Christians: Joint heirs with jesus - what does it mean?

[S-word]

Allll righty, then!
None of this has anything whatsoever to do with Matthew. None of this is even found in Matthew. You're blending gospel traditions here.:redcard:

To begin with, In post 40, and below "Originally Quoted by sojourner," you have my words. Are you plagiarising my post?

There are two dectives, and four witnesses. One dective takes the evidence of all four witnesses, knowing that each one is going to recount what they know from their own particular stand point, and although all four accounts may differ, they all tell the one story, but from different points of view.

The second dective believes only one witnesses account and rejects the other three because they seem to be in contradiction to the account of the witness that he sees as the most reliable; He, being ignorant of the fact that all four witnesses are reliable, but each account has been told from a different perpective.

Which of the two dectives do you believe is the most likely to solve the mystery?

 

[sojourner]

To begin with, In post 40, and below "Originally Quoted by sojourner," you have my words. Are you plagiarising my post?

There are two dectives, and four witnesses. One dective takes the evidence of all four witnesses, knowing that each one is going to recount what they know from their own particular stand point, and although all four accounts may differ, they all tell the one story, but from different points of view.

The second dective believes only one witnesses account and rejects the other three because they seem to be in contradiction to the account of the witness that he sees as the most reliable; He, being ignorant of the fact that all four witnesses are reliable, but each account has been told from a different perpective.

Which of the two dectives do you believe is the most likely to solve the mystery?

This doesn't have anything to do with detectives and witnesses. It has to do with arguing Matthew's unique take on the life and ministry of Jesus, and how it relates to the community to whom he writes, using Mark and Luke's individual takes. You're comparing apples and oranges. It just don't work that way. Apples are apples and oranges are oranges. While they're both fruit, only one can be used to make orange juice.

You can't use material found in Mark and Luke to argue a purely Matthean concept, such as "they worshiped him, but some doubted." Use Matt. to argue Matt., and your argument will be a whole lot tighter -- and more acceptable.

 

[S-word]

This doesn't have anything to do with detectives and witnesses. It has to do with arguing Matthew's unique take on the life and ministry of Jesus, and how it relates to the community to whom he writes, using Mark and Luke's individual takes. You're comparing apples and oranges. It just don't work that way. Apples are apples and oranges are oranges. While they're both fruit, only one can be used to make orange juice.

You can't use material found in Mark and Luke to argue a purely Matthean concept, such as "they worshiped him, but some doubted." Use Matt. to argue Matt., and your argument will be a whole lot tighter -- and more acceptable.

O Come on now, what sort of a student are you? Surely you must understand that the bible can only be interpreted by the Bible. The Books of the Bible are like wheels of interlocking cogs, wheels within wheels, here a little and there a little etc.

Luke tells us that Mary gave birth to her first born child in the town of Bethlehem of Judea, as opposed to the Bethlehem which was about two miles from Nazareth in Galilee, and that eight days after the child was born, it was circumcised and named Jesus.

Then thirty three days later, and before the wise men from the east had come and lavished their gifts of Gold, Frank-incense and mire, he was taken to the temple in Jerusalem by his not so financial parents, where his mother performed the purification ceremony according to the law handed down through Moses. And after they had completed everything according to the Law, they returned to Nazareth.

How do we know, even though it is not mentioned in Luke, that it was thirty three days after the circumcision that the ceremony of purification was perform? Because Luke says, “And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord.

To find out when the days of her purification according to the Law of Moses were accomplished, do we need to go to some school of Biblical learning? No! We simply turn to Leviticus 12: 14, and let the Bible reveal itself to us.

How do we know that the parents of Jesus were not flushed financially? Again, we must let the Bible reveal that to us, Leviticus 12: 8, “If the woman cannot afford a lamb, she shall bring two doves or pigeons etc,” the fact that the birds were offered, shows that they were unable to afford a lamb, and had not yet received the gifts of Gold, etc.

The fact that it was not from the town of Bethlehem of Judea, from which the family fled to Egypt for protection, is borne out by the Luke account, which states that before the visit of the wise men, the family had returned to Nazareth of Galilee which is but a few miles from Bethlehem of Galilee which can be seen from the wonderful Hellenistic city of Sepphoris, in which so many families lost their lives in 4 B.C. about two years after the birth of Jesus around the time of the conjunctions of Jupiter, Saturn and Mars, in 7 and 6 B.C. when the wise men first sighted the star that had heralded the birth of the promised King, which star (Comet) appeared to be coming out of Jupiter and would not be visible to the casual observer for another two years.

