yourself this many times has to be a crime. <laugh>

Well, you saying that your belief is not dispensational-ish on this is fair enough, but that doesn't make it so.

It does. I know what I believe. You don't. Nothing I believe is dispensationalish. If you think so, then you are misunderstanding some of what I beleieve. and you have proven to misunderstand some of what I beleive repeatedly. Thinking that I believe the earth will be annihilated, for instance. I don't believe that.

People believe all sorts of things about themselves, right? But they can be mistaken, no?

Of course, but I fully know what I believe and you have proven that you don't. So get over yourself already. You don't undertand what I believe better than I do.

And that doesn't make them dumb, or stupid, or anything like that. But still, it is what it is. This is silly; let's just stop with the talk about dispensationalism, and dispensational-ish things and the like, how about that?

Who is it who started talking about that? I'll give you a hint. It wasn't me. Maybe you shouldn't have even started it, eh?

Right, and I heard you (multiple times), but you did say it would be literally burned up with literal fire. See above.

Yeah, so? I also said it would be renewed. If only you knew what that word means. It doesn't mean annihilated and replaced with something else entirely.

See, here you go. Let's talk about 2 Corinthians 5:17 for a moment, SI.

Sure.

Paul says, if you are in Christ, you are a new creation, the old has gone and the new has come. Assuming you are in Christ, you are... well, I'll say it this way... you have been radically changed. But the day you were changed, did you look ~ on the outside ~ any different physically than you did the day before? No, you didn't. But you were baptized ~ unbeknownst to you until after the fact actually ~ born again of the Spirit and baptized with the Holy Spirit and fire (Matthew 3:11; Mark 3:16). Did you have literal burns anywhere on your body? Well no, of course not. In the larger sense, when Jesus comes back, this is how all of creation will be changed, but it will not, afterwards, look any different than it does right now. And... the change in us, and the change in the world is/will not be merely spiritual. Yet again, our God is a consuming fire.

I already commented on this, but you apparently failed to see my point. As I already said, I think it makes more sense to compare the changing of our bodies to what will happen with the earth than to compare it to our born again experience. The earth isn't going to be changed spiritually, it's going to be changed physically. So, the changing of our bodies is a better comparision. The changing of bodies is a drastic change. For the dead in Christ, their bodies obviously decay first and are then changed. I would compare that to the erath being buned up and changed. It's not an exact comparison, but it illustrates a process of major change. From a pile of bones to a fully fuctional immortal body. It's not a different body entirely or else saying that it will be change would not be accurate. But, it will be a body that is obviously changed dramatically. And that's how I see what will happen to the earth as well.

All the wicked things on the earth will be burned up and destroyed and the earth will be made new. God will basically start things over somewhat like what He did with the flood except I believe this time the earth will be changed to be something far better than it even was in the beginning while you, I think, believe it will be restored to exactly how it was in the beginning. Yet, it was not suited in the beginning for eternal life. The sun never had infinite energy, so even if Adam and Eve had never sinned, this earth as we know it, with its dependency on the sun and so on, would not exist forever.

And that's fine; we disagree.

It's so fine with you that we disagree, that you can't stop arguing with me about this. Yeah, I'm really believe that that is fine with you. When things are fine with someone that they disagree, they always repeat their same arguments over and over again. Right? It's not fine with you that we disagree or else you'd have moved on by now. But, that's fine that you're not fine with it. It's fine that you want me to agree with you.

But I guess to this I would say, no, I don't believe all things will be made new... Unbelievers will not, which I think you agree with, but if not, that's okay, too.

Of course I agree. The new earth is where we will dwell, not unbelievers. We will be made new (rewewed, changed) and the earth will be made new (renewed, changed).

You said that before, so I'll say what I said before.

I'll stop reading here since I don't feel like wasting my time. I'm not going to read your repeated arguments anymore. It's not as if I'm suddenly going to agree with you on this.

Sure. We can continue, SI, but I suggest we both tone it down. Like a lot. Me as well as you. Let's... both of us... you know, act like the faithful Christians we are. <smile>

I have toned it down. I could still be mocking you for not recognizing that WPM was talking about you and not me. You mocked me for supposedly not knowing who he was talking about and you ended up making a fool of yourself. But, I've let that go at this point. So, just be happy about that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Same to you. But seriously, let's both tone it down. A lot.


To you. I get it. I could say the same thing to you. Let's tone it down.

Not sure how you could say the same thing to me when, before that, I was doing the same as you. Just posting one of those here and there. Not 10 in a row. But, sure, we can tone it down. Even tough I feel like I already have toned it down.

Okay well I am now. Let's tone it down. Again, a lot. Let's try to get back on good terms. Deal?

Deal.

I told you why I did... to just put an end to all the shenanigans. And I mean me just as much as you.

That's fine.

Let's get past all this... stuff... SI.

I believe I am past it. You don't have to keep going with this. We're not really saying anything new at this point. You're free to stop responding any time. Don't blame me if you can't stop. LOL. I can't think of anything to add that I haven't already said. I'm not really feeling like repeating myself at this point, how about you? We could, and we have, but I don't want to anymore.

You know, I'm not talking down to you, and I'm not on some high horse, but you know... blessed are the peacemakers... Yeah?

We can agree to disagree on that first part, but, yes, blessed are the peacemakers.

Grace and peace to you.

And to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You mean submit to all those false teacher leaders like I used to do in the 80s? Thanks, but no thanks. Not to mention, the churches in the 80s I used to attend were somewhat mega churches. Easy to get lost in the crowd and no one even acknowledging that you are there unless you come with a group of other believers. I usually came by myself, though.

