Understanding the 1000yr Reign?

[EdSutton]

BTW; I believe the saints that arose after Christ arose and went into that Holy City, were the 144,000.

I gotta' admit, that's a new one to me.

Incidentally, I suspect, but have no way of proving, I admit, that the number of "saved" or "Messianic" Jews over almost 2000 years has surpassed 144,000, a long time ago. There were 3,000 on Day 1, alone. Another time there were 5,000 men, to say nothing of women and children that may heve been there. And they were being saved, daily. Some have estimated that the Jerusalem church, alone, by the time the deacons were chosen in Acts 6, easily topped 20K, and may have reached 40K.

BTW, for all those who don't like Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, Saddleback and Willow Creek, and all that croed, wouldn't that make the "First Church of Jerusalem" the original "megachurch"? :thumbsup:

The Metropolitan Tabernacle (Baptist) of Charles Haddon Spurgeon, a century ago, with its 5,000+ regular attendees (none of whom had automobiles then), instead of being the first "megachurch", was only a "Johnny-come-lately" wannabe megachurch. :tongue3:

Ed

 

[TCGreek]

Bbob, when I said that Skypair and I may answer some of your questions differently is because I believe in the absolute sovereignty of God in all these eschatological events.

I see everything as part of the plan but involving 100% human response.

Rom 11:14If by any means I may provoke to emulation [them which are] my flesh, and might save some of them.
Here is Paul speaking of the same group that you speak of, saying that he might provoke to emulation (them whch are) my flesh, and might save some of them, during the church age.


These were not Gentiles, but were Israel;

Bbob, Skypair and I are not saying that Jews are not going to be saved during this church age. The Bible certainly teaches that.

But Jews being saved during the church age in no way nullifies God's original promises to Abraham and his descendants.

Jhn 1:11He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

Jhn 1:12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:

A partial hardening has come to Israel, my brother.

Don't you believe if they could receive Him in the "end times" that Jesus would of told them. Jesus said to them "Israelites", except you believe that I am He, you shall die in your sins and where I am ye cannot come.
TC: Jesus tod the Israelites that, not the Gentiles.

Bbob, get Israel right and you'll get your eschatology right!

If they died in their sins "Israelites" and could not be saved, then how could they be saved in the "end times"????? I mean, this is just as much "scripture" as anything you have quoted, is it not????

Read all the Scriptures in connection to God's promises to Israel, and it's God saying, "I will, I will, I will..."

Totally unilateral and forever.

Again consider the scripture:

1John 4:
3: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

Do you deny the scripture of 1John 4:3?

You are teaching that all Israel will be saved.
They are teaching you will not.

Neither does the Bible that this element of the anti-Christ at work is final. It is just seminal.

The Christian Churches, with few exceptions, have rejected Israel's laws and adopted pagan customs instead. Rather than follow Yahweh's Sabbath and holy days (Passover, Unleavened Bread, Firstfruits, Penetecost, Trumpets, Yom Kippur, and Tabernacles) they have substituted pagan holidays like Christmas, Easter, Halloween, Lent, etc., and changed the Sabbath day from Saturday to Sunday. A sign of the true people of Yahweh - of Messianic/Christian Israel (the 144,000) - is that she will be obeying all the commandments (Torah) and not just those that suit her. This includes many other things too such as Yahweh's laws of sexual purity, marriage and dietary laws.

According to the new covenant, God will set everything right in the MK.

BTW; I believe the saints that arose after Christ arose and went into that Holy City, were the 144,000.



BBob,

Your position doesn't fit the biblical record. Reread Revelation.

 

[Brother Bob]

Bbob, when I said that Skypair and I may answer some of your questions differently is because I believe in the absolute sovereignty of God in all these eschatological events.

I see everything as part of the plan but involving 100% human response.



Bbob, Skypair and I are not saying that Jews are not going to be saved during this church age. The Bible certainly teaches that.

But Jews being saved during the church age in no way nullifies God's original promises to Abraham and his descendants.

No, it is a fulfillment of the promises.



A partial hardening has come to Israel, my brother.

Yes, and it was that partial that Paul said he might save some of them in his time.


Bbob, get Israel right and you'll get your eschatology right!