The wise men, in 5 B.C., had told Herod in a secret meeting that they had first sighted the star, (which by then was hidden behind the sun) almost two years previously, for according to Matthew, Herod chose the age of the children in the district around the northern town of Bethlehem who were to be slaughtered as two years and below, according to the information that he had received from the wise men, about the time that they had first sighted the star.

On leaving the palace of Herod, who had told them that they might find the child in Bethlehem of Judea, the Star that they had first seen while in the east appeared once again and O, what joy was theirs. And the comet in its return to the orbit of Jupiter in the constellation of Pisces, led the wise men, not to the southern Bethlehem of Judea, but to the northern town in Galilee, to where, according to Luke, the family had returned almost two years previously, where the star ‘Stood Over” the house where the child was, the term Stood Over in ancient literature, refers to comets and comets only.

Around 4 B.C., about the time of Herod’s death, there are uprisings by the peasants around that district in Galilee – Sepphoris is the centre. Judas, son of Hezekias, attacks Herod’s arsenal so he may arm himself. The Romans, under Quintillius Varus of Syria, attack and burn the city.

In the spring of 3 B.C., after the death of Herod his father in April of 4 B.C., following a failed suicide attempt, when Antipas returns from Rome where his father’s will was ratified by Augustus, he chose this site for his capital city for ruling over Galilee. Sepphoris, which is described by Josephus as the largest and most beautiful city in this region, was just 4 miles north of Nazareth, and even closer to the town of Bethlehem, which today is called Beitlahm, in which surrounding district all the male children two years of age and below were slaughtered,

Quote...sojourner... You can't use material found in Mark and Luke to argue a purely Matthean concept,
I can, I did, and I will continue to do so.

 

[sojourner]

O Come on now, what sort of a student are you?

4.0 -- straight-"A." Not that it particularly matters to this argument. But since you asked...

The Books of the Bible are like wheels of interlocking cogs, wheels within wheels, here a little and there a little etc.

We're not talking about an overview of the Bible. We're talking about a misinterpretation of something only found in Matthew. I think it prudent to discuss the Matthew-only pericope from a Matthew-only standpoint, without sullying the waters with other source material.

Luke tells us that Mary gave birth to her first born child in the town of Bethlehem of Judea, as opposed to the Bethlehem which was about two miles from Nazareth in Galilee, and that eight days after the child was born, it was circumcised and named Jesus.

Then thirty three days later, and before the wise men from the east had come and lavished their gifts of Gold, Frank-incense and mire, he was taken to the temple in Jerusalem by his not so financial parents, where his mother performed the purification ceremony according to the law handed down through Moses. And after they had completed everything according to the Law, they returned to Nazareth.

How do we know, even though it is not mentioned in Luke, that it was thirty three days after the circumcision that the ceremony of purification was perform? Because Luke says, “And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord.

To find out when the days of her purification according to the Law of Moses were accomplished, do we need to go to some school of Biblical learning? No! We simply turn to Leviticus 12: 14, and let the Bible reveal itself to us.

How do we know that the parents of Jesus were not flushed financially? Again, we must let the Bible reveal that to us, Leviticus 12: 8, “If the woman cannot afford a lamb, she shall bring two doves or pigeons etc,” the fact that the birds were offered, shows that they were unable to afford a lamb, and had not yet received the gifts of Gold, etc.

The fact that it was not from the town of Bethlehem of Judea, from which the family fled to Egypt for protection, is borne out by the Luke account, which states that before the visit of the wise men, the family had returned to Nazareth of Galilee which is but a few miles from Bethlehem of Galilee which can be seen from the wonderful Hellenistic city of Sepphoris, in which so many families lost their lives in 4 B.C. about two years after the birth of Jesus around the time of the conjunctions of Jupiter, Saturn and Mars, in 7 and 6 B.C. when the wise men first sighted the star that had heralded the birth of the promised King, which star (Comet) appeared to be coming out of Jupiter and would not be visible to the casual observer for another two years.

The wise men, in 5 B.C., had told Herod in a secret meeting that they had first sighted the star, (which by then was hidden behind the sun) almost two years previously, for according to Matthew, Herod chose the age of the children in the district around the northern town of Bethlehem who were to be slaughtered as two years and below, according to the information that he had received from the wise men, about the time that they had first sighted the star.