No one is asking you to attend a mega church. Yes, it's very easy to get lost in the crowd and not be acknowledged in those. They are too big. Churches should never be that big. But, are there no churches anywhere in your area that you could attend and have fellowship with other believers?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The way I look at it, if I'm the only person on the entire planet that has concluded something that no other person has concluded, my chances of being correct are zero. I at least have enough sense to realize that. But if others have concluded pretty much the same thing, even if they are not in the majority, that means the odds go from zero that I'm correct to something at least measurable. Which then could mean that the majority is not always correct every single time. Sure, in some cases the majority is correct. But in every case, though?

No one is saying that. You completely missed the point. You seem to think that you can get all the answers on your own and have never needed to learn anything from anyone else. But, if that was the case, why does God give the gift of being a pastor, teacher, prophet, etc. to people? If everyone thought like you then those spiritual gifts would be useless.

For example, how I interpret the sheep and goats judgment based on the context that just proceeded it involving Christ's profitable and unprofitable professed servants.

But, why would you not interpret it in relation to Jesus having said that anyone who is not with Him is against Him (Matt 12:30) which puts every person in one of two groups (With Him or Against Him)? There is nothing He said to indicate that Matthew 25:31-46 must have the exact same context as Matthew 25:14-30 in terms of who He was talking about. That's just something you decided must be the case.

Why would you not interpret the sheep and goats judgment in light of Revelation 20:11-15? Surely, what is described in Matthew 25:41 is the same thing as described in Revelation 20:15. Do you deny that? If so, why would you think that the goats would be cast into the lake of fire at a different time than the rest of those whose names are not written in the book of life?

 

[PinSeeker]

No, you read that carefully.

I read everything carefully, SI. But I make mistakes sometimes ~ and so do you, and so do we all. But yes, I read everything carefully.

What is the earth as we know it? It has wickedness occurring on it, right? The new earth will be a place "wherein dwelleth righteousness" and not wickedness.

Sure. Sin. Of course. Not to downplay it in any way, as that might sound, but yes.

So, the judgment will not take place on this earth as we know it where sin and death exists. That's the point.

Okay, but really, what even kind of point is that? I mean, sin and death exists throughout the universe... fallen creation. So in that sense, the judgment could take place on one of the moons on some moon of some distant planet in some distant galaxy, right? I mean, take that for what it's worth, which is not much, of course, but still... <smile> So yeah, we know the Judgment will take place on earth, because Scripture says it. It cannot be in heaven, because God is not only sinless (of course), but is so perfectly holy that He cannot even be in the presence of sin, and will never be; this is what Paul means in 1 Corinthians 15 in saying "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God" ~ contrary to how some others read what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15; we will not have new immaterial, non-physical bodies in the New Heaven and New Earth, we will have the same bodies that we have now, but glorified, and no longer sinful, just like Jesus. And that's my point about the earth itself (and all of creation), is that it will be the same earth and universe that we know now, just completely glorified, no longer fallen, but restored to the way God made it ~ "very good," as Moses quoted God in Genesis 1 ~ and in that sense renewed, which is the point that we've been going back and forth on recently.

I am and there's nothing I said which would indicate that I was referring to an entirely different planet.

Okay, fine, but

Don't blame me for your reading comprehension problem.

Ah, there it is again... Pish.

I don't care what you think I seem to be saying...

Yes you do, because otherwise you would not keep clarifying. That's not meant to be disparaging; it's true for all of us.

Do you not know what the word "renewed" means?

Yes. See directly above (as if it's the first time I've said that...).

The problem here is your lack of understanding of what the word "renewed" means...

No, if there's a "problem" here between us, it's the sense in which you understand "renewed," or "made new," as it pertains to the earth (and us) as opposed to the sense in which I understand it. Now, I don't really care if you keep insulting my intelligence or not, but really, quit it. Ohhhhh... I'm "telling you what to do" again <shaking my head>,,,

If you knew what the word "renewed" means, then you wouldn't be saying that.

If I understood "renewed" in the same sense as you do. Well, hey, right back atcha, SI. You wouldn't be saying what you're saying if you understood "renewed" in the same sense that I do.

Wrong.

There is nothing wrong with my reading comprehension, and nothing wrong with your clarity, generally speaking... but in this case, how you originally stated your case regarding the earth and the judgment was a bit unclear to me. That's all. Come on. You might say, "Well it shouldn't have been, because it wasn't!' Okay, well it's easy for one to say that about something he or she himself or herself says... of course when one says something he or she thinks it's perfectly clear, but sometimes it's just not. And that's not a big deal, it just happens, with all of us. Come on, man.

...you should have understood what I was saying all along...

And I would have if my thinking was exactly the same as yours ~ if our brains were exactly alike... which is just a ridiculous, thought; misunderstandings happen all the time.

...if only you knew what the word "renewed" means.

Renewed... yes, made again... "re"-"new"-"ed". Yes, elementary English... <sigh> But the word itself can be understood in several different senses depending on the context in which it is used. You agree that context is very important, I'm sure. So, to what you say here, it's not a matter of either one of us, woodenly speaking, "knowing or not knowing what the word 'renewed' means," but rather what it means as it is used in the particular context of the Bible in the particular places where we are talking about.

So, if the sea is not meant to be taken literally there, should we be like the preterists and also think that the new heavens and new earth mentioned just before that are not literal, either?

If you're accusing me of "picking and choosing," then right back atcha... you do the same thing. It's just where we see that as being or not being appropriate that's the issue, and it may or may not be just a difference of opinion, but in this particular case is.

What I have consistently said is that it won't take place on this earth as we know it which has sin and death occurring on it, etc. ...

