John Saw a New Heaven and New Earth

[EndtimesDeut32/70AD]

Couple things I see Henry excluding.

Gal 4 description of the New Jerusalem indicates that it is associated with the new covenant [the blessing to the second son] and contrasted against the mosaic covenant.

It is called a new covenant only as contrast to the mosaic, old covenant] ; new heavens [ordinances] new earth [domain] See Job 38:33; new temple and NEW Jerusalem... i.e. the collection of NEW ordinances and instructions of Christ and freedom and Love and approval from the Spirit.

Job 38:33 Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?

22For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

23But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

24Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai,[mosaic] which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

25For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is,[then yet was] and is in bondage with her children.

26But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

It says that the Jerusalem above is the mother, not the future, of us all.

Secondly Henry misses that in the Hebrews passage it says that we are not come to a mount [or city] that can be touched. [not a physical city]

18 For ye are NOT come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest,

22But ye are [present tense of 60 AD] come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, [cannot be touched; non-physical] and to an innumerable company of angels,

24And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

26Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven.

27And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken [non physical things] may remain.

28Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:

This type of missing the context occurs when one seeks out scripture to support concepts and perspectives rather than doing inductive study and including the historical time context and original audience of the letters.

Written in @ 60 Ad these removing of things which are shaken as things that are made, can only refer to the temple, ordinances, commands and elements of the mosaic covenant which though rendered ineffective had yet to be confirmed ineffective and 'ended' by their removal which would thus also confirm the favor of the kingdom of the saints of Christ as described in Dan 7.

The new covenant, like the foretype of the mosaic, old was established and confirmed with a 40 yr process. He shook the earth at the cross when his blood covered the earth even affecting the temple and the house of the Sanhedrian; and then once more the during the removal of things that were made; I.E. the temple.. {Isaiah 66:1,2]

1Thus saith the LORD, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?

2For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the LORD: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.

If the 'new Jerusalem' is not here presently; neither can the new covenant be!! and thus we or they are yet in the 'old' conditional covenant. Or we are in adultery with kingdoms which resemble mosaic covenant principles.

And that may be the stumbling stone in that some still pine for the wrong glory of the wrong covenant. Or they pine for a physical utopia rather than live in the present relational utopia of the new covenant and the present manifestation of life with the Creator and attempt to effect a better next generation.

In Revelation, when the New Heavens, new earth, new Jerusalem are mentioned; these are words of contrast against the principles and ordinances of the old, mosaic covenant. They are not NEW and future to us who have recieved; [unless we have not yet recieved] but were New to the Jewish apostles and the world mindset who lived during the time of the last generation of the old.

In Jeremiah 31, the 'new' covenant was promised to be 'not like' the mosaic "old" covenant. It is New only in contrast against the old covenant. That's what the writer of Hebrews affirms when he says that in stating a 'new' covenant, God through Jeremiah was delcaring the former [the mosiac coveant] OLD. It had been prophesied to be a temporal and inferior coveanant right when Moses gave it. It was 'broken' even at that time.

The same with the words New Heaven, new earth and new Jerusalem. They are words of contrast against the heavens [ordinances and temple] and earth of God's previous workings through the negative mosiac covenant. This includes the mention of the new heavens and earth in 2 Peter and in the end of Revelation when the things that were made [even made and permitted by his hands {Isaiah 66:1-3] were removed.

2 Peter 2 associates Sodom and Gommorah with Noahs flood. Without mentioning the name of Jerusalem or Judea or the temple; Peter says that the elementary things of the mosaic covenant heavens and earth [domain of judea] would burn with fire as Sodom/Gomorrah. He's talking about the destruction of the city and latter end of the mosaic covenant 'heavens and earth' which was yet to come upon them to whom he was writing.


Thirdly
John says that Revelation was about things which must shortly come to pass. If one rejects the 65 AD authorship they will miss the first century application of Revelation as the final transfer from the mosaic covenant to the ordinances and domain of the eternal covenant and the release and favor [Dan 7; 18,22,24-28] of the everlasting covenant peoples. This is what Henry does and insists that the city is U.S.; NYC or D.C. But Jerusalem was as Babylon and Egypt. The believers escaped out of Egypt [spiritually] when they escaped out of Jeruslaem and Judea across the Jordan [red sea]

If one's foundation is that Rev was written in 95 AD, then 'shortly come to pass' must be forcefully translated out to thousands of years and culminate in something that is not presently fulfilled. This is the same as what the Pharisees did in shutting up the present tense kingdom of God.

Sorry I won't have time to interact further; as some of these things have been covered in previous discussions and repeated interaction will likely be frustrating and time consuming. I saw a few things that Henry was either ignoring or failing to consider that seemed simple, obvious and irrefutable to point out.

In summary,

The context of Gal 4 associates Jerusalem which is above [new] with the second son; the everlasting covenant of the Creator called "new" in contrast against the mosaic covenant; not a future utopia.

Heb 12 has context which says that New Jerusalem was being recieved by them [his original audience] and that it cannot be touched; it is non physical.

Ones beliefs of the date of the writing of Revelation and it's intended audience as well as ones previous indoctrinations about Revelation and about one's hopes vs the Creators intentions with Life effect how one interprets it.

For example: Henry says that "The New heaven and New earth only comes in when all that are to be saved are saved, and not until". But I can't follow this unless one insists that Revelation is a still futurist book. The "new heavens and new earth" were first prophesied to those in Isaiahs time who were still within and under the mosiac covenant heavens and earth. They would be in contrast with the temporal ordinances and domain of the mosaic covenant. Several places in the OT indicate that his children of the everlasting covenant shall remain generation after generation; not 'till all who are to be saved come in".

That concept seems to be based on a false interpretation of Roman 11 and of the filling of the 'gentiles' and the subsequent 'saving' of all Israel.

There is the concept that of the increase of his government, there shall be no end; and that may be individually applied or progressively fulfilled. BUT, even so; the 'new heavens' and new earth' are not associated with that future event or hope; but as contrasted against the ordinances of the mosaic covenant heavens [ordinances and principles] and domain.

The new heavens and new earth in Rev 21 depict the restored individualized and free relationship and friendship with Creator God that Adam/Eve had in the old Garden, but with only one tree. It is a spiritual symblolism of life perfected [in status] in relationship with Creator God through his incarnation and being in Christ and confirmed through the removal of the old ways and domain.

[TheForgiven]

Joe, read it again, I didn't say the 'kingdom" is what we 'seek to come.' I said we 'seek God's 'city' to come.' We are the 'citizens' of the Kingdom/Household of God that resides in heaven.

The "city" and "kingdom" are the very same thing Henry. I'm not aware of God creating more than one kingdom besides the different kingdoms upon this earth. In heaven, there is only one kingdom, and it's called the kingdom of God. In the Old Covenant, God's kingdom existed, but with regards to its first principals, most of which served as a shadow or copy of the kingdom in its fulfillment; that is to say, the kingdom as it exists now, in the form of the Church. The New Jerusalem exists in heaven, AND on this earth. The Angels serve the kingdom in heaven for the earth; the Angels are stewards to guard and serve the salvation of souls within each generation. And thus we who abide on this earth serve the New Jerusalem from the earth. Therefore, the will of God, being for our sanctification, takes place on earth from heaven; both go hand-in-hand.

Established yes, but not completed as a corporate body (where all those to be saved are saved). Yes, here we are considered 'spiritually' (as an heir) in the New Jerusalem. But if not a heavenly 'city' of God, then how do you see the heavenly 'Jerusalem' you are to be a part of? Where will you reside?

