 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > "Man according to God's view" | Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/14/2010 10:51 AM (GMT -6) |   | Tom:
Does that work well with you, D, about how John tracks the nations in Revelation? In ch. 19 the nations and kings are hurled into the flames. So Starky thinks THOSE kings remain there and that the kings/nations of 21 are new/different kings/nations who have repopulated the earth?
As I see it, Starky believes that the LIVING people of the LITERAL 1000 year reign who have had the "first resurrection" for whom the "second death has no power" (and who were NOT thrown into the LITERAL "lake of fire" ) are the "kings of the earth" and "nations" that are bringing their glory into the LITERAL Holy City that has LITERALLY come down from Heaven to earth. They are the City's "offspring."
Again, it's a totally literal take. Quoting Starky...
---------------------------------------
Finally, the last reference to the bride of Christ is Revelation 22:17
The Spirit and the Bride say, "Come." And let the one who hears say, "Come." And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price.
We see in full swing the Bride, the Groom and the Offspring: Jehovah, the Bride (the New Jerusalem, made up of apostles, prophets and redeemed believers), giving the call to the nations (the offspring). All is complete now.
Post Edited (One Love) : 4/14/2010 10:56:27 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/14/2010 10:56 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/14/2010 11:15 AM (GMT -6) | | | Now what's interesting is this: If you are NOT Pre-mill...but you look at the same PATTERN (ie God, God's Bride, God and God's Bride CALLING to those "outside" of their reality [meaning the "kings of the earth" and the "nations"] to "adopt" them and bring healing to them inside the reality of God and God's Bride)...
do you see how the thinking STILL works with what I'm saying about the "kings of the earth" and "nations" NOT BEING OF God's People?
Hmm...
Post Edited (One Love) : 4/14/2010 11:21:52 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/14/2010 11:52 AM (GMT -6) | | You might see me in the street
But shawty you don't know me
When you holla when you speak
Remember you don't know me
Save all the hatin' and the poppin'
pimpin' you don't know me
Quit tellin' people you're my pahtna
Listen you don't know me...
In love for my siblings. God have mercy on us all.
Post Edited (One Love) : 4/14/2010 12:01:55 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Truth Aficionado
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2003
Total Posts : 1544
| Posted 4/14/2010 12:04 PM (GMT -6) | | |
Tom: It’s making God the focus of all living creatures. It’s saying God will ultimately be recognized as the focus the way he deserves to be.
Mark: Amen.
“Here in Revelation, John is drawing a symbolic line across the universe and placing God and the Lamb on one side, and ALL of creation on the other.” Tom: Fine. So…?
Mark: The point is, there is no distinction made between the just and unjust or the saved and unsaved.
"John’s objective is NOT to show salvific or intrinsic value to any given creature…"
Tom: Who the hell is giving “intrinsic value” to any creature, Mark?
Mark: Scratch “intrinsic” and address salvific value to any creature…
“ It’s all about the glorious scene before the throne of God in heaven, where ALL creatures throughout ALL creation bow down, worshipping, giving praise and glory to God and the Lamb, Jesus Christ”. Tom: That’s called universalism, Mark.
Mark: I beg to differ, Tom. It’s called God, creator of all things.
“All creatures in their way praise God, and are subservient to the glory and interest of Christ, and are the occasion of glorifying of both; and even the enemies of Christ, wicked men and devils, will be obliged to own Christ to be Lord, to the glory of God the Father…" Tom: Except the text doesn’t say that. You can read it that way if you want. To me you’re just accommodating the passage to an already determined rejection of UR. Fine. I won’t accuse you of arrogance for handling the text this way. But there’s no argument here from the text. The Elders join all creatures in their worship with a hearty “Amen,” hardly a vision of the Elders saying “Amen” to the “way” that Satan in his evil state, for example, praises and worships God (?). Dude, read it how you want. But you’re wrong to accuse me of arrogantly making man the focus of the passage. That’s low.