Right, which I agree with in and of itself, but I say again that the earth will not have been literally burned or scorched by literal fire. I say yet again ~ and this is Scripture, so you can't deny it... and you have never commented on it, which says to me that you agree with it ~ our God is a consuming fire (Deuteronomy 4:24; Hebrews 9:29), and if you agree with it, then whether you realize it or not, in contradicts what you're saying about what happens to the earth "as we know it."

And I said it could take place on the new earth, which I have consistently said is this earth renewed (changed)...

Yes, and again... well, see directly above. Our God is a consuming fire.

So like completely razed, and/or blackened like burnt toast or something? No. But, no longer fallen, meaning sin and death completely defeated? Well, after Jesus's final defeat of Satan and the final Judgment, yes.

It says heaven and earth flee from His presence and there's no place found for them, so what does that tell you?

I think it's very clear where both of us stand on that now. We disagree. And... that's okay. Really, it's okay.

It's just your reading comprehension problem rearing its head again. It's a problem that led you to think that WPM was talking about me instead of you.

Pish. Drop that. It's silly.

Pray for wisdom...

I do that every day, if not multiple times every day. Yes, and particularly, from time to time, "God, give me wisdom in conversing with... difficult people (among many other things)." <smile>

so that you can understand what others are saying...

Oh, I understand exactly what you're saying on this subject; you said so yourself.

Grace and peace to you. Especially grace, which, assuming you have some, I say you should be much less selective in having toward others. You know, love your neighbor as yourself... I've heard that somewhere beforrrrrrrrre... <smile>

Yeah, grace and peace to you, SI.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I read everything carefully, SI. But I make mistakes sometimes ~ and so do you, and so do we all. But yes, I read everything carefully.

So do I, so how about we stop accusing each other of that, eh? I don't think that's the reason we disagree or that we sometimes misunderstand each other most of the time.

Okay, but really, what even kind of point is that?

You say you read everything I say carefully, but then you ask me questions like this. The point is that the judgment won't take place on this earth as we know it but I do allow that it could take place on the new earth after this earth is made new. There has to be some explanation for Revelation 20:11, doesn't there? How do you interpret it?

I mean, sin and death exists throughout the universe... fallen creation. So in that sense, the judgment could take place on one of the moons on some moon of some distant planet in some distant galaxy, right? I mean, take that for what it's worth, which is not much, of course, but still... <smile> So yeah, we know the Judgment will take place on earth, because Scripture says it.

Where does scripture say that exactly? Show me.

It cannot be in heaven, because God is not only sinless (of course), but is so perfectly holy that He cannot even be in the presence of sin, and will never be; this is what Paul means in 1 Corinthians 15 in saying "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God" ~ contrary to how some others read what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15; we will not have new immaterial, non-physical bodies in the New Heaven and New Earth, we will have the same bodies that we have now, but glorified, and no longer sinful, just like Jesus. And that's my point about the earth itself (and all of creation), is that it will be the same earth and universe that we know now, just completely glorified, no longer fallen, but restored to the way God made it ~ "very good," as Moses quoted God in Genesis 1 ~ and in that sense renewed, which is the point that we've been going back and forth on recently.

This discussion really needs to end soon because we're arguing over semantics here which is a complete waste of time. It seems that what you are actually saying when you say the judgment will take place on earth is that it will take place on the new earth. And I do allow for that possibility. Yes, we agree that the new earth is not a separate earth, but we should still clarify what we're talking about when we refer to something happening on earth. This earth as we know it now where sin and death are still occurring or the new earth where sin and death have been removed?

No, if there's a "problem" here between us, it's the sense in which you understand "renewed," or "made new," as it pertains to the earth (and us) as opposed to the sense in which I understand it.

Right. I think comparing it to the changing of our bodies (comparing a physical change to a physical change) makes more sense than comparing it to the change spiritually inside of us when we e are born again, so we obviously have a different perspective on how the earth will be changed/made new.

If I understood "renewed" in the same sense as you do. Well, hey, right back atcha, SI. You wouldn't be saying what you're saying if you understood "renewed" in the same sense that I do.

Obviously. I think we're getting close to wrapping this up finally since it seems that we have nothing more to say except for obvious things or things that we've already said.

There is nothing wrong with my reading comprehension, and nothing wrong with your clarity, generally speaking... but in this case, how you originally stated your case regarding the earth and the judgment was a bit unclear to me. That's all. Come on. You might say, "Well it shouldn't have been, because it wasn't!' Okay, well it's easy for one to say that about something he or she himself or herself says... of course when one says something he or she thinks it's perfectly clear, but sometimes it's just not. And that's not a big deal, it just happens, with all of us. Come on, man.

LOL. Okay, whatever you want to think about that is fine. Whatever.

Renewed... yes, made again... "re"-"new"-"ed". Yes, elementary English... <sigh> But the word itself can be understood in several different senses depending on the context in which it is used.

I agree, but one thing it can't mean is for something to be annihilated and replaced with something else entirely. Yet, that's what you previously thought I believed regarding the earth despite my saying repeatedly that it would be renewed.

Right, which I agree with in and of itself, but I say again that the earth will not have been literally burned or scorched by literal fire. I say yet again ~ and this is Scripture, so you can't deny it... and you have never commented on it, which says to me that you agree with it ~ our God is a consuming fire (Deuteronomy 4:24; Hebrews 9:29), and if you agree with it, then whether you realize it or not, in contradicts what you're saying about what happens to the earth "as we know it."

Yes, God is a consuming fire. Why would I deny that? That's doesn't mean I have to apply that to 2 Peter 3:10-13 and conclude that it's not talking about literal fire there. I personally believe that when Jesus compared what will happen at His second coming to what happened in Sodom in Lot's day in Luke 17:26-30, He was indicating that, just as in Lot's day when literally fire came down on Sodom, "Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed" (Luke 17:30).