As stated, the New Jerusalem exists in heaven and on earth; God's will in heaven and on earth at the same time. We serve the New Jerusalem as babies while on this earth. But in heaven, after we've passed from flesh to the spiritual body, we serve the New Jerusalem as Angels in heaven serving those upon the earth. So our duties and responsibilities never end. Some (not you) think eternity is nothing more than worshiping, drinking fruit juice, and eating from grape vines with a little cloud surfing (a little humor if it's okay). Just trying to keep the peace my friend.

You deny the existence of an actual 'city' of God confirmed in the passages I gave. The Kingdom of God consists of more than just the body of Christ as I stated in post#14. God's Kingdom consists of a'city,' and its inhabitants, God, Christ, angels, and Old and New Testament saints in which they dwell.

No I do not deny the existence of an actual city in the heavens; I believe it is living and active for the sole purpose of tending the fields; the earth is that field. But this is a "new moon" process without end. As the scripture says:

Isaiah 66:23
And it shall come to pass That from one New Moon to another, And from one Sabbath to another, All flesh shall come to worship before Me,' says the LORD.

The New Moon from each generation is without end. [note: "all flesh" doesn't mean every single human being; this is referring to the flesh of all races, and not limited to the Hebrews]

Of course Revelation is a vision given metaphorically and not to be taken in a strict literal sense, but nonetheless, it has a literal fulfillment. Are you not a literal and physical being? Yes. Are you not a part of God's Kingdom now? Yes. But for now spiritually, yet will it not become literal in time? YES! Or do you deny this?

This is what I refer to as the "Spiritual now, physical later" doctrine. This doctrine is not found in scripture. Rather, this doctrine was formulated based on the false concept of a restored Eden. Papais, a 2nd century false teacher is the one who formulated this false teaching. The Church questioned him where he received these oracles, and he claimed it was by word of mouth. But then many false teachers claimed oral Apostolic connection. Yet Papias had no scripture to back up his claims. He believed the same as most Futurists do today; the idea of a restore physical Jerusalem and a field of gardens to produce thousands and thousands of grape vines so that Christ can fulfill His statement, "I will not drink from the fruit of the vine until I drink it anew, in my Father's kingdom". Eusebius basically considered Papias to be a block head, denoting that Papias didn't understand that those passages were metaphoric and not literal.

Now, does this mean the kingdom is still being built? I do not believe that it is. The kingdom was established in the first century. The description and the dimensions of the NJ prove that this city is strictly Jewish. We became citizens of the kingdom through salvation, and thus fulfill within each generation the following:

Revelation 21:24
And the nations of those who are saved shall walk in its light, and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.

Revelation 21:26
And they shall bring the glory and the honor of the nations into it.

Revelation 21:24-26 applies to us, and to all future generations beginning from the first century. When we help those in need, we are in essence, bringing the glory of the nations into the city or kingdom of God.

Once more, we are the bride of Christ, and are the inhabitants of the city called the New Jerusalem. The city, the New Jerusalem 'as a whole' is called the Bride of Christ, the Lamb's wife. The Bride of Christ, does not consist of only her. Revelation tells us it is a city with other inhabitants that make up THE Kingdom of God (see above).

The city is the spiritual aspect of God's kingdom which we know as the Church. The Church of the first born exists in heaven, as it does on earth. But we, while on this earth, are unlearned children trying to attain to perfection so that we may abide in the heavenly Jerusalem; the earth is our planting field; our learning center. We become inhabitants of the kingdom by being born of the Holy Spirit. Remember that the gates are open. This means Jerusalem is not subject to attack. And we, the nations, bring our glory into her. So although we do not travel to physical Jerusalem to worship the Lord (as was required by Gentile converts annually in the Old Covenant), we enter Jerusalem by our services performed in the Church. We abide within Jerusalem always, and that without end, except our physical deaths on this earth, transferring from the temporary abode, to the eternal.

The New heaven and New earth only comes in when all that are to be saved are saved, and not until.

This is a false expectation that cannot be proven with scripture. There's no scripture that says salvation has a final goal or purpose. I previously quotes the prophesy from Isaiah that God's government shall never stop increasing. His government is eternal, and it's purpose is eternal. There is no such thing as a moment in time where salvation will no longer save any souls. Thus your statement "all that are to be saved are saved" is not correct. Now there was a limit on how many "elect" were to be saved, but this is not in reference to us, but to the "remnant" of the 12 Tribes of Israel. That was completed more than 2000 years ago; it was they who completed the New Jerusalem, thus giving reason to destroy the former Jerusalem.

Well how about that, Joe and I agree on something for a change! Yippee!!

Yes, that is certainly worth celebration. Cheers!

Disproving the prophecy on whether all prophecy has been fulfilled or not cuts both ways my friend.

The proof is in the text. The New Jerusalem is described as being strictly Jewish. Its pearls, and stones are all Jewish, originating from the 12 Tribes of Israel. We are the inhabitants that travel spiritually to Jerusalem (that cannot be touched as the author of Hebrews states), and make up the nations who are blessed by the "healing of the leaves for the nations".

Revelation 22:2
In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life, which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

The leaves are for our healing during times of distress and trouble. This has been the teaching of the Greek Orthodox Church since the 1st century. The "tree of life" is a visual of Christ Jesus. We, as Gentiles, are grafted into the tree of life by the Holy Spirit, thus enabling our adoption as sons/daughters. The waters flowing from the Throne represents the Holy Spirit. All of this came and was made possible by the faith of the early church standing fast despite widespread torture and martyrdom. Thus, the New Jerusalem is a picture of their faithfulness and steadfastness, all being Jewish of course. The 7 Churches of Asia were being shown that they were defending the New Jerusalem with their lives; that is why they were shown the vision; to let them know what they were fighting for.

By His death Jesus fulfilled the Law, he did not destroy it. The Law stands to those who are under it, the non-believers to this day, 'till heaven and earth pass away.' Under the NC we are either under Law or under Grace. If in Christ we are under Grace (Gal. 3:13), 'Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law---'; if not we are judged under the Law. Rom 2:14 'For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves.' (Read Romans chapter 2).

He most certainly did destroy it, although not at the cross. The Law did not pass until it was completely destroyed in 70AD. Remember the Passover? Jesus fulfilled the Passover, but they would not receive the 10 commandments until 50 days later after being led out of Egypt. The same with Jesus; the law was introduced to the Apostles (Holy Spirit) on Pentecost, 50 days after His resurrection. But they would not enter into the promised land until 40 years later; this came in 70AD. By 70AD, the laws of God as received by the Holy Spirit, also known as the Laws of Christ, reached its fulfillment, and spread beyond ancient Israel, into the lands of the Gentiles, where the Church began striking down the nations with her King in the front leading His armies to eat the flesh of kings, birds, horsemen, the great and small, etc. Just as Joshua led the Hebrews into the promised land to begin cleaning out the sinners of the land, Christ led the Christians out of Israel into the outer nations to begin purging the land of its sinners. But instead of fighting with spears and swords, they fought with plowshares and pruning hooks (figuratively speaking); farming my friend. By planting seeds in the hearts of men about the Gospels, and overtaking the Beast and his kingdom.