Mark: Once again though, the focus is NOT on creation in this symbolic text, no, the focus of the “amen” and the entire passage is solely on the glory of God. I don’t believe I have to read into it at all to pull this obvious truth out of it. So, I don’t know what you mean with “read it how you want”, on the contrary, I think one would have to “read it as one wants” to pull UR out of it. This is not about any "determined rejection of UR" I might hold, I'm taking into account the other 65 books, the authors intent, style, central theme/point, his audience, tradition, empirical knowledge, the great saints before us, the over whelming majority of theologians and the list goes on. You are faced with a steep uphill battle, my friend.
Regardless, none of this UR stuff is that important on this side of life. No offense intended to you Tom or D, I extend my sincere apology. I "humbly" bow out of this conversation, respecting any risk of further bruising…
Love on,
Mark
Post Edited (Truth Aficionado) : 4/14/2010 4:40:04 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 4/14/2010 4:45 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom: Starkman, I’m not sure I follow you entirely. I got a bit lost here and there. Could you boil it down to 4 or 5 bullets?
Starkman: Dude, I'm so sorry about that mess of a post. I couldn't get the "List" command to work correctly, and I ended up editing the tags, and the post, into the ground! Sorry again. Here's what I was saying. (And D., yeah, you're pretty on track with what I was saying, but let me clear the muck up a bit.)
Isaiah is very theological—his thinking tied heavily into the concept of God's kingdom of righteousness, centered in Jerusalem, ruling over all; Israel will reflect the glory of this kingdom—the New Jerusalem and new heavens and earth: Death will come to those nations who oppose God during the kingdom period; seas and waters will exist; foreigners will build the City (a statement of subservience to God's rule and to the Israel of God); life spans are limited but extended. (The emphasis here is theological, not chronological).
I then noted Matthew 25, that curious period of time when the nations are judged. The language of the judgment includes finality (eternal life and eternal damnation); those who are to inherit a kingdom prepared for them—those nations who properly treated Christ's "brethren." All this led me to ask, "Who are these nations, and when are they judged?"
I then noted John's approach in Revelation: more chronological (as I read him) than Isaiah but no less theological. I demonstrated John's use of the "Bride" of Christ being more than just the church, at least in concept and it its theology. John's use of the Bride of Christ directly parallels Isaiah's use of Jehovah marrying the "land," whose glory is reflected in BOTH Israel AND the obedient nations—I called the nations who reflect this glory "offspring," a suitable term in view of children coming forth from Jehovah's marriage to the land.
John, as well, moves his use of "bride" as a representation of the Church into the same Isaiah (don't know the adjective for "Isaiah" ) concept: inseparable unity, by way of marriage, between God and the New Jerusalem (both a new earth and heaven having been noted, but the New Jerusalem being the focus). From this glory shines BOTH the Church (consisting of, or along with, Old and New Testament saints) AND those obedient nations, just as Isaiah noted.
I then tied in that Matthew 25 judgment-of-the-nations text with John use of "nations": those who do not rebel against God ARE those nations who will take their glory in and out of the New Jerusalem (I used "roam around" but I meant the same thing). These nations are the same "offspring" Isaiah saw, the reflective glory of God's kingdom and marriage to the New Jerusalem. These are the very nations to whom Christ said, "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world" (Mat 25:34). (Christ certainly wasn't addressing Christians or Jews here.)
The final call THEOLOGICALLY, then, from Revelation 22 is what I wrote: We see in full swing the Bride, the Groom and the Offspring: Jehovah, the Bride (the New Jerusalem, made up of apostles, prophets and redeemed believers), giving the call to the nations (the offspring). All is complete now.
To finish up here...
First, it's neither here nor there whether you are pre-, mid- or post-mel! I believe John's chronology is not given to us that we might be dogmatically literal, but dogmatically theological, the chronology serving only as the vehicle to get us there. Thus, when I say that John is "more chronological" than Isaiah, I should be clear to say that I believe there is literalism to John's chronology, BUT EVEN IF THERE ISN'T the theology stands regardless.