I think it's very clear where both of us stand on that now. We disagree. And... that's okay. Really, it's okay.

I've never said that it's not okay.

Grace and peace to you. Especially grace, which, assuming you have some, I say you should be much less selective in having toward others. You know, love your neighbor as yourself... I've heard that somewhere beforrrrrrrrre... <smile>

Yes, you were being so gracious and loving when you thought WPM was talking about me and you were mocking me for supposedly not recognizing that.

Anyway, I say grace and peace to all people, including you, since God graciously offers salvation to all people (Titus 2:11).

 

[PinSeeker]

Stop making everything complicated.

I think that applies to both of us, really. Yeah, you too.

What is your understanding of us being caught up in the air?

Not in the sense of a "rapture." I have said several times that we will go out to meet Jesus in His return, as in loyal subjects of royalty going out to meet and escort their conquering king. In terms of what Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 4, SI, particularly concerning the seizing (harpazo), in His coming, Jesus will ~ figuratively speaking ~ take by force what is rightfully his from Satan, so "snatched," "seized," in that sense, but this is in reference to His Kingdom, not literally we His people. Even "caught up," as it is translated in most English translations, is not in the sense of us literally being grabbed by Jesus or anybody else. I mean, if used in the right sense, we can be "caught up" ~ harpazo-ed ~ by all sorts of things, like ideas, TV shows, music groups, etc. We will be caught up by Jesus, yes, but no longer of this world anymore, which, because of our sinful nature, we still are, at least to an extent, and we will finally be truly free of that.

It does. I know what I believe. You don't.

Come on. <sigh> Yeah, we both know what we believe. Come on.

...get over yourself already.

You don't undertand what I believe better than I do.

That's not what it's about, SI. It's really about the implications of what you do believe.

I already commented on this, but you apparently failed to see my point.

I don't think soooo... <smile> But I'll be glad to hear your explanation here...

As I already said, I think it makes more sense to compare the changing of our bodies to what will happen with the earth than to compare it to our born again experience. The earth isn't going to be changed spiritually, it's going to be changed physically.

Yes, I fully understood that before, and here again. <smile> Instead of repeating myself again, I'll just point you back to what I said above in Post 330, particularly that "our God is a consuming fire" and "it will be the same earth and universe that we know now, just completely glorified, no longer fallen, but restored to the way God made it ~ "very good," as Moses quoted God in Genesis 1 ~ and in that sense renewed."

For the dead in Christ, their bodies obviously decay first and are then changed.

Ohhhhh.... boy.... <smile> I think this I'll just say, disagree, and disagree. But I'm sure you knew that when you wrote what you wrote here... <sigh> And, I'll just say that those not in Christ will... not be changed at all.

...a process of major change. From a pile of bones to a fully functional immortal body. It's not a different body entirely or else saying that it will be change would not be accurate.

Ah, so a couple of things here:

1. You know Ezekiel 37 and the valley of dry bones, I'm sure. This is a vision given to Ezekiel, much in the same

But, it will be a body that is obviously changed dramatically. And that's how I see what will happen to the earth as well.

All the wicked things on the earth will be burned up and destroyed and the earth will be made new.

<sigh> <chuckles> I agree what you say here on its face, but... <smile> Yes, I understand you. <smile>

God will basically start things over....

Well... I... sort of agree... <smile> ...but not in the same sense as you, I think. <smile>

...I believe this time the earth will be changed to be something far better than it even was in the beginning...

Well, in the beginning before the Fall of Genesis 3 or in the beginning after? Never mind, I know what you mean, and in the sense that Satan will not be there ~ in other words, the non-presence of evil in the New Heaven and New Earth ~ I agree, but otherwise... <smile> The Tree of Life was in the Garden when God put it there in Genesis 1... and I believe that Tree of Life to be... Jesus. <smile>

while you, I think, believe it will be restored to exactly how it was in the beginning. Yet,

Satan won't be there, so not... quite. That always puzzled me... Why was evil in Eden before the Fall? Well, on that, at least, we cannot know the mind of God' why he allowed that to be so we cannot know, because we are not told or given any idea why. The origin of evil has always puzzled us; it is impossible for us to know.

it was not suited in the beginning for eternal life.

The Tree of Life was in the Garden of Eden in the beginning. It will be again.

It's so fine with you that we disagree, that you can't stop arguing with me about this.

Right back atcha.

Yeah, I'm really believe that that is fine with you. When things are fine with someone that they disagree, they always repeat their same arguments over and over again. Right? It's not fine with you that we disagree or else you'd have moved on by now. But, that's fine that you're not fine with it. It's fine that you want me to agree with you.

Right back atcha.

I have toned it down.

Well maybe now you have... <chuckles>

I could still be mocking you for not recognizing that WPM was talking about you and not me. You mocked me for supposedly not knowing who he was talking about...

Not sure why I would need to acknowledge that if he himself clarified himself. Sure. Happy now?

...you ended up making a fool of yourself.

Pish.

But, I've let that go at this point. So, just be happy about that.

Whatever.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Not in the sense of a "rapture." I have said several times that we will go out to meet Jesus in His return, as in loyal subjects of royalty going out to meet and escort their conquering king. In terms of what Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 4, SI, particularly concerning the seizing (harpazo), in His coming, Jesus will ~ figuratively speaking ~ take by force what is rightfully his from Satan, so "snatched," "seized," in that sense, but this is in reference to His Kingdom, not literally we His people. Even "caught up," as it is translated in most English translations, is not in the sense of us literally being grabbed by Jesus or anybody else. I mean, if used in the right sense, we can be "caught up" ~ harpazo-ed ~ by all sorts of things, like ideas, TV shows, music groups, etc. We will be caught up by Jesus, yes, but no longer of this world anymore, which, because of our sinful nature, we still are, at least to an extent, and we will finally be truly free of that.