For the unbeliever: Gal.5:4, 'Christ has become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.' It does not matter whether one falls back to the law or follows the law, they are not under Grace but under the law, and shall be judged accordingly. So in the NC age, beginning at Pentecost, Law and Grace continue 'till heaven and earth pass away.'

Correct, except this did indeed pass away in 70AD. Going back to my explanation of the Passover, the law was introduced to the Hebrews 50 days after they were set free from Egypt. But they did not enter the promised land (new earth) until 40 years later. The same with the Apostles and their disciples. Thus, the old earth passed away in 70AD. Now of course, I know you're still referring to the earth as the entire globe. But traditionally speaking, the "earth" was in reference to ancient Israel, while the "seas" represented the Gentiles. Israel was considered the "heart of the earth", and the nations were outside of the center of the earth. Remember, they did not know that the earth was a round globe; this was explained before. So what was expected to pass during Paul's day, reaches its fulfillment by 70AD; 40 years after receiving the Laws of Christ on Pentecost.

Heaven and earth passed away with a huge roar and raging fire, in 70AD.

I believe this is enough for now my good friend. I hope this finds you well.

God bless and peace to you all.

Joe

[TheForgiven]

Couple things I see Henry excluding.

Gal 4 description of the New Jerusalem indicates that it is contrary to the mosaic covenant thus associated with the new covenant.

It is called a new covenant [contrary to the mosaic, old covenant] ; new heavens [ordinances] new earth [domain] See Job 38:33; new temple and NEW Jerusalem... i.e. the collection of NEW ordinances and freedom and Love and approval from the Spirit.




It says that the Jerusalem above is the mother, not the future, of us all.

Secondly Henry misses that in the Hebrews passage it says that we are not come to a mount [or city] that can be touched. [not a physical city]



This type of missing the context occurs when one seeks out scripture to support concepts and perspectives rather than doing inductive study and including the historical time context and original audience of the letters.

Written in @ 60 Ad these removing of things which are shaken as things that are made, can only refer to the temple, ordinances, commands and elements of the mosaic covenant which though rendered ineffective had yet to be confirmed ineffective and 'ended' by their removal which would thus also confirm the favor of the kingdom of the saints of Christ as described in Dan 7.

The new covenant, like the foretype of the mosaic, old was established and confirmed with a 40 yr process. He shook the earth at the cross when his blood covered the earth even affecting the temple and the house of the Sanhedrian; and then once more the during the removal of things that were made; I.E. the temple.. {Isaiah 66:1,2]
If the 'new Jerusalem' is not here presently; neither can the new covenant be!! and thus we or they are yet in the 'old' conditional covenant. Or we are in adultery with kingdoms which resemble mosaic covenant principles.

And that may be the stumbling stone in that some still pine for the wrong glory of the wrong covenant. Or they pine for a physical utopia rather than live in the present relational utopia of the new covenant and the present manifestation of life with the Creator and attempt to effect a better next generation.

In Revelation, when the New Heavens, new earth, new Jerusalem are mentioned; these are words of contrast against the principles and ordinances of the old, mosaic covenant. They are not NEW and future to us who have recieved; [unless we have not yet recieved] but were New to the Jewish apostles and the world mindset who lived during the time of the last generation of the old.

In Jeremiah 31, the 'new' covenant was promised to be 'not like' the mosaic "old" covenant. It is New only in contrast against the old covenant. That's what the writer of Hebrews affirms when he says that in stating a 'new' covenant, God through Jeremiah was delcaring the former [the mosiac coveant] OLD. It had been prophesied to be a temporal and inferior coveanant right when Moses gave it. It was 'broken' even at that time.

The same with the words New Heaven, new earth and new Jerusalem. They are words of contrast against the heavens [ordinances and temple] and earth of God's previous workings through the negative mosiac covenant. This includes the mention of the new heavens and earth in 2 Peter and in the end of Revelation when the things that were made [even made and permitted by his hands {Isaiah 66:1-3] were removed.

2 Peter 2 associates Sodom and Gommorah with Noahs flood. Without mentioning the name of Jerusalem or Judea or the temple; Peter says that the elementary things of the mosaic covenant heavens and earth [domain of judea] would burn with fire as Sodom/Gomorrah. He's talking about the destruction of the city and latter end of the mosaic covenant 'heavens and earth' which was yet to come upon them to whom he was writing.


Thirdly
John says that Revelation was about things which must shortly come to pass. If one rejects the 65 AD authorship they will miss the first century application of Revelation as the final transfer from the mosaic covenant to the ordinances and domain of the eternal covenant and the release and favor [Dan 7; 18,22,24-28] of the everlasting covenant peoples. This is what Henry does and insists that the city is Rome. But Jerusalem was as Babylon and Egypt. The believers escaped out of Egypt [spiritually] when they escaped out of Jeruslaem and Judea across the Jordan [red sea]

If one's foundation is that Rev was written in 95 AD, then 'shortly come to pass' must be forcefully translated out to thousands of years and culminate in something that is not presently fulfilled. This is the same as what the Pharisees did in shutting up the present tense kingdom of God.

Sorry I won't have time to interact further; as some of these things have been covered in previous discussions and repeated interaction will likely be frustrating and time consuming. I saw a few things that Henry was either ignoring or failing to consider that seemed simple, obvious and irrefutable to point out.

In summary,

The context of Gal 4 associates Jerusalem which is above [new] with the second son; the everlasting covenant of the Creator called "new" in contrast against the mosaic covenant; not a future utopia.

Heb 12 has context which says that New Jerusalem was being recieved by them [his original audience] and that it cannot be touched; it is non physical.

Ones beliefs of the date of the writing of Revelation and it's intended audience as well as ones previous indoctrinations about Revelation and about one's hopes vs the Creators intentions with Life effect how one interprets it.

For example: Henry says that "The New heaven and New earth only comes in when all that are to be saved are saved, and not until". But I can't follow this unless one insists that Revelation is a still futurist book. The "new heavens and new earth" were first prophesied to those in Isaiahs time who were still within and under the mosiac covenant heavens and earth. They would be in contrast with the temporal ordinances and domain of the mosaic covenant. Several places in the OT indicate that his children of the everlasting covenant shall remain generation after generation; not 'till all who are to be saved come in".

That concept seems to be based on a false interpretation of Roman 11 and of the filling of the 'gentiles' and the subsequent 'saving' of all Israel.

There is the concept that of the increase of his government, there shall be no end; and that may be individually applied or progressively fulfilled. BUT, even so; the 'new heavens' and new earth' are not associated with that future event or hope; but as contrasted against the ordinances of the mosaic covenant heavens [ordinances and principles] and domain.

The new heavens and new earth in Rev 21 depict the restored individualized and free relationship and friendship with Creator God that Adam/Eve had in the old Garden, but with only one tree. It is a spiritual symblolism of life perfected [in status] in relationship with Creator God through his incarnation and being in Christ and confirmed through the removal of the old ways and domain.

EXCELLENT POST BROTHER! EXCELLENT INDEED!

Joe

[Twospirits]

EndtimesDeut32/70AD wrote,

Couple things I see Henry excluding.

Gal 4 description of the New Jerusalem indicates that it is contrary to the mosaic covenant thus associated with the new covenant.


22For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

23But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

24Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai,[mosaic] which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

25For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is,[then yet was] and is in bondage with her children.

26But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

It says that the Jerusalem above is the mother, not the future, of us all.