I got Israel right, because the rejected the Lord, is why there is only a remnant of Israel that will be saved. Not all of Israel are Israel. That is scripture.



Read all the Scriptures in connection to God's promises to Israel, and it's God saying, "I will, I will, I will..."

Totally unilateral and forever.

Most of it was in the days Israel was under the OT.



Neither does the Bible that this element of the anti-Christ at work is final. It is just seminal.

I only know what John said that the anti-Christ was here now. I agree his work is not final, but will gross worse and worse, because the love of many have waxed cold. That also is scripture.


According to the new covenant, God will set everything right in the MK.

It was established in the MK.

Your position doesn't fit the biblical record. Reread Revelation.

My position does not cut out who the Gentiles were grafted in to.
My position does not cut out that Paul said he might save some of the partial blinded of Israel in his day.
My position does not give the covenant to the Gentiles but rather gives it to the remnant of Israel (true Israel), and the Gentiles were grafted in to it.
My position sure does not say that Christ failed in delivering the "new" covenant.
My position makes Israel and the Gentiles the same, they both must believe in Jesus Christ to be saved.
My position does not say there will be animal sacrifices again, but that Jesus fulfilled that part by making a perfect sacrifice.

Everything you say, takes the covenant away from Israel. Talk about a replacement, that would be one. The promise was made to Israel and not the Gentiles.

Again, what was the Gentiles grafted in to????????

You still fail to see that Paul was talking about some of those who were blinded, which could not be saved until the fulness of the Gentiles, yet he said he might save some of them.

You read it again, for you are adding something to that scripture that is just not there.


BBob,

 

[Brother Bob]

I gotta' admit, that's a new one to me.

Surely you jest????

Incidentally, I suspect, but have no way of proving, I admit, that the number of "saved" or "Messianic" Jews over almost 2000 years has surpassed 144,000, a long time ago. There were 3,000 on Day 1, alone. Another time there were 5,000 men, to say nothing of women and children that may heve been there. And they were being saved, daily. Some have estimated that the Jerusalem church, alone, by the time the deacons were chosen in Acts 6, easily topped 20K, and may have reached 40K.

The 144,000 were virgins, are all those you speak of virgins Ed. Yet I am glad you named them, for they were Israelites also, for the most part.

BTW, for all those who don't like Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, Saddleback and Willow Creek, and all that croed, wouldn't that make the "First Church of Jerusalem" the original "megachurch"? :thumbsup:

The Metropolitan Tabernacle (Baptist) of Charles Haddon Spurgeon, a century ago, with its 5,000+ regular attendees (none of whom had automobiles then), instead of being the first "megachurch", was only a "Johnny-come-lately" wannabe megachurch.

I am sure there is a message here, but I no comprehenda!
:tongue3:

Ed

The 144,000 were virgins Ed. Are all those you speak of virgins??


Isaiah the prophet prophesied of these FIRSTFRUITS that rose with Jesus. (Isaiah 26:19 ) "Thy
dead men ( the many bodies ) shall live, ( resurrected) TOGETHER WITH MY DEAD BODY
(CHRIST'S BODY) SHALL THEY ARISE. Awake and sing, you that dwell in the dust; for thy dew
is as the dew of the herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead."

In the book of Revelation, Chapter 14, it speaks of the Holy City where these saints went and
how they are reigning with Christ now. John writes:



Rev. 14:

1: And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.
2: And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:
3: And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.
4: These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth.

These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.
5: And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.

These were (past) redeemed from among men, BEING THE FIRSTFRUITS UNTO GOD AND TO
THE LAMB. And in their mouth was found no guile: FOR THEY ARE WITHOUT FAULT BEFORE
THE THRONE OF GOD". Not on earth.

BBob,

 

[Brother Bob]

Scripture does not say what you are implying, here, in Rev. 20:4. Ergo, the charge of "change the scripture to mean what you want" is not warranted, and this is "theology", at best. The verse says "...and they lived and reigned...", with they referring back referring back to "those" and "who", throughout the verse. Sounds to me like someone's salvation is being at least doubted, here. Anyone who is "still looking for the Messiah" is not saved, by definition, as I understand Scripture.
Ed

According to the scripture of God, if they die in their sins, where the Lord is, they can not come. Take it or leave it.