I don't personally think your interpretation makes any sense, but, as you say, that's okay. What is your understanding of being caught up "in the air" then. What does "in the air" mean in your view?

Satan won't be there, so not... quite. That always puzzled me... Why was evil in Eden before the Fall? Well, on that, at least, we cannot know the mind of God' why he allowed that to be so we cannot know, because we are not told or given any idea why. The origin of evil has always puzzled us; it is impossible for us to know.

It puzzles "us"? It might puzzle you, but not me. Evil existed before the fall because God gave the angels free will and did not wish to force them to submit to Him unless they willingly chose to do so. Same thing with human beings. Love and obedience can't be forced. God doesn't work that way.

The Tree of Life was in the Garden of Eden in the beginning. It will be again.

Do you think it is on the earth now? If not, I thought you said God will be making all things new and not all new things?

Whatever.

Agree. Whatever indeed.

Grace and peace to you.

Peace and grace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

So do I, so how about we stop accusing each other of that, eh?

I've never accused you of not reading stuff carefully, SI.

There has to be some explanation for Revelation 20:11, doesn't there? How do you interpret it?

You're asking me here, SI, to repeat myself, which you hate. We discussed this.

Where does scripture say that exactly? Show me.

Actually, there are a couple of things in that quote of mine, and I don't know which you are referring to in asking this question, so I'll just answer to the place of the Judgment being on earth: "When the Son of Man comes in his glory..." (Matthew 25:31), and then He proceeds to describe the Judgment. If he were talking about it happening anywhere else, He would have spoken of it in that light.

This discussion really needs to end soon because we're arguing over semantics here which is a complete waste of time. It seems that what you are actually saying when you say the judgment will take place on earth is that it will take place on the new earth.

I don't make any real distinction between the two (the earth or the new earth); in the physical sense they are one and the same. Which I think to be your understanding, too, but... speaking generally, not the things that are given to us in Scripture themselves, but the senses in which those things are given. Read on, because I think you'll understand what I mean by that more in a moment, if you don't already.

...we agree that the new earth is not a separate earth, but we should still clarify what we're talking about when we refer to something happening on earth. This earth as we know it now where sin and death are still occurring or the new earth where sin and death have been removed?

So, in asking this question, SI, you seem to be asking it in reference to time, really, and not place ~ even if that's not your real intention in asking it. Assuming that, then my answer would be... kind of in-between, I guess: When the Judgment takes place, the Judgment itself will be part of the process of making the earth new; the earth will not be completely made new until sin and death have been destroyed and the Judgment has concluded and unbelievers are sent away into judgment and the "New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven" ~ earth and heaven are one again, and paradise is restored on earth.

Right. I think comparing it to the changing of our bodies (comparing a physical change to a physical change) makes more sense than comparing it to the change spiritually inside of us when we e are born again, so we obviously have a different perspective on how the earth will be changed/made new.

Okay, so yeah, disagree. <smile>

Obviously. I think we're getting close to wrapping this up finally since it seems that we have nothing more to say except for obvious things or things that we've already said.

I think we are long past that point, but I don't mind, really.

Yes, God is a consuming fire. Why would I deny that?

I didn't say you did, SI, and I know you don't. But that is the effect of what you've said you believe, basically, that God is not the consuming fire, actual fire is the consuming fire.

That's doesn't mean I have to apply that to 2 Peter 3:10-13 and conclude that it's not talking about literal fire there.

You... don't absolutely have to do anything, SI. <smile> However, regarding 2 Peter 3:10-13 itself... I'm not going to repeat myself. <smile>

I personally believe that when Jesus compared what will happen at His second coming to what happened in Sodom in Lot's day in Luke 17:26-30, He was indicating that, just as in Lot's day when literally fire came down on Sodom, "Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed" (Luke 17:30).

You're not alone in thinking that. <smile> And neither am I in what I "personally believe" regarding the same. This is actually what I was speaking to some time ago (if you didn't understand me before) in differentiating between the Old Testament and New Testament. They are different in the true outworking of.... things... and how they really look, but not different in effect. For example, just take... battles...

• There are real military conflicts that take place in the Old Testament, but these point to the battles that we constantly fight now against spiritual forces, and we fight the good fight of faith, as Paul says.
• Or the law... like Jesus has all His "but I tell you" statements, like, "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Paul speaks of the Old Testament law being a tudor or a guardian that we no longer need since we have Jesus in Galatians 3. And the writer of Hebrews in Hebrews 7 says, "For on the one hand, a former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness (for the law made nothing perfect); but on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God."
• Or even Jews and Israel itself, where, in the Old Testament, it was ethnic, but now includes Gentiles, people of every tongue tribe and nation, and as Paul says, "no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical... a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter."

In all these things, What was woodenly physical in the Old Testament is spiritual in the New. And I'll just say too that in a way, I don't like just saying spiritual," because it seems people very often take that in the sense that they're not real, or even not literal, which is surely not the case.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I've never accused you of not reading stuff carefully, SI.

Wrong. What started that whole thing was post 322 where you told me to read something that I had said carefully as if I hadn't read it carefully. Even though I said it. (Say what now?). That implies that you were saying I hadn't read it carefully.

You can now reply with your normal "Come on" or "Whatever".

You're asking me here, SI, to repeat myself, which you hate. We discussed this.

Great job of not repeating yourself then. You passed the test. <wink>

Actually, there are a couple of things in that quote of mine, and I don't know which you are referring to in asking this question, so I'll just answer to the place of the Judgment being on earth: "When the Son of Man comes in his glory..." (Matthew 25:31), and then He proceeds to describe the Judgment. If he were talking about it happening anywhere else, He would have spoken of it in that light.