On leaving the palace of Herod, who had told them that they might find the child in Bethlehem of Judea, the Star that they had first seen while in the east appeared once again and O, what joy was theirs. And the comet in its return to the orbit of Jupiter in the constellation of Pisces, led the wise men, not to the southern Bethlehem of Judea, but to the northern town in Galilee, to where, according to Luke, the family had returned almost two years previously, where the star ‘Stood Over” the house where the child was, the term Stood Over in ancient literature, refers to comets and comets only.

Around 4 B.C., about the time of Herod’s death, there are uprisings by the peasants around that district in Galilee – Sepphoris is the centre. Judas, son of Hezekias, attacks Herod’s arsenal so he may arm himself. The Romans, under Quintillius Varus of Syria, attack and burn the city.

In the spring of 3 B.C., after the death of Herod his father in April of 4 B.C., following a failed suicide attempt, when Antipas returns from Rome where his father’s will was ratified by Augustus, he chose this site for his capital city for ruling over Galilee. Sepphoris, which is described by Josephus as the largest and most beautiful city in this region, was just 4 miles north of Nazareth, and even closer to the town of Bethlehem, which today is called Beitlahm, in which surrounding district all the male children two years of age and below were slaughtered,

This diatribe has nothing whatsoever to do with exegeting the Matthean pericope of the keys to the kingdom. Why is it here?

Once again:

Quote...sojourner... You can't use material found in Mark and Luke to argue a purely Matthean concept,

I can, I did, and I will continue to do so.

Well, you sure haven't in this case. You've given us everything but what we need here.

I still maintain that inheritance is not the problem du jour for Matthew, as per Charity's post. I think she's using the wrong scriptural reference to support her argument.

What say you? Can we discuss the particular passage in question, or are we going to be led through yet another theological mish-mash?

 

[S-word]

]


This diatribe has nothing whatsoever to do with exegeting the Matthean pericope of the keys to the kingdom. Why is it here?

Quote...sojourner...What say you? Can we discuss the particular passage in question, or are we going to be led through yet another theological mish-mash?

You’re, the only one who sees this thread as a critical analysis of the gospel of Matthew, the rest are quoting scripture taken from the Bible, in their quest to discover, what is meant by the statement that we are joint heirs with Jesus.


Quote...Charity...post 16, According to the Bible (Not Matthew) there will be a judgement after death....


Quote... sojourner...This diatribe has nothing whatsoever to do with exegeting the Matthean pericope of the keys to the kingdom. Why is it here?


Because this Thread has nothing to do with the keys to the kingdom, and where do you get off calling my post (43) a bitter and abusive criticism, no one but yourself, having read my post would see it as such.
Diatribe: A bitter and abusive criticism or denunciation.

Quote...sojourner...What say you? Can we discuss the particular passage in question, or are we going to be led through yet another theological mish-mash?
The passage that you wish to discuss I believe, is Matthew 28: 16-17.

Post 40, Originally Posted by sojourner..."When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted").

OK, let’s begin the discussion. From the ‘Living New Testament,’ “Then the 11 disciples went to the hill in Galilee where Jesus said they would find him. There they met Him and worshiped Him—but some of them weren’t sure it really was Jesus.”

Quote...sojourner... You can't use material found in Mark and Luke to argue a purely Matthean concept.

I can, I did, and I will continue to do so, even though you would describe the revelation of the other passages in scripture as “theological mish-mash,” because they prove you to be wrong again, and show that the concept that his family and closest friends did not recognise the risen Jesus, as the man that they walked and talked with, is not a purely Matthean concept, as you in your ignorance to God’s word seem to believe.


And here is the post that proves you wrong, which according to you is “theological mish-mash.” When Jesus died, the earth shook from a tremendous heavenly impact, the graves broke open, and many of God’s people who had died were raised to life. These were the spirits of the good people who had died in righteousness; the ancestral spirits within the body of Jesus who was the godhead or compilation of the inner spiritual enclosure, and three days later they entered the Holy city and showed themselves as the risen body of Christ.

The first to see one of they, who were of the body of the risen Christ, the 365 day old unblemished Lamb of God who was offered up for our sake, were the Mother of Jesus who was by then, the wife of Cleophas, which name is an abreviation of Cleopatros the masculine form of Cleopatra the mother of Herod's son philip from Bethsaida, who mysteriously disappears from the pages of history at the time of the death of Jesus. With Mary the wife of Alpheaus who is identified as Cleophas, was Mary Magdalene, her sister, half sister, or step sister, who, although looking straight at one of the risen body of Christ, thought that he was the gardener, until he spoke her name.