Second, and finally, as to the matter of universalism, I don't think that's what John is thinking, anymore than Isaiah was. To be clear, when I talked about the finality of language used in Matthew 25 and Revelation, I was not talking finality of duration but of the cessation of opposition! In other words, we may still be able to conclude from other parts of the Bible that those who are sent to the lake of fire have not exhausted their chances for redemption, but we just cannot make those last chapters of Revelation. All John was trying to say was that there is finality to the plan of God AS IT CONCERNS A NEW NEW HEAVEN AND EARTH with regard to opposition; there won't be anymore opposition:
The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son. But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death." (Rev 21:7-8)
Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. (Rev 22:14-15)
Note the finality here. There is no place for us to discuss what happens to those sent to the lake of fire, those who are "outside," which is another theological way of saying those who are separated from. "Outside" is not a place, but a position. Again, though, if there is redemption for all, then we only need look for it elsewhere in Scripture, not here. It's just not found in these passages, that's all.
Again, I do apologize for that messy post. I hope this is clearer.
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/14/2010 4:56 PM (GMT -6) | | Starkman:
The final call THEOLOGICALLY, then, from Revelation 22 is what I wrote: We see in full swing the Bride, the Groom and the Offspring: Jehovah, the Bride (the New Jerusalem, made up of apostles, prophets and redeemed believers), giving the call to the nations (the offspring). All is complete now.
To finish up here...
First, it's neither here nor there whether you are pre-, mid- or post-mel! I believe John's chronology is not given to us that we might be dogmatically literal, but dogmatically theological, the chronology serving only as the vehicle to get us there. Thus, when I say that John is "more chronological" than Isaiah, I should be clear to say that I believe there is literalism to John's chronology, BUT EVEN IF THERE ISN'T the theology stands regardless.
Interestingly enough, I AGREE with the theological motif that you present. It's seems pretty clear in Isaiah 24 and 60 in my view. My only thing is that one can keep that theological motif while NOT asserting that the "kings of the earth" and "nations" are the literally resurrected peoples of the earth who didn't get thrown into the lake of fire. In other words, the "kings of the earth" and nations" DO benefit from the Bethothal of God to His Bride, but as kindly God-like rulers over their defeated opposition...who are images of God just like THEY are.
JUST LIKE some subjected rulers and peoples that fell to Israel would be treated as "strangers" and "aliens" in their land, even in their servitude. (See OT Scriptures*)
JUST LIKE the "kings of the earth" in Isaiah 24 and 60 are said to be "led in procession" as servants of Zion.
See the similiar themes?
*Exodus 22:21“You shall not wrong a sojourner or oppress him, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exodus 23:9 "You shall not oppress a stranger, since you yourselves know the feelings of a stranger, for you also were strangers in the land of Egypt.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leviticus 19:33 'When a stranger resides with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leviticus 19:34 'The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt; I am the LORD your God.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leviticus 25:35 'Now in case a countryman of yours becomes poor and his means with regard to you falter, then you are to sustain him, like a stranger or a sojourner, that he may live with you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deuteronomy 1:16 "Then I charged your judges at that time, saying, 'Hear the cases between your fellow countrymen, and judge righteously between a man and his fellow countryman, or the alien who is with him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deuteronomy 10:19 "So show your love for the alien, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deuteronomy 27:19 'Cursed is he who distorts the justice due an alien, orphan, and widow.' And all the people shall say, 'Amen.'
Post Edited (One Love) : 4/14/2010 5:09:07 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/14/2010 5:07 PM (GMT -6) | | | See what I'm saying, Starky? The motif of God's kindness to those OUTSIDE his Covenant People (even the enemies of God) has been there all the time...and expecting His Covenant People to be a transformative, healing force for those OUTSIDE his Covenant, bringing them INTO Covenant with God. And, IMO, Revelation 21 demonstrates that biblical theme exquisitely!