Correct, the 'Jerusalem above,' is the mother of us all. Therefore how can the earthly body of Christ BE the mother/Jerusalem/city above? Did the body of Christ give birth to herself? No, the Jerusalem above is the mother giving birth (being built; Eph. 2:20; 1 Peter 2:9) until the last to be saved is saved.

Secondly Henry misses that in the Hebrews passage it says that we are not come to a mount [or city] that can be touched. [not a physical city]

True, until then we are considered 'spiritually' (as an heir) in the New Jerusalem above. The heavenly Kingdom, which includes the body of Christ, in its 'completion' is yet future. In the 'here and now' it is still growing.

Written in @ 60 Ad these removing of things which are shaken as things that are made, can only refer to the temple, ordinances, ----

The 'removing of things which are shaken' most certainly CAN refer to things other than the 70 A.D. Temple and its ordinances. For example, like all rule, dominion and authority which will come to pass as 1 Cor. 15: 24 prophecies.

If the 'new Jerusalem' is not here presently; neither can the new covenant be!! and thus we or they are yet in the 'old' conditional covenant.

The New Jerusalem, the mother is not here but above. Under the NC we are either under Law or under Grace. If in Christ we are under Grace (Gal. 3:13), 'Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law---'; if not we are judged under the Law. Rom 2:14 'For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves.' (Read Romans chapter 2).

Sorry I won't have time to interact further; as some of these things have been covered in previous discussions and repeated interaction will likely be frustrating and time consuming. I saw a few things that Henry was either ignoring or failing to consider that seemed simple, obvious and irrefutable to point out.

Agreed, many things have already been discussed so there's no need of repeating them again. The things you pointed out here have not been ignored, nor did I fail to take them into consideration in my studies. I appreciate you bringing these points up here, and now they have been duly noted.

God bless---Twospirits

[Bob May]

Couple things I see Henry excluding.

Gal 4 description of the New Jerusalem indicates that it is associated with the new covenant [the blessing to the second son] and contrasted against the mosaic covenant.

It is called a new covenant only as contrast to the mosaic, old covenant] ; new heavens [ordinances] new earth [domain] See Job 38:33; new temple and NEW Jerusalem... i.e. the collection of NEW ordinances and instructions of Christ and freedom and Love and approval from the Spirit.




It says that the Jerusalem above is the mother, not the future, of us all.

Secondly Henry misses that in the Hebrews passage it says that we are not come to a mount [or city] that can be touched. [not a physical city]



This type of missing the context occurs when one seeks out scripture to support concepts and perspectives rather than doing inductive study and including the historical time context and original audience of the letters.

Written in @ 60 Ad these removing of things which are shaken as things that are made, can only refer to the temple, ordinances, commands and elements of the mosaic covenant which though rendered ineffective had yet to be confirmed ineffective and 'ended' by their removal which would thus also confirm the favor of the kingdom of the saints of Christ as described in Dan 7.

The new covenant, like the foretype of the mosaic, old was established and confirmed with a 40 yr process. He shook the earth at the cross when his blood covered the earth even affecting the temple and the house of the Sanhedrian; and then once more the during the removal of things that were made; I.E. the temple.. {Isaiah 66:1,2]
If the 'new Jerusalem' is not here presently; neither can the new covenant be!! and thus we or they are yet in the 'old' conditional covenant. Or we are in adultery with kingdoms which resemble mosaic covenant principles.

And that may be the stumbling stone in that some still pine for the wrong glory of the wrong covenant. Or they pine for a physical utopia rather than live in the present relational utopia of the new covenant and the present manifestation of life with the Creator and attempt to effect a better next generation.

In Revelation, when the New Heavens, new earth, new Jerusalem are mentioned; these are words of contrast against the principles and ordinances of the old, mosaic covenant. They are not NEW and future to us who have recieved; [unless we have not yet recieved] but were New to the Jewish apostles and the world mindset who lived during the time of the last generation of the old.

In Jeremiah 31, the 'new' covenant was promised to be 'not like' the mosaic "old" covenant. It is New only in contrast against the old covenant. That's what the writer of Hebrews affirms when he says that in stating a 'new' covenant, God through Jeremiah was delcaring the former [the mosiac coveant] OLD. It had been prophesied to be a temporal and inferior coveanant right when Moses gave it. It was 'broken' even at that time.

The same with the words New Heaven, new earth and new Jerusalem. They are words of contrast against the heavens [ordinances and temple] and earth of God's previous workings through the negative mosiac covenant. This includes the mention of the new heavens and earth in 2 Peter and in the end of Revelation when the things that were made [even made and permitted by his hands {Isaiah 66:1-3] were removed.

2 Peter 2 associates Sodom and Gommorah with Noahs flood. Without mentioning the name of Jerusalem or Judea or the temple; Peter says that the elementary things of the mosaic covenant heavens and earth [domain of judea] would burn with fire as Sodom/Gomorrah. He's talking about the destruction of the city and latter end of the mosaic covenant 'heavens and earth' which was yet to come upon them to whom he was writing.


Thirdly
John says that Revelation was about things which must shortly come to pass. If one rejects the 65 AD authorship they will miss the first century application of Revelation as the final transfer from the mosaic covenant to the ordinances and domain of the eternal covenant and the release and favor [Dan 7; 18,22,24-28] of the everlasting covenant peoples. This is what Henry does and insists that the city is Rome. But Jerusalem was as Babylon and Egypt. The believers escaped out of Egypt [spiritually] when they escaped out of Jeruslaem and Judea across the Jordan [red sea]

If one's foundation is that Rev was written in 95 AD, then 'shortly come to pass' must be forcefully translated out to thousands of years and culminate in something that is not presently fulfilled. This is the same as what the Pharisees did in shutting up the present tense kingdom of God.

Sorry I won't have time to interact further; as some of these things have been covered in previous discussions and repeated interaction will likely be frustrating and time consuming. I saw a few things that Henry was either ignoring or failing to consider that seemed simple, obvious and irrefutable to point out.

In summary,

The context of Gal 4 associates Jerusalem which is above [new] with the second son; the everlasting covenant of the Creator called "new" in contrast against the mosaic covenant; not a future utopia.

Heb 12 has context which says that New Jerusalem was being recieved by them [his original audience] and that it cannot be touched; it is non physical.

Ones beliefs of the date of the writing of Revelation and it's intended audience as well as ones previous indoctrinations about Revelation and about one's hopes vs the Creators intentions with Life effect how one interprets it.

For example: Henry says that "The New heaven and New earth only comes in when all that are to be saved are saved, and not until". But I can't follow this unless one insists that Revelation is a still futurist book. The "new heavens and new earth" were first prophesied to those in Isaiahs time who were still within and under the mosiac covenant heavens and earth. They would be in contrast with the temporal ordinances and domain of the mosaic covenant. Several places in the OT indicate that his children of the everlasting covenant shall remain generation after generation; not 'till all who are to be saved come in".

That concept seems to be based on a false interpretation of Roman 11 and of the filling of the 'gentiles' and the subsequent 'saving' of all Israel.

There is the concept that of the increase of his government, there shall be no end; and that may be individually applied or progressively fulfilled. BUT, even so; the 'new heavens' and new earth' are not associated with that future event or hope; but as contrasted against the ordinances of the mosaic covenant heavens [ordinances and principles] and domain.

The new heavens and new earth in Rev 21 depict the restored individualized and free relationship and friendship with Creator God that Adam/Eve had in the old Garden, but with only one tree. It is a spiritual symblolism of life perfected [in status] in relationship with Creator God through his incarnation and being in Christ and confirmed through the removal of the old ways and domain.