The next, to who one of the risen body of Christ appeared, were Cleophas who is also called Alpheas, who is the biological father of James the younger of Mary's three biological sons, who was the brother of Jesus, and the first to sit on the Episcopal throne of the church of the circumcision, and Cleophas was the husband of Mary, who, with his son Simon, 'to another marriage,' who was to inherit the Episcopal throne of the church of the circumcision after his half brother, 'James the righteous,' was killed at the instigation of the same sudducce sect that had his brother Jesus killed.

Although Cleophas and Simon, walked and talked with one of the risen body of Christ for some kilometres, they did not recognise him for who he was, until they saw the manner in which he broke the bread, Cleophas then returned to Jerusalem, where eleven of the disciples which included Simon Peter and Simon the Patriot, were cowering in a darkened room, Cleophas then said to the eleven, "He has risen, he appeared to Simon," who could not have been Simon peter or Simon the patriot, but was of course Simon the brother of Jesus.

Then there were the seven disciples who were fishing on Lake Galilee, when someone on the bank told them to throw their net on the right side of the boat in which they caught 153 fishes, sitting down to eat with the person who had a fire prepared with fish on it and some bread, not one of the disciples who had walked and talked with the man Jesus, dared to ask who he was, but they understood that he was of the risen body of Christ. Even when he ascended up into heaven, although they worshipped him, some of the disciples present, doubted that it was he.

And here is your response to that post.
Quote...sojourner... None of this has anything whatsoever to do with Matthew. None of this is even found in Matthew.
Your ignorance is astounding, but entertaining: see Matthew 28: 17.

But let us return to the purpose of this thread and explain, Who are the joint heirs with Jesus, who was chosen as the first fruits, the first of many brothers who are to be joined to He, the corner stone and heir to the throne of the Godhead within the creation.

Let us explain that what a joint heir gets, is a glorious body of brilliant and blinding light, which is the next stage of the evolution, or growth of the mind that is God. For as the kingdom of God, which is currently within you, the body of mankind which is the temporary tent of God; the new Kingdom of God is the new creation which is the new Godhead within the creation, which supercedes mankind, the lord of creatures and the current most high in the creation, the glorious Temple of God which will dwell on earth among mankind and will gain dominion over all creation visible and invisible.

For I tell you a sacred secret, “we shall not all fall asleep in death, but at the sound of the last trumpet, those who are joint heirs with Jesus, will be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, from bodies of corruptible matter, into glorious bodies of incorruptible light as that seen by Paul, from which body of blinding light, he heard the words, “I am Jesus of Nazareth.”

From the Book of Enoch the prophet, 108: 11, spoken by the only man to have been redeemed from the previous world. The only exception of all mankind to have ascended to the ends of all things, and who came down and revealed himself through his obedient servant, the man Jesus.

“And now I will summon the spirits of the good who belong to the generation of light, and I will transform those who were born in darkness, who in the flesh were not recompensed with such honour as their faithfulness deserved. And I will bring forth in shining light, those who have loved my Holy name (Who I Am), and I will seat each on the throne of their honour. And they shall be resplendent for times without number.”

Let us explain that there is no scope to their inheritance, and that they will inherit at the close of the sixth day, or the sixth period of one thousand years from the day in which Adam ate of the forbidden fruit and died in that day at the age of 930. For It is then, the day of the Lord, the Sabbath; that the chosen number of Jews and Gentiles will take the thrones that have been prepared for them and rule the whole world.

 

[sojourner]

You’re, the only one who sees this thread as a critical analysis of the gospel of Matthew, the rest are quoting scripture taken from the Bible, in their quest to discover, what is meant by the statement that we are joint heirs with Jesus.

I understand that this is a general discussion. I also think that the bit of scripture Charity uses to argue her point has nothing to do with inheritance. In order to argue my position would require us to look closely at that particular passage and exegete it. Right? That's what I'm attempting to do, yet all I get from you is scriptural diarrhea.

Because this Thread has nothing to do with the keys to the kingdom, and where do you get off calling my post (43) a bitter and abusive criticism, no one but yourself, having read my post would see it as such.
Diatribe: A bitter and abusive criticism or denunciation.