Now the Lord saidto Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”
Post Edited (One Love) : 4/14/2010 5:14:15 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 4/14/2010 5:14 PM (GMT -6) | | One Love said...
My only thing is that one can keep that theological motif while NOT asserting that the "kings of the earth" and "nations" are the literally resurrected peoples of the earth who didn't get thrown into the lake of fire. In other words, the "kings of the earth" and nations" DO benefit from the Bethothal of God to His Bride, but as kindly god-like rulers over their defeated opposition...who are images of God just like THEY are.
JUST LIKE some subjected rulers and peoples that fell to Israel would be treated as "strangers" and "aliens" in their land, even in their servitude. (See OT)
JUST LIKE the "kings of the earth" in Isaiah 24 and 60 are said to be "led in procession" as servants of Zion.
WAIT!
I didn't clarify that part either!
I'm not espousing a necessary resurrection in order for the kings of the earth, who are images of God just like THEY are, to bring their glory into the New Jerusalem (boy, I REALLY screwed my first post up, didn't I!). I think the whole point of both Isaiah and John is that it is the humanity of the nations (unresurrected) that is at issue; it is mankind finally serving God as he was created to do. But in view of the language both Jesus and John use when speaking of those nations, and in view of flesh and blood not being able to enter into the kingdom of God, I wrote what this in my first post:
These nations have not experienced a resurrection (as of yet), and they apparently do not experience death. They do, however, have to be washed in the blood of the lamb if they are to eat of the Tree of Life, as we saw above. Clearly, then, they are to become Christians. From Matthew 25, it would seem that at the time they are appointed to their inheritance, they are then redeemed—“Enter into the inheritance [eternal life] appointed for you”. This would mean that at some time they receive resurrected bodies. We are not told specifically when, however.
Ultimately, then, even those comprising the nations will be resurrected into an eternal (not duration but position) that they cannot fully enjoy in their own humanity.
Thanks,
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 4/14/2010 5:14 PM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 4/14/2010 8:06 PM (GMT -6) | | Bit more clarity...
When I said, . . . This would mean that at some time they receive resurrected bodies. We are not told specifically when, however., let me amend this:
This would mean that at some time they receive transformed bodies. We are not told specifically when, however. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Asher
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 477
| Posted 4/14/2010 8:29 PM (GMT -6) | | Once you state up front that you could be wrong, then you are pretty free to follow where your thoughts take you...even when those thoughts contradict long established traditions of thought. And when you have followed those thoughts in and out of briar patches of all sorts and you are still following the trail...and you arrive at, not absolute certainty, but relative certainty...and you take delight in your journey...and even more importantly, take delight in what your thoughts say about God...that His graciousness extends further than you had previously thought...and you are astounded...and humbled...at where your thoughts have taken you...it is by no means prideful in sharing your thoughts with others. And if in sharing you are jocular instead of hiding your light under a bushel and going about with hand-wringing about the epistemic state of mankind and how we can't be too sure about much, so maybe we should just remain in silence...and maybe we should even shut our minds down because how dare we ascend to the height of hubris by thinking we can think anything much about God. Even when God has given us the invitation, "Come now, let us reason together." And when you bend over backwards to answer the charge of pride and you are then charged with false humility...
...yeah, it does kind of leave you with something unpleasant...
So, I'll just say this to you guys. 1) reloop back into how wonderful God is and at just how astounding is the extent of His forgiveness...that it cannot reach further. There is nothing, no place, no person...that is outside of that reach...AND THAT MAKES ME VERY HAPPY!
2) You guys and the kind of theological depths that you are willing to jump into with abandon IS THE REASON I COME HERE!
If I want "Woe is us! We shouldn't think thoughts too big for us!" then I can pretty much go anywhere else in the Christian blogosphere and that's what I'll find. That, or dogmatic assertion of one theological position or another with no real wrestling with the issues.
So...keep it up! | | Back to Top | | |
| 194 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 10:34 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|