Excellent post,
Bob

[Twospirits]

TheForgiven wrote,

The "city" and "kingdom" are the very same thing Henry.

When viewing it as a whole yes, but I was bringing out the fact, and gave scriptural passages that show “in” God's heavenly Kingdom is a “city” in which He rules from. That is the point in fact I was making.

The New Jerusalem exists in heaven, AND on this earth.

No, the New Jerusalem exists in heaven and we on earth have come to it spiritually.

"Ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels." (Heb. 12:22).

“For here (the earthly city Jerusalem) have we no continuing city, but we seek one (a city) "to come." (Heb. 13:14).

Joe, if we are the “city," the New Jerusalem and it exists here and now, why would we seek “one to come?” You (preterists) say it wasn't ready until 70 A.D., but the writer of Hebrews says “ye are come unto---the city—the heavenly Jerusalem,” from the time of Pentecost. This text also lets us know that we are NOT New Jerusalem but are a “part” of the city/kingdom as a whole.

The Angels serve the kingdom in heaven for the earth; the Angels are stewards to guard and serve the salvation of souls within each generation. And thus we who abide on this earth serve the New Jerusalem from the earth.

According to your paradigm, if “we are” the New Jerusalem, then what you are saying is “we (New Jerusalem) serve ourselves” and not the Lord and his Kingdom. Would this not be considered idolatry in God's eyes? I would think so!

No I do not deny the existence of an actual city in the heavens; I believe it is living and active for the sole purpose of tending the fields; the earth is that field.

Then you are contradicting yourself and your position. By admitting that it exists in heaven you need to change your position on “who” you see the New Jerusalem to be here on earth for it contradicts scripture. You say it is the body of Christ, scripture says it is a heavenly city/kingdom (as a whole), and we are "citizens" of God's household/kingdom.

Now, does this mean the kingdom is still being built? I do not believe that it is. The kingdom was established in the first century. The description and the dimensions of the NJ prove that this city is strictly Jewish. We became citizens of the kingdom through salvation, and thus fulfill within each generation the following:

What? Strictly Jewish? So the apostles (and Gentiles) didn't need “salvation” from 30-70 A.D. but post 70 A.D. to this day we do? Paul says to Jew and Gentile in Eph. 2:19 that “ye are fellow citizens with the saints and OF the household of God.” Paul goes on in verse 20 to tell us what the HOUSE (New Jerusalem seen in Revelation) consists of. It (the WHOLE structure of Jew and Gentiles) is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone. (21) In whom ALL the building fitly framed TOGETHER GROWETH unto a holy temple in the Lord.” From the bottom up, the house, seen as the New Jerusalem in Revelation consists of Jew AND Gentile saints; and still GROWING today.

And we, the nations, bring our glory into her. So although we do not travel to physical Jerusalem to worship the Lord (as was required by Gentile converts annually in the Old Covenant), we enter Jerusalem by our services performed in the Church.

As I noted above, according to your paradigm this constitutes idolatry; “serving ourselves” rather than God.

This is a false expectation that cannot be proven with scripture. There's no scripture that says salvation has a final goal or purpose. I previously quotes the prophesy from Isaiah that God's government shall never stop increasing. His government is eternal, and it's purpose is eternal. There is no such thing as a moment in time where salvation will no longer save any souls. Thus your statement "all that are to be saved are saved" is not correct.

God's government is eternal yes, but not salvation. This truth can be seen in the building of the New Jerusalem. In expressing the house of God, the New Jerusalem, Paul, Peter and John expresses it in metaphoric language as a “temple, house, city “being built.” Well common sense tells us that sooner or later it's building would come to “completion, an end." Even you hold that the building was completed in 70 A.D. In this post I'm answering.

We are the inhabitants that travel spiritually to Jerusalem (that cannot be touched as the author of Hebrews states), and make up the nations who are blessed by the "healing of the leaves for the nations".

Until all is fulfilled what you say is correct, we agree again!

He most certainly did destroy it, although not at the cross. The Law did not pass until it was completely destroyed in 70AD.

Joe, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” (Mt. 5:17-18).

But traditionally speaking, the "earth" was in reference to ancient Israel, while the "seas" represented the Gentiles. Israel was considered the "heart of the earth", and the nations were outside of the center of the earth. Remember, they did not know that the earth was a round globe; this was explained before. So what was expected to pass during Paul's day, reaches its fulfillment by 70AD; 40 years after receiving the Laws of Christ on Pentecost.

Heaven and earth passed away with a huge roar and raging fire, in 70AD.

The heaven and earth referred to in Rev. 21:1 and what Jesus refers to in Mt. 5:17-18 has not occurred as yet. It will occur when the building of the New Jerusalem is complete as seen in Rev. 21:10, the bride, the Lamb's wife.

“And there shall in no wise enter into it anything that defileth, neither (whatsoever) worketh abomination, or (maketh) a lie; but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life” (Rev. 21:27). Can we honestly say that nothing that defiles is “entering into it” today if we be the New Jerusalem?

I believe this is enough for now my good friend. I hope this finds you well.

Same here, be well.

God bless---Twospirits

[TheForgiven]

When viewing it as a whole yes, but I was bringing out the fact, and gave scriptural passages that show 'in' God's heavenly Kingdom is a 'city' in which He rules from. That is the point in fact I was making.

Yes, there is a city in heaven and that's where the saints who have passed on reside. The problem with our discussion is that you view this heavenly city as a future city that is to literally descend upon this earth. Perhaps not in the fashion as Revelation describes (1,500 mile with six equal sides), but you still expect this city to descend. The problem then becomes with the interpretation of its dimensions. Since Revelation is telling us a story with a conclusion of the Holy Mountain (Hebrews), also referred to as the heavenly Jerusalem, being delivered as Christ says, "it will not come in such a way with ones careful expectation), then this contradicts your theory that Jerusalem must descend from heaven. I've shown you in scripture that when a demon has been cast out, the kingdom from heaven comes upon them. That is how the kingdom comes from above, into our hearts, and not on the earth. This is scripturally factual. Jesus never said that the kingdom would descend in visible fashion; he specifically stated that this kingdom is a spiritual kingdom. But Futurists believe in a non-biblical theory of "spiritual now, physical later", yet there's absolutely no proof of this man-made doctrine.

No, the New Jerusalem exists in heaven and we on earth have come to it [U]spiritually.

That's the same thing. The New Jerusalem exists in heaven, and on earth. But on earth, it exists within our hearts, and not a clump of land, as Futurists expect. Again, this is the EXACT same mistake made by first century Jews. The Jews expected a physical kingdom to be bestowed upon them, yet there was a physical kingdom that existed among them; that kingdom was the spiritual kingdom of the Church. We are the Church and that's how Jerusalem exists on earth. So it's the same thing.

"Ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels." (Heb. 12:22).

EXACTLY! So my point has been proven. It exists now, just as you've shown in Hebrews, so why do you expect it to exist again later, as though it does not exist on this earth yet? Could it be as I've been saying? You expect Jerusalem to exist in a future fashion OTHER THAN the Church?

'For here (the earthly city Jerusalem) have we no continuing city, but we seek one (a city) "to come." (Heb. 13:14).

Exactly! This was written prior to 70AD. The city that was to come was not yet completed; it was still being built. Just as Joshua led them into the promised land to build a city, the Apostles built a city that was to rule the entire world; not rule as the heathen once did, but as God expects; a kingdom of love, hope, and grace; a kingdom that resides within our hearts, and not on a geographical location.