The thread in general has nothing to do with the keys to the kingdom. Thank you for backing up my argument. Finally! Yes! This discussion has nothing to do with the keys to the kingdom. Why, then, did Charity even bring it up? That's my point: That her reference is mistaken. And then I strove to prove why I took that position. Sheesh!

You post is a diatribe because it is aimed specifically at me, it's unnecessary to the discussion, and it has the same, general caustic tone that your other posts have when addressing my posts.

The passage that you wish to discuss I believe, is Matthew 28: 16-17.

Post 40, Originally Posted by sojourner..."When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted").

OK, let’s begin the discussion. From the ‘Living New Testament,’ “Then the 11 disciples went to the hill in Galilee where Jesus said they would find him. There they met Him and worshiped Him—but some of them weren’t sure it really was Jesus.”

No. That wasn't the source I used. I used the NRSV. Let's discuss from that translation, since it's the one I started with. It says, "When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted." (28:17)

I can, I did, and I will continue to do so, even though you would describe the revelation of the other passages in scripture as “theological mish-mash,” because they prove you to be wrong again, and show that the concept that his family and closest friends did not recognise the risen Jesus, as the man that they walked and talked with, is not a purely Matthean concept, as you in your ignorance to God’s word seem to believe.

It's not the general concept of recognition I take issue with. It's Matthew's particular reason for using it as a literary device in promulgating his theology. Matthew's point here is not who will inherit. His point is that the Church is a mixed blessing: contains wheat and tares, good and bad, believers and doubters. That really isn't cogent to the particular angle of inheritance that Charity was putting out there.

While your example does show that other gospel writers portray a lack of recognition, it, too, is not cogent, because none of it speaks to the reason that Matthew included that particular passage in his gospel. Therefore, it's unnecessary to our discussion.

And here is your response to that post.
Quote...sojourner... None of this has anything whatsoever to do with Matthew. None of this is even found in Matthew.
Your ignorance is astounding, but entertaining: see Matthew 28: 17.

My ignorance? Wow.
Look at this:

Even when he ascended up into heaven, although they worshipped him, some of the disciples present, doubted that it was he.

You'll have to show me where Matthew has Jesus ascending to heaven. Guess what! It's not there! You're giving me mish-mash, calling it scholarship, and then pointing the ignorance finger at me. Good job.

But let us return to the purpose of this thread and explain, Who are the joint heirs with Jesus, who was chosen as the first fruits, the first of many brothers who are to be joined to He, the corner stone and heir to the throne of the Godhead within the creation.

Let us explain that what a joint heir gets, is a glorious body of brilliant and blinding light, which is the next stage of the evolution, or growth of the mind that is God. For as the kingdom of God, which is currently within you, the body of mankind which is the temporary tent of God; the new Kingdom of God is the new creation which is the new Godhead within the creation, which supercedes mankind, the lord of creatures and the current most high in the creation, the glorious Temple of God which will dwell on earth among mankind and will gain dominion over all creation visible and invisible.

For I tell you a sacred secret, “we shall not all fall asleep in death, but at the sound of the last trumpet, those who are joint heirs with Jesus, will be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, from bodies of corruptible matter, into glorious bodies of incorruptible light as that seen by Paul, from which body of blinding light, he heard the words, “I am Jesus of Nazareth.”

From the Book of Enoch the prophet, 108: 11, spoken by the only man to have been redeemed from the previous world. The only exception of all mankind to have ascended to the ends of all things, and who came down and revealed himself through his obedient servant, the man Jesus.

“And now I will summon the spirits of the good who belong to the generation of light, and I will transform those who were born in darkness, who in the flesh were not recompensed with such honour as their faithfulness deserved. And I will bring forth in shining light, those who have loved my Holy name (Who I Am), and I will seat each on the throne of their honour. And they shall be resplendent for times without number.”

Let us explain that there is no scope to their inheritance, and that they will inherit at the close of the sixth day, or the sixth period of one thousand years from the day in which Adam ate of the forbidden fruit and died in that day at the age of 930. For It is then, the day of the Lord, the Sabbath; that the chosen number of Jews and Gentiles will take the thrones that have been prepared for them and rule the whole world.

Great! And how does Matt. 28:17 figure in to this concept? It doesn't.
Point made.
Next!

 

[S-word]

Quote...sojourner...Great! And how does Matt. 28:17 figure in to this concept? It doesn't.