That's a pretty weak argument, but whatever. Do you believe it will occur on what scripture calls "the new earth" (with the understanding that it's not a brand new planet or anything like that, but this earth made new)? In other words, do you believe it will occur after the earth has been been made new or before?

I don't make any real distinction between the two (the earth or the new earth);

Well, scripture does. So, it's helpful to use the same terms scripture uses. By now, we both understand that neither of us believes that the new earth is referring to a an entirely new planet, so we should be able to use those terms separately without any confusion.

in the physical sense they are one and the same

Basically, sure. But, the earth as it is now is not set up to support eternal life. Life on earth currently depends on being able to revolve around the sun and the sun does not have infinite energy. So, the earth will have to be changed to be able to support eternal life. If you think the sun will still be around then it would need to be changed to have infinite energy, which is not the case right now.

So, in asking this question, SI, you seem to be asking it in reference to time, really, and not place ~ even if that's not your real intention in asking it. Assuming that, then my answer would be... kind of in-between, I guess: When the Judgment takes place, the Judgment itself will be part of the process of making the earth new; the earth will not be completely made new until sin and death have been destroyed and the Judgment has concluded and unbelievers are sent away into judgment and the "New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven" ~ earth and heaven are one again, and paradise is restored on earth.

This basically answers a question I asked earlier in my post. I disagree with your understanding here, of course, but at least now I understand what you believe about the timing of things as it relates to this.

I didn't say you did, SI, and I know you don't. But that is the effect of what you've said you believe, basically, that God is not the consuming fire, actual fire is the consuming fire.

But, to be clear, since you are making things confusing here, I do believe God is a consuming fire. I just see no basis for applying that to 2 Peter 3:10-13.

 

[PinSeeker]

I don't personally think your interpretation makes any sense....

Yep, likewise. Really though, I don't think you can really say it doesn't make sense, it's just... well, opposed to yours. And the same is true the other way around, that your interpretation makes sense, it's just... opposed to mine. I think we both have to admit that.

What is your understanding of being caught up "in the air" then. What does "in the air" mean in your view?

That's a bit of a tough question; Paul seems to say that we will literally rise up off the ground and meet Him somewhere in the sky, and that may be the case. It is possible, though, to believe he's speaking of us being with Him in the Holy Spirit, as he says we are right now ("seated with Jesus in the heavenly places") in Ephesians 2. But we will go to welcome Him to earth, so... maybe the same as you with regard to "in the air."

It puzzles "us"? It might puzzle you, but not me.

Of course it does. LOL! No, it's kind of like... oh, the trinity, that God exists in three distinct Persons, yet still is One, as He says. I say if anyone tells you he or she understands that completely, he or she is kidding himself or herself.

Evil existed before the fall because God gave the angels free will and did not wish to force them to submit to Him unless they willingly chose to do so.

Why? Because you just think that? There's nothing in Scripture that indicates or says that. I mean, I get that you're deriving this from the Arminian - GASP <smile> - understanding of soteriology, but angels are never really in creation like we are so are not fallen like we are and therefore their hearts ~ not their free will ~ were never at issue.

Same thing with human beings. Love and obedience can't be forced. God doesn't work that way.

But we are caused to obey, as Ezekiel says in Ezekiel 19 and 36. This is not a manipulation of the will by God, but a changing of the heart ~ A GIVING OF NEWNESS OF THE HEART (and I capitalize that because it speaks to what we've been talking about, this making all things new) ~ which happens only for His elect at the time He justifies them in their sin and gives them new birth in and by the Holy Spirit. I've said hundreds of times before, it is NOT A MATTER OF THE WILL, BUT A MATTER OF THE HEART, which always... always... drives the (very free) will. And if not for God's mercy and compassion on us, our will with regard to God would still be in the same place as those who hate Him. So, speaking of love and obedience being forces is non sequitur. This "causing to obey" that Ezekiel speaks of ~ and Paul and Peter, too, in the New Testament ~ is indirect, really... we obey of our own volition, but it is our volition because God has given us a new heart. So we often say, of not obeying, and even hating God, and it is very true, "If not for the grace of God, there go I."

Do you think it is on the earth now?

The Tree of Life? No. Ah well you know what... No... and yes. No, Jesus is not here physically yet, but yes, He will be, in the New Heaven and New Earth. And actually... No, I'll leave it at that for now at least.

If not, I thought you said God will be making all things new and not all new things?

<chuckles> He is, SI. You and I are being made more and more like Jesus right now, aren't we? And all of creation is in the process of being redeemed ~ Paul says in Romans 8 that "the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now."

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

Wrong. What started that whole thing was post 322 where you told me to read something that I had said carefully as if I hadn't read it carefully.

Oh, good night. There was no implication there, SI. None.

That's a pretty weak argument...

To you. Sure. It's not.

Do you believe it will occur on what scripture calls "the new earth" (with the understanding that it's not a brand new planet or anything like that, but this earth made new)? In other words, do you believe it will occur after the earth has been been made new or before?

See above. Well, I'll copy and paste from above so you won't have to. <smile> Well no, not even that... Okay so I was right, in reference to time, really, and not place, and so... "the Judgment itself will be part of the process of making the earth new; the earth will not be completely made new until sin and death have been destroyed and the Judgment has concluded and unbelievers are sent away into judgment and the "New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven" ~ earth and heaven are one again, and paradise is restored on earth. I mean, that's pretty clear...

Well, scripture does.

Well, the true state of the earth, not the earth itself. And, as I say, it will be restored to it's original unfallen state. So, renewed... made new again. That 'again' is important... <smile> ...because it means it was in that state ~ new ~ some time before... <smile>

Basically, sure. But, the earth as it is now is not set up to support eternal life. Life on earth currently depends on being able to revolve around the sun and the sun does not have infinite energy. So, the earth will have to be changed to be able to support eternal life. If you think the sun will still be around then it would need to be changed to have infinite energy, which is not the case right now.