Joe, if we are the 'city," the New Jerusalem and it exists here and now, why would we seek 'one to come?' You (preterists) say it wasn't ready until 70 A.D., but the writer of Hebrews says 'ye are come unto---the city—the heavenly Jerusalem,' from the time of Pentecost. This text also lets us know that we are NOT New Jerusalem but are a 'part' of the city/kingdom as a whole.

We do not seek one to come as we are the generation after 70AD; more than 2000 years now. The New Jerusalem has existed since 70AD. Prior to that, it was still being built according to the foundations described in Revelation, with each symbolic stone, and/or pearl representing the faith and purity of the early church. We enter into what they built. And what they built was completed by 70AD, when the former Jerusalem was purged and destroyed.

According to your paradigm, if 'we are' the New Jerusalem, then what you are saying is 'we (New Jerusalem) serve ourselves' and not the Lord and his Kingdom. Would this not be considered idolatry in God's eyes? I would think so!

I fail to see your logic in this assumption. How is serving God and His Christ within the Church (Jerusalem) idolatry? I'll leave this one alone for now until further clarification.

Then you are contradicting yourself and your position. By admitting that it exists in heaven you need to change your position on 'who' you see the New Jerusalem to be here on earth for it contradicts scripture. You say it is the body of Christ, scripture says it is a heavenly city/kingdom (as a whole), and we are "citizens" of God's household/kingdom.

"Thy will be done, on earth, as it is in heaven..." This is not a contradiction Henry. You seem to have a difficult time grasping that the heavenly Jerusalem exists on earth, and I believe it's because to you, Jerusalem cannot exist on earth unless it is a physical city that can literally be entered. Once again, this contradicts what the Lord taught the Apostles and the Scribes with regards to the kingdom. Many many times, the Lord said, "The Kingdom is like.....", meaning that the kingdom, not being physical with buildings and stones, is comparable to the many parables and examples He gave them. Don't you think that if the kingdom were to be a physical city upon this earth, that He would have told them where and what it would be? Surely He would have said, "in that day, I will build Jerusalem with walls made of gold, located on the current city, and all the nations will be required to travel to this city once per year, to worship me on my throne. And I will require my throne to be made of this type of stone....etc....etc." At now time did Jesus ever give a prediction of a heavenly city falling from heaven in physical form. As I've stated at the beginning of this thread, the New Jerusalem does not descend from heaven in physical form; it descends from heaven upon the nations who are being saved, in their hearts, and not their lands.

What? Strictly Jewish? So the apostles (and Gentiles) didn't need 'salvation' from 30-70 A.D. but post 70 A.D. to this day we do? Paul says to Jew and Gentile in Eph. 2:19 that 'ye are fellow citizens with the saints and OF the household of God.' Paul goes on in verse 20 to tell us what the HOUSE (New Jerusalem seen in Revelation) consists of. It (the WHOLE structure of Jew and Gentiles) is 'built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone. (21) In whom ALL the building fitly framed TOGETHER GROWETH unto a holy temple in the Lord.' From the bottom up, the house, seen as the New Jerusalem in Revelation consists of Jew AND Gentile saints; and still GROWING today.

You misunderstood me. The description of the New Jerusalem is of Jewish design. Each stone represents a Tribe of Israel. The Gentile Churches were grafted into the tree of life, but did not make up part of the visionary structure of the New Jerusalem. They are those who enter into the gates (spiritually) of the New Jerusalem. The actual building, however, is established by the Apostles. Remember at the beginning of Revelation, John sees a great magnitude; a sea of purified glass; this represents the Gentiles. The 144,000 sealed make up the New Jerusalem. And we, 2000 years later, are their children; their offspring.

As I noted above, according to your paradigm this constitutes idolatry; 'serving ourselves' rather than God.

This is highly illogical, to say the least. We do not "serve ourselves". Nay, we of the spirit, and who worship IN THE SPIRIT, worship God in the Spirit, in His Spiritual kingdom we call the Church. Church simply means "assembly", and when we gather in the name of the Lord Jesus, we are gathering in the assembly of God all mighty, to worship Him. How is this idolatry or serving ourselves?

God's government is eternal yes, but not salvation. This truth can be seen in the building of the New Jerusalem. In expressing the house of God, the New Jerusalem, Paul, Peter and John expresses it in metaphoric language as a 'temple, house, city 'being built.' Well common sense tells us that sooner or later it's building would come to 'completion, an end." Even you hold that the building was completed in 70 A.D. In this post I'm answering.

Be careful Henry. You'll note in Revelation that even when the New Jerusalem is perpetually established, there is an open invitation to partake of the gift of the waters of life that comes from the New Jerusalem. This water represents the free gift of the Holy Spirit. This has been the position of the Church (Greeks) since the very beginning. I can't speak for the Romans in this matter, but the Greek Churches know and understand that the waters that come from the New Jerusalem represents the Holy Spirit. And this water is given for anyone abiding outside of it's gates, and not allowed to enter therein, to partake for free. This is the gift of salvation, which is not limited or destined to end. Scripture does not agree with you.

Until all is fulfilled what you say is correct, we agree again!

Here's where you are mistaken. You assume that the offer for salvation unto eternal life has a limited time-span. Yet there's not proof in scripture to substantiate this belief. When you say, "all is finished", you assume that this is in reference to salvation. Can you prove this? Or is this merely your inferred assumption? I've already proven to you from Revelation, that the waters from the New Jerusalem are offered perpetually to anyone who desires to drink, and be given the right to enter into this spiritual city. Read it again and note the timing and the context.

Joe, 'Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled' (Mt. 5:17-18).

Yep! And that He did, and right on time. Christ fulfilled all the Law and the Prophets, beginning with His birth, and ending with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD; a nearly identical list of events that mimicked the Israelite s being set free from Egypt. Jesus fulfilled the Law and the prophets, and in 70AD, heaven and earth passed away with a huge roar; not as you expect it, but as Christ taught in according to Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21.

The heaven and earth referred to in Rev. 21:1 and what Jesus refers to in Mt. 5:17-18 has not occurred as yet. It will occur when the building of the New Jerusalem is complete as seen in Rev. 21:10, the bride, the Lamb's wife.

Nope! That is your assumption because you expect heaven and earth to literally be destroyed; the entire earth. Yet I've already proven to you that if John saw the complete destruction of the entire globe, then would not the Church have known that the earth was shaped in the form of the globe? Nope, what he saw was the destruction of the earth as they knew it; geographical Israel. The seas were dried up, indicating that no longer would the Church be surrounded by Gentile nations. And as you can see to this day, the Church is not surrounded by Gentile nations. For in nearly every nation, there exists a lamp that shines. From within every city, there exists a light and heart for the nearby inhabitants to see. Yes, even in destitute places in India, or the over-populated places in China; the fragrance of God is seen all over the world....a world without the sea to surround the earth.

'And there shall in no wise enter into it anything that defileth, neither (whatsoever) worketh abomination, or (maketh) a lie; but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life' (Rev. 21:27). Can we honestly say that nothing that defiles is 'entering into it' today if we be the New Jerusalem?

This is a spiritual truth that exists even to this day. Unless you partake of the free gift of life, you will in no way be permitted to enter into the kingdom of Christ. It is impossible. A sinner may attend Church. But without the gift of salvation, he is nothing more than a dead soul abiding outside of the gates of Jerusalem. Yet the gates remain open, awaiting him/her to take that step.