Correct, Matthew is but one paragraph in the story of our inheritance. It is the whole of the sacrifical lamb that we are commanded to eat, taking care not to break off just those peices that titilate the taste buds of our minds, who reveals to us the inheritance that we, who believe the words of our saviour as spoken through the mouth of his obedient servant Jesus, who he has risen to life as the first of those who are to inherit the throne of Godhead.

Why are you so set on trying to confine this debate to the one Book of Matthew?

 

[Heneni]

Which brings me to my next point.

Will any 'brother' inherit, that would fight about the inheritance with another brother?

Hmmmm.....:cover:

 

[blackout]

Christians: Joint heirs with jesus... what does it mean...?

It means we're all equal in our Oneness as/with gOd.

One with gOd as Y'shua, or ANY Christ figure, is One with gOd.

 

[blackout]

Which brings me to my next point.

Will any 'brother' inherit, that would fight about the inheritance with another brother?

Hmmmm.....:cover:

Why would anyone fight about what's uniquely their own?
or what's uniquely someone elses?

The point woud be....?

 

[blackout]

also.... better go after here/NOW ...
whatever it is you would like to find in your own reality
anywhere else.... or at any other point in time.

 

[S-word]

Which brings me to my next point.

Will any 'brother' inherit, that would fight about the inheritance with another brother? Hmmmm.....:cover:

Were the dishonest money changers, the brothers of Christ and Joint heirs to the promise that belongs to Jesus and those who are gathered to him?

Were the Pharisees of whom Jesus said, "Oh you generation of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak good things etc. Are these also brothers of Jesus and joint heirs in the promise?

I once belonged to the mother church who sits on the seven hills of Rome and who cliams to have a spiritual rulership over the temporal kings of the earth. She who claims that Jesus did come as a human being like we, his brothers who are born of two physical parents. But I heard and have obeyed the words of God in Revelation 18: 4-8.

Come out of her my people, do not share in her sin
You must not share her punishment, for her Judgment day has come
Her sins are piled to heaven and god recalls her evil ways
She says I am no widow and i'll never see the grave
Because of that, in just one day disease will strike her down
And plagues and famine she'll recieve till finally she's burned
Pay her back twofold for all that she has done
Fill her cup as she filled yours, but make it twice as strong
For all the glory she has claimed and all her luxury
Must be repaid this very day, with pain and mysery.

 

[sojourner]

Quote...sojourner...Great! And how does Matt. 28:17 figure in to this concept? It doesn't.

Correct, Matthew is but one paragraph in the story of our inheritance. It is the whole of the sacrifical lamb that we are commanded to eat, taking care not to break off just those peices that titilate the taste buds of our minds, who reveals to us the inheritance that we, who believe the words of our saviour as spoken through the mouth of his obedient servant Jesus, who he has risen to life as the first of those who are to inherit the throne of Godhead.

Why are you so set on trying to confine this debate to the one Book of Matthew?

I'm not. I'm merely responding to Charity's earlier inclusion of this particular Matthean passage in her argument.

 

[sojourner]

Which brings me to my next point.

Will any 'brother' inherit, that would fight about the inheritance with another brother?

Hmmmm.....:cover:

I've not noticed a fight about the inheritance. I've noticed an argument with regard to the inclusion of a particular biblical passage into the discussion that I felt didn't belong there...

 

[sojourner]

Why would anyone fight about what's uniquely their own?
or what's uniquely someone elses?

The point woud be....?

That's what allows the argument to start in the first place: The erroneous assumption that inheritance is personal and not communal. It's not individual people that inherit -- it's the human race that inherits.

 

[S-word]

That's what allows the argument to start in the first place: The erroneous assumption that inheritance is personal and not communal. It's not individual people that inherit -- it's the human race that inherits.

So you believe that it is the entire human race who are Joint heirs with Jesus the cornerstone to the New Temple in which our God and Father will dwell among mankind and not within.

Are you saying that it is of no use to join the race for the prize that is offered to those who will overcome and endure to the end? Why bother, for you believe that there is no personal inheritance?

Not that we shall all fall asleep in death, for some shall be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, from bodies of corruptible matter into glorious bodies of incorruptible light as was the brilliant and blinding body of Jesus of Nazareth who met Paul on the road to Damascus.

When Enoch, at the age of 365, the number of days in a calendar year, was escorted to the end of all things, (The only exception of all mankind to have ascended to heaven) and was stripped of his mortal garments and anointed with the sweet smelling ointment of God which shone with the brilliance of the sun, and there, as one of the glorious ones, while clothed and girded in fire, he was to serve God before the body of Adam into all eternity.