<chuckles> There was a time when God made the sun stay up for 24 hours... I mean, I say the sun (and all creation) will be "changed" in the same way we believers will be...

But, to be clear, since you are making things confusing here...

I'm not. That's a you thing, either because you really are confused (which I don't think to be the case, really) or you are so bought into where you are that you just want that to be the case.

, I do believe God is a consuming fire.

Good.

I just see no basis for applying that to 2 Peter 3:10-13.

Bad. <smile> So you're being... selective... <chuckles>

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yep, likewise. Really though, I don't think you can really say it doesn't make sense, it's just... well, opposed to yours. And the same is true the other way around, that your interpretation makes sense, it's just... opposed to mine. I think we both have to admit that.

No, I truly can't make sense of what you said. I'm not saying that to be offensive, I just don't understand what you were saying. But, that's okay. We already know we disagree on this subject, so please don't try to clarify what you were saying since I know I will disagree with it, anyway.

That's a bit of a tough question;

I don't think so at all, but okay...

Paul seems to say that we will literally rise up off the ground and meet Him somewhere in the sky, and that may be the case.

Look at how the Greek word "aer", translated as "air", in that verse, is used in other scriptures and I think it should be clear that is the case.

It is possible, though, to believe he's speaking of us being with Him in the Holy Spirit, as he says we are right now ("seated with Jesus in the heavenly places") in Ephesians 2. But we will go to welcome Him to earth, so... maybe the same as you with regard to "in the air."

Maybe technically possible, but in my mind it's not. I don't see Paul as speaking figuratively in 1 Thess 4:13-18 at all.

Of course it does. LOL!

What's funny here is that you think you can speak for me or anyone else regarding this.

No, it's kind of like... oh, the trinity, that God exists in three distinct Persons, yet still is One, as He says. I say if anyone tells you he or she understands that completely, he or she is kidding himself or herself.

I don't think it's like that. Whatta ya know, we disagree again. Nothing new.

Why? Because you just think that?

No, because someone else thinks that. Come on, man. But, seriously, it makes a lot of sense and I can't think of any other explanation that makes any sense at all.

There's nothing in Scripture that indicates or says that.

Well, scripture does speak of free will, so I think it can be implied. Think about this. Satan will be cast into the lake of fire and tormented forever (Revelation 20:10). That's a pretty severe punishment, right? Why else is anyone punished except for choosing to do what is wrong instead of what is right? If someone does something that they were made to do and they were not capable of deciding to do anything else, what is the reason for the punishment?

I mean, I get that you're deriving this from the Arminian - GASP <smile> - understanding of soteriology,

I don't know that I would describe myself as Arminian exactly. It seems that they believe in total depravity and I don't. Anyway, I know you are confused about this topic becaues of your Calvinist - GAG <smile> - understanding of soteriology.

but angels are never really in creation like we are so are not fallen like we are and therefore their hearts ~ not their free will ~ were never at issue.

Say what now? I hope you're not saying you think they were not created. I'll assume not. Are they just basically robots? What better explanation do you have than what I gave? Do you think it makes any sense at all that God would purposely hae made some of the fallen angels to rebel against Him? What is rebellion except for a willful decision to do what is wrong despite knowing what is right?

But we are caused to obey, as Ezekiel says in Ezekiel 19 and 36.

Show me exactly where you think it says that (was giving the verses too difficult?) and explain to me if we are caused to obey, how do you make sense of these scriptures from the same book?

Ezekiel 18:24 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return from his ways, and live? 24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.

This says that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked and would rather that they repent so that their wickedness would not be held against them. How do you reconcile this with your belief that God caused them to be wicked by creating them that way? Why would He not take pleasure in them behaving the way He created them to behave? It makes far more sense that He gave them the ability to repent and they have no excuse for not repenting because they did not use their free will to choose to repent and decided to remain in their wickedness instead of repenting and acknowleding their sin.

This is not a manipulation of the will by God, but a changing of the heart ~ A GIVING OF NEWNESS OF THE HEART (and I capitalize that because it speaks to what we've been talking about, this making all things new) ~ which happens only for His elect at the time He justifies them in their sin and gives them new birth in and by the Holy Spirit. I've said hundreds of times before, it is NOT A MATTER OF THE WILL, BUT A MATTER OF THE HEART, which always... always... drives the (very free) will.

You just don't get it, but we've been over and over this before awhile back, if you recall. It is BOTH a matter of the will and the heart. God does not just change people's hearts for no discernible reason as you believe. For some reason that He alone knows, in other words. No, scripture says that God rewards those who diligently seek Him (Hebrews 11:6). To diligently seek Him is a matter of the will. One must choose to do that. One must choose how they respond to hearing the word of God. Will they choose to respond to it favorably or not? If they respond to it favorably and repent and put their trust in Jesus, then God will come to dwell in them and change their hearts to have a new perspective while beginning to teach them about the deeper things of God.

And if not for God's mercy and compassion on us, our will with regard to God would still be in the same place as those who hate Him.

I agree, but people need to use their free will to decide how to respond to God's offer of mercy and compassion. He graciously offers salvation to all people and all people are required to choose how to respond.

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.

So, speaking of love and obedience being forces is non sequitur. This "causing to obey" that Ezekiel speaks of ~ and Paul and Peter, too, in the New Testament ~ is indirect, really... we obey of our own volition, but it is our volition because God has given us a new heart. So we often say, of not obeying, and even hating God, and it is very true, "If not for the grace of God, there go I."