May all who call upon the name of the Lord, prove their salvation by saving even a single soul. Teach them of God's Jerusalem, and invite them to enter. Or else, sit by idly and await a future city; one that may never come as one would expect it. To those who have ears, may God bless you through and through. And to those without, may He open them for instruction.

God bless everyone.

Joe

[Twospirits]

TheForgiven wrote,

Yes, there is a city in heaven and that's where the saints who have passed on reside.

Good, so we agree that the Kingdom of God has an actual city where the body of Christ, the saints reside in. That the body of Christ is “not” the city itself, but a part of the city (New Jerusalem) called the bride the Lamb's wife.

I see you have misunderstood what I'm saying on HOW New Jerusalem comes down from heaven so my explanation will be highlighted in blue below.

The problem with our discussion is that you view this heavenly city as a future city that is to literally descend upon this earth. Perhaps not in the fashion as Revelation describes (1,500 mile with six equal sides), but you still expect this city to descend. The problem then becomes with the interpretation of its dimensions. Now that we agree there's a heavenly city, you fail to understand that we are in agreement on how the kingdom (as a whole) comes, but not the timing of it. It does not float down at some future time. It exists now in heaven and on earth, and continues to be built. You agree that the description of the city is given in metaphorical language yet you take the dimensions literally, why so? Though we may not understand its meaning, we need not take this literal and the other descriptions metaphorically, this is not proper exegesis.

The New Jerusalem exists in heaven, and on earth. But on earth, it exists within our hearts, and not a clump of land, as Futurists expect. ----------We are the Church and that's how Jerusalem exists on earth. Agreed, and the “part” of the Kingdom (New Jerusalem) that exists on earth spiritually is the body of Christ as the citizens of the heavenly city/kingdom Jerusalem.

EXACTLY! So my point has been proven. It exists now, just as you've shown in Hebrews, so why do you expect it to exist again later, as though it does not exist on this earth yet? Could it be as I've been saying? You expect Jerusalem to exist in a future fashion OTHER THAN the Church? [COLOR="Blue"]We have come to it spiritually until it is fully manifested as a reality in the new heaven new earth at the restoration of all things.[/COLOR

The New Jerusalem has existed since 70AD. Prior to that, it was still being built according to the foundations described in Revelation, with each symbolic stone, and/or pearl representing the faith and purity of the early church. We enter into what they built. And what they built was completed by 70AD, when the former Jerusalem was purged and destroyed. There is more to a house(city) than just its foundation. The foundation is what the “house” is built upon as described in Eph. 2:20. The foundation are the apostles, the building (metaphorically the framing, plumbing, electrical, roof, etc.) itself is made up of Old and New Testament saints, and continues to be built until it is finished. Now note in Rev 21 the description of New Jerusalem only describes its wall, its gates, and its foundations (Rev. 21:10-23) but not the “building” itself that metaphorically represents the citizens, the saints. That "construction" is not complete as they are given in a present and future tense (see Rev. 21:24-26). This is why the gates of the city remain open, that the way of salvation is still open here on earth, until the “house” is completed. Salvation ends with the coming of Christ (Rev. 22:20).

"Thy will be done, on earth, as it is in heaven..." This is not a contradiction Henry. You seem to have a difficult time grasping that the heavenly Jerusalem exists on earth, and I believe it's because to you, Jerusalem cannot exist on earth unless it is a physical city that can literally be entered. It (speaking of the city itself) spiritually exists on earth through the body of Christ. At this time “Thy Will” (the building of Jerusalem) is still being done on earth. --------------Don't you think that if the kingdom were to be a physical city upon this earth, that He would have told them where and what it would be? Jesus did to John, Rev. 1:1, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ--”

This is highly illogical, to say the least. We do not "serve ourselves". Nay, we of the spirit, and who worship IN THE SPIRIT, worship God in the Spirit, in His Spiritual kingdom we call the Church. Church simply means "assembly", and when we gather in the name of the Lord Jesus, we are gathering in the assembly of God all mighty, to worship Him. How is this idolatry or serving ourselves? When you insisted that the body of Christ IS the heavenly city itself, that there is no actual city of God where God resides in, then in reality, you are a “city unto yourselves” with no God residing within. You unintentionally therefore are “serving yourselves, glorifying yourselves” because the BOC is “not” the city “where God resides in.” The BOC make up the “citizens” of the city.

Here's where you are mistaken. You assume that the offer for salvation unto eternal life has a limited time-span. Yet there's not proof in scripture to substantiate this belief. When you say, "all is finished", you assume that this is in reference to salvation. Can you prove this? Or is this merely your inferred assumption? I've already proven to you from Revelation, that the waters from the New Jerusalem are offered perpetually to anyone who desires to drink, and be given the right to enter into this spiritual city. Read it again and note the timing and the context. Like I said above, the “building” of the New Jerusalem is still in construction, and will continue until its completed, and why the gates of the city remain open. Salvation ends with the coming of Christ in judgment upon the world.

Concerning this “end,” it is seen in scripture: Acts 2:17, “And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh;------(20)--before that great and notable day of the Lord come; (21) And it shall come to pass (to fulfillment), whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

Now preterists can argue that “the last days” ended in 70 A.D., that time being the “day of the Lord” according to them. But this would mean that God “ceased” pouring out his Spirit on “all flesh” at that time, ending salvation in 70 A.D. No one post 70 A.D. would be saved, yet preterists deny this. They believe and teach that the Spirit is still being poured out on the inhabitants of the world. The “last days,” the “pouring out of the Spirit,” the “calling on his name” are all tied together in their fulfillment. Therefore the “last days” continue until the Day of the Lord comes (1 Cor. 15:24, Christ's coming) and the building (growing) of the New Jerusalem is finished.

Nope! That is your assumption because you expect heaven and earth to literally be destroyed; the entire earth. I have never said that the entire heaven and earth would be destroyed, I have maintained it is to be restored, as scripture states “the restoration of all things.”------------The seas were dried up, indicating that no longer would the Church be surrounded by Gentile nations. The sea in scripture is a symbol for chaos, a principle of disorder, violence, or unrest that marks the old creation. The old world, with all its troubles and tumults, will have passed away. (1 Cor. 15:24; all rule, authority and power destroyed at Christ's coming).

This is a spiritual truth that exists even to this day. Joe, this “fulfillment” speaks future tense, here in the body of Christ it is not a fulfilled reality as yet. “And there shall in no wise enter into it anything that defileth, neither (whatsoever) worketh abomination, or (maketh) a lie; but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life” (Rev. 21:27). It will be fulfilled when Christ separates the tares from the wheat at his coming.

To those who have ears, may God bless you through and through. And to those without, may He open them for instruction. Amen!

God bless---Twospirits

[TheForgiven]

Rather than continue in a response to each point we make, I'll simply narrow it down to our differences.

We both agree that there is a heavenly Jerusalem as we speak. We both agree that it descends. The difference is I maintain that it has already descended, when the former temple was destroyed in 70AD. You maintain that Jerusalem is still being built.

Neither of us fully understands the meaning of the dimensions, but to me, it clearly shows the limitation of its construct being limited to a single race; the chosen nation of Israel, otherwise called "the elect", or the "remnant". We, as those who were grafted into the tree of life, do not make up any part of the New Jerusalem's construction; we are those who "spiritually" enter into the city by means of the Church while abiding on this earth. After death, we enter into the eternal city of God, also called the Church (Jerusalem).