Enoch was then commanded to write down the soul of all who would ever live and to record the position for each soul into all eternity, for all souls are prepared for eternity. In the resurrection, all will rise from the dead and receive the body that is prepared for them in the new order; the body that they have earned in their life on earth, from maggot to moons and stars etc. which body do you hope to inherit in the new heavens and earth that God will create for us after he has called all creation back to himself?

 

[blackout]

......which body do you hope to inherit in the new heavens and earth that God will create for us after he has called all creation back to himself?

I'm personally thinking my age 32 body would be real nice...
with my age 41 "maturity" and incomparably unique UltraViolet Style added. :flirt:

I would like also to retain my musical skill,
after all I worked DAMNed hard for it.

Also... I would like my hair to be NATURALLY Purple.
It's kind of alot of work dying it every 3-4 weeks.
(though totally worth it)


:yes:

Thanks for asking. hehe

 

[Heneni]

So you believe that it is the entire human race who are Joint heirs with Jesus the cornerstone to the New Temple in which our God and Father will dwell among mankind and not within.

Are you saying that it is of no use to join the race for the prize that is offered to those who will overcome and endure to the end? Why bother, for you believe that there is no personal inheritance?

Not that we shall all fall asleep in death, for some shall be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, from bodies of corruptible matter into glorious bodies of incorruptible light as was the brilliant and blinding body of Jesus of Nazareth who met Paul on the road to Damascus.

When Enoch, at the age of 365, the number of days in a calendar year, was escorted to the end of all things, (The only exception of all mankind to have ascended to heaven) and was stripped of his mortal garments and anointed with the sweet smelling ointment of God which shone with the brilliance of the sun, and there, as one of the glorious ones, while clothed and girded in fire, he was to serve God before the body of Adam into all eternity.

Enoch was then commanded to write down the soul of all who would ever live and to record the position for each soul into all eternity, for all souls are prepared for eternity. In the resurrection, all will rise from the dead and receive the body that is prepared for them in the new order; the body that they have earned in their life on earth, from maggot to moons and stars etc. which body do you hope to inherit in the new heavens and earth that God will create for us after he has called all creation back to himself?

I was thinking about this...about the 'prize' spoken of in the bible. A prize is something you work for. You train as an athlete, you run the race, you get first place or second, or whatever, but it is your prize. We know that we cannot serve god for what he can give us. We will be sorely dissapointed if we did. So the prize is not the inheritance i think. The prize is knowing that we have done what god wanted us to do on earth. That is the prize, a thumbs up from god.

The inheritance is another thing all together. Its not a prize. Its an estate that legally belongs to someone. I for one believe it belongs to the sons of god....but that it does not belong to those 'who are snatched from the fire'.

Heneni

 

[blackout]

I was thinking about this...about the 'prize' spoken of in the bible. A prize is something you work for. You train as an athlete, you run the race, you get first place or second, or whatever, but it is your prize. We know that we cannot serve god for what he can give us. We will be sorely dissapointed if we did. So the prize is not the inheritance i think. The prize is knowing that we have done what god wanted us to do on earth. That is the prize, a thumbs up from god.

The inheritance is another thing all together. Its not a prize. Its an estate that legally belongs to someone. I for one believe it belongs to the sons of god....but that it does not belong to those 'who are snatched from the fire'.

Heneni

And also an e'state of BEing, no?

(blame it on my husbands mexican accent)

 

[sojourner]

So you believe that it is the entire human race who are Joint heirs with Jesus the cornerstone to the New Temple in which our God and Father will dwell among mankind and not within.

Well...God did become one of us (human), not one of them (not-human).

Are you saying that it is of no use to join the race for the prize that is offered to those who will overcome and endure to the end? Why bother, for you believe that there is no personal inheritance?

If the kingdom has come near, then it is today that matters, not the sweet bye-and-bye. It is useful to us to join the community of believers, if for no other reason than the support we receive, the kinship we share, and the opportunity to serve today. As part of the community, we can start spending that inheritance right now.

the body that they have earned in their life on earth, from maggot to moons and stars etc. which body do you hope to inherit in the new heavens and earth that God will create for us after he has called all creation back to himself?

Earned??? what in the world does grace have to do with stuff we earn? Grace has to do with what God does in us.