Do you actually think you can change my mind about this subject? I woud hope not. You know I'm not going to agree with you about any of this. Do you want to have a several page long discussion about this like we did before or should we not get too far into this subject here? Maybe we could start a new thread in the Soteriolgy forum and talk about this more there.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Oh, good night. There was no implication there, SI. None.

Good night yourself. Clearly, telling someone to read something carefully that they said themselves and obviously already read implies that you think they didn't read it carefully.

<chuckles> There was a time when God made the sun stay up for 24 hours... I mean, I say the sun (and all creation) will be "changed" in the same way we believers will be...

I say that the earth will be changed as you do, just with a different understanding of how that will occur. But, I just don't agree with the idea that literally everything has to still exist and be made new. If that was the case, why did God ever destroy the earth with a flood? That caused some things to cease to exist.

I'm not. That's a you thing, either because you really are confused (which I don't think to be the case, really) or you are so bought into where you are that you just want that to be the case.

LOL. Do I have to spell everything out to you? Of course, I'm saying you make it confusing for me, not for you. I would hope what you're saying is not confusing to yourself. But, it's a fact that you made it confusing for me. You don't decide that for me. But, don't take offense by it. Good grief. I can't help it that I find you to be hard to follow sometimes. So what? That says nothing necessarily about me or about you. We just have a bit different way of explaining things, so we end up not understanding each other sometimes. It's no one's fault, but you're always looking to place the blame somewhere.

Bad. <smile> So you're being... selective... <chuckles>

Wrong. That's utterly ridiculous. <guffaws>

That's like saying my belief that God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah with literal, physical fire instead of Him doing it as a consuming fire is a case of being selective. I'm almost afraid to ask, but you do believe that God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah with literal, pysical fire, don't you?

 

[PinSeeker]

No, I truly can't make sense of what you said.

Okay, fine. That's a you thing.

Look at how the Greek word "aer", translated as "air", in that verse, is used in other scriptures and I think it should be clear that is the case.

Air is air. Yes. <chuckles> That's very much beside the point I made.

I don't see Paul as speaking figuratively in 1 Thess 4:13-18 at all.

I know, but not allowing for the possibility is... well, not good. Even thought my take is what it is, I am allowing for the possibility that we do actually float up off the ground and meet him in the air. It's really not worth debating that point, because the outcome is the same either way.

What's funny here is that you think you can speak for me or anyone else regarding this.

I didn't, SI. I don't do that, because I don't like it when others put words into my mouth (or thoughts into my brain). Nobody does.

I don't think it's like that.

Of course not. And I knew you would say that. So be it.

...it makes a lot of sense and I can't think of any other explanation that makes any sense at all.

Or, again, maybe you are so bought into... well, again, "still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

Well, scripture does speak of free will, so I think it can be implied. Think about this. Satan will be cast into the lake of fire and tormented forever (Revelation 20:10). That's a pretty severe punishment, right? Why else is anyone punished except for choosing to do what is wrong instead of what is right?

Yes, of their own free will, they chose to do what was wrong instead of what was right, but certainly not because they knew what was wrong was really right. Right? So again, initially speaking, ~ and here we go into soteriology ~ it does not have anything to do with free will. Everyone has free will, and no one ~ even five-point Calvinists like me ~ thinks anyone doesn't have free will at any point. No one. Even in Romans 9, Paul doesn't say anything about anyone using or not using, or not having free will, and in fact implies strongly that man does in fact have free will by saying it doesn't depend on man's will ~ does not depend on it ~ but on God, Who has mercy and compassion, and that is according to His free will. So man's free will it not denied in any way, and free will is totally beside the point Paul is making. Being one of God's elect does not depend on man's willing or running, precisely as Paul says in Romans 9:16.

If someone does something that they were made to do...

Nobody is made to do anything. But, like Paul says, God did make some for honorable use and some for dishonorable use.

and they were not capable of deciding to do anything else, what is the reason for the punishment?

They are capable. But, as Paul says in Romans 1, they exchanged the truth for a lie, and this is an act of volition. No one is forced to do that. Therefore, they have no excuse.

I don't know that I would describe myself as Arminian exactly. It seems that they believe in total depravity and I don't. Anyway, I know you are confused about this topic because of your Calvinist - GAG <smile> - understanding of soteriology.

<chuckles> And because of your Arminian soteriology (whether you attribute that to yourself or not)... same back atcha. Plus, you're... well, I won't say 'confused" about it but you're mis-attributing certain things to Calvinism itself.

What is rebellion except for a willful decision to do what is wrong despite knowing what is right?

Sure. I just said as much.

...but people need to use their free will to decide how to respond to God's offer of mercy and compassion.

Sure and they do, but being one of God's elect does not depend on man's willing or doing but on God's mercy. Yes again, it does not initially ~ initially ~ have anything to do with man's free will, but his heart, and the state thereof. And man cannot change the condition of his/her heart. God has to do that. And this is His free will choice. Otherwise, as Paul says, grace is not really grace. Would you say that man's will forces God's will? Is God not free? I'll use another one of Paul's rhetorical questions : "who has given a gift to Him..." (God) "...that he..." (man) "...might be repaid?" In other words, did any man ~ regarding anything ~ ever do anything to obligate God to him? Is God captive to man's free will?

Do you actually think you can change my mind about this subject?

Nope. But the Spirit can use me to do so. Or not. That's not up to me. In any case, it's not essential to your salvation. And as for what that means just between me and you, it doesn't mean either one of us are "better Christians" than the other. If you want to stay where you are, by all means, use your free will do so. <smile>

Maybe we could start a new thread in the Soteriolgy forum and talk about this more there.

Well, it probably would be about the 4,936th time. <smile>

Grace and peace to you.