IN short, Jerusalem is the Church; for they are one and the same. One abides on earth, while the other aspect abides in heaven. Those on earth attending Church are being prepared to enter eternity. So Jerusalem on earth is our training camp, while Jerusalem in heaven is what we're preparing to enter after death.

Now because you believe that Jerusalem is still being built, it's been more than 2,000 years now. Don't you believe that there's been far more souls saved spanning even since the time of Adam, for a small mass measuring 1,500 miles tall, wide, and long to construct?

In a nut shell, the New Jerusalem was built by the Apostles, with Christ Jesus as the corner stone. The different stones describe the 12 Tribes of Israel. This is a picture of the New Testament Church was established by the Apostles and their disciples. We are those who enter into the gates, again in spiritual fashion. Once we die, we become Angels serving as stewards of the kingdom, keeping watch over our assigned responsibilities, or perhaps soul. That's how I view it, and this is a never ending process. After all, heaven has no size limit, so why would their be a time-limit? There's nothing in scripture to indicate an end of God's offer for salvation; absolutely none.

Other than that, we must simply disagree, but I strongly believe you're usurping an understandable/traditional idea that is not entirely backed with scripture; it's all speculation, which again, I fully understand. So I don't fault you in any way. But if I made the choice of change and correction, then you can too. But the choice must be made by you, whether to continue in endless speculation, and curiosity, or to finally lay those aside in search of the truth; the CONTEXTUAL truth.

God bless.

Joe

[Twospirits]

TheForgiven wrote,

Rather than continue in a response to each point we make, I'll simply narrow it down to our differences.

We both agree that there is a heavenly Jerusalem as we speak. We both agree that it descends. The difference is I maintain that it has already descended, when the former temple was destroyed in 70AD. You maintain that Jerusalem is still being built.

The invitation of salvation goes out (Rev. 22:17), metaphorically to mean the heavenly building/city Jerusalem “still groweth” until the coming of Christ. Where its “descent” (restoration) will then be completed in the new heaven and earth.

Neither of us fully understands the meaning of the dimensions, but to me, it clearly shows the limitation of its construct being limited to a single race; the chosen nation of Israel, otherwise called "the elect", or the "remnant". We, as those who were grafted into the tree of life, do not make up any part of the New Jerusalem's construction; we are those who "spiritually" enter into the city by means of the Church while abiding on this earth. After death, we enter into the eternal city of God, also called the Church (Jerusalem).

The Inspired writings of the NT and Paul show you to be wrong, the whole structure/building/city is made up of both Jew and Gentile, with Jesus as the cornerstone and the apostles as its foundation. The epistle of Romans was written between 56-58 A.D., and the church was primarily made up of Gentiles. In Rom.11:16 forward, Paul explains the grafting in of Jew and Gentile. The “root” of the tree is the covenant promise to Abraham which included Jew and Gentile. The broken off branches refer to Israel individually, and the Gentiles as the grafted into the olive tree. Paul speaking to the Gentiles says in Rom. 12:5: So WE (This includes all here, Paul, the apostles, the Jews and Gentiles that make up the body of Christ), (being) many, are ONE BODY (building/city) in Christ, and every one members (a part) one of another.”

1 Cor. 12:13, “For by ONE Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether (we be) Jew or Gentiles, whether (we be) bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.”

Eph. 2:20-21, “And are being built* (#2026, epoikodomeó; to build upon) upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; (21) In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord.”

Whatever metaphor is used in their writings, whether of a body, of a temple, building, or city, they are all, Jew and Gentile alike, part of the whole structure, as scripture confirms.

Now because you believe that Jerusalem is still being built, it's been more than 2,000 years now. Don't you believe that there's been far more souls saved spanning even since the time of Adam, for a small mass measuring 1,500 miles tall, wide, and long to construct?

Did you fail to read this in my last post? “You agree that the description of the city is given in metaphorical language yet you take the dimensions literally, why so?” The description includes its dimensions which I take to have a different meaning other than literal. I take the measurements to symbolically mean the city is “limited” in its size/growth, and is not a limitless never-ending process like you believe. The measurement indicates a limit- that when the body/bride of Christ (New Jerusalem) is complete, all those to be saved are saved, Christ's coming and the restoration of the new heaven and earth occur.

In a nut shell, the New Jerusalem was built by the Apostles, with Christ Jesus as the corner stone. The different stones describe the 12 Tribes of Israel. This is a picture of the New Testament Church was established by the Apostles and their disciples. We are those who enter into the gates, again in spiritual fashion. Once we die, we become Angels serving as stewards of the kingdom, keeping watch over our assigned responsibilities, or perhaps soul. That's how I view it, and this is a never ending process. After all, heaven has no size limit, so why would their be a time-limit? There's nothing in scripture to indicate an end of God's offer for salvation; absolutely none.

Well, you know I disagree that the New Jerusalem is made up of only Jews as I showed above. So all the disciples of Christ from 30-70 A.D. that make up the church, New Jerusalem were Jews only according to how you view it. Unbelievable!

Other than that, we must simply disagree, but I strongly believe you're usurping an understandable/traditional idea that is not entirely backed with scripture; it's all speculation, which again, I fully understand. So I don't fault you in any way. But if I made the choice of change and correction, then you can too. But the choice must be made by you, whether to continue in endless speculation, and curiosity, or to finally lay those aside in search of the truth; the CONTEXTUAL truth.

I gave my contextual truth, here it is again.

The “building” of the New Jerusalem is still in construction, and will continue until its completed, this is the reason why the gates of the city remain open and the invitation is given. Salvation ends with the coming of Christ in judgment upon the world.

Concerning this “end,” it is seen in scripture: Acts 2:17, “And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh;------(20)--before that great and notable day of the Lord come; (21) And it shall come to pass (to fulfillment), whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

Now preterists can argue that “the last days” ended in 70 A.D., that time being the “day of the Lord” according to them. But this would mean that God “ceased” pouring out his Spirit on “all flesh” at that time, ending salvation in 70 A.D. No one post 70 A.D. would be saved, yet preterists deny this. they believe and teach that the Spirit is still being poured out on the inhabitants of the world. The “last days,” the “pouring out of the Spirit,” the “calling on his name” are all tied together in their fulfillment. Therefore the “last days” continue until the Day of the Lord comes (1 Cor. 15:24, Christ's coming) and the building (growing) of the New Jerusalem is finished.

Joe, you full preterists say that this christian/age world has no end because you say Jesus came in 70 A.D. fulfilling all prophecy with New Jerusalem complete and here through the church beginning at that time. Since then, through the church the invitation of Rev. 22:17 is given. My question is, why then does Christ say in Rev. 22:20 three verses AFTER the invitation is given: “He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.” The following verse, John's prayer closes the book.

This is the very Revelation of Christ himself, IF Christ was to come in 70 A.D., the book would end in 22:19 after the warning not to take or subtract from the book was given and John's prayer and Christ would not need to repeat his coming. For several verses prior to the invitation in Rev. 22:12 we see Christ had just finished stating “I come quickly.” Christ would not need to repeat it AFTER the invitation IF it was to be a never ending christian/age world; for he would have already come in 70 A.D. No, the reason Christ repeated it in Rev. 22:19 is because his coming would not be in 70 A.D., but at a much later time unknown to us.

Yes, may we all truly search for contextual truth--

God bless---Twospirits