Also, it does say lived and reigned (past tense) doesn't it. One other little point, it was only the "souls" of them that were beheaded.

 

[skypair]

Everything you say, takes the covenant away from Israel.

Don't be silly. What it does is DELAY it for Israel and give it to the Gentiles in order to make Israel jealously desire Christ when the time comes.

Again, what w[ERE] the Gentiles grafted in[to]????????

Since you apparently can't find common ground with us in Rom 11, why don't you try finding this in some other place in scripture. This can't be the only foundation of your belief, can it? Where else do you find Gentiles "included" wholesale into "Israel?" Isn't it instead that the Jews are included into the church, not us into Judaism?? Failing that, you might conclude that it is YOU that has interpretted Rom 11 wrong.

You still fail to see that Paul was talking about some of those who were blinded, which could not be saved until the fulness of the Gentiles.

OK -- I'll bite. :laugh: How, when, why, where will these Jews convert?? Are you saying this happens after the rapture when the fulness of the church is taken out? How else would we know what the "fulness of the Gentiles" is? (You may be "creeping up on" some good answers here, BB. raying: )

skypair

 

[Brother Bob]

Don't be silly. What it does is DELAY it for Israel and give it to the Gentiles in order to make Israel jealously desire Christ when the time comes.

Putting a "delay" in the "new" covenant is what is silly and says the Lord was not able to finish His work and when He said "it is finished", was not true, for according to you He failed with Israel.

Since you apparently can't find common ground with us in Rom 11, why don't you try finding this in some other place in scripture. This can't be the only foundation of your belief, can it? Where else do you find Gentiles "included" wholesale into "Israel?" Isn't it instead that the Jews are included into the church, not us into Judaism?? Failing that, you might conclude that it is YOU that has interpretted Rom 11 wrong.

Seems you are not able to answer this one. Keep studying, you might find an answer.

Romans 11:
1: I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
2: God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,
3: Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.
4: But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
5: Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6: And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Paul's time,


OK -- I'll bite. :laugh: How, when, why, where will these Jews convert?? Are you saying this happens after the rapture when the fulness of the church is taken out? How else would we know what the "fulness of the Gentiles" is? (You may be "creeping up on" some good answers here, BB. raying: )
skypair

NOW!! They have as much right as you or I do, to believe that Jesus is the Christ.

Rom 2:10But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

This is not going to happen in the "end times" but is going on now.

Notice!!!!! It is to the Jew first!

 

[skypair]

The 144,000 were virgins Ed. Are all those you speak of virgins??

Duh, no. That's why he is saying we haven't seen them yet. Not, certainly, at the resurrection of bodies in Mt 27. Are you claiming that they were virgins?

All the prerequisites in Rev 14 are merely those of the preists in Ezek 40-48. But you wouldn't know about that, would you, Bob?

Isaiah the prophet prophesied of these FIRSTFRUITS that rose with Jesus. (Isaiah 26:19 ) "Thy dead men ( the many bodies ) shall live, ( resurrected) TOGETHER WITH MY DEAD BODY (CHRIST'S BODY) SHALL THEY ARISE. Awake and sing, you that dwell in the dust; for thy dew is as the dew of the herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead."

:laugh: This is the POSTRIB resurrection of the OT saints (Psa 50:3-5, Dan 12:2, Job 19:25-27, Ezek 37:12-14) into the MK of Messiah! Was Job one of those "many" seen in Jerusalem? How about David? Or Daniel?

In the book of Revelation, Chapter 14, it speaks of the Holy City where these saints went and how they are reigning with Christ now. John writes:

1: And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. 2: And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: 3: And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth...."

If you will notice, there are "harpers" in heaven and 144,000 on earth. These are the only ones who can sing this song.

Now notice Rev 15:2 -- "And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God." These are directly related. The "harpers" are the heavenly counterparts (perhaps spirits) of the 144,000. And in Rev 15, we learn their song. IOW, the 144,000 pass through the 'sea of glass mingled with flame'/GT unhurt as Rev 7:3 suggests. That is, Bob, whoever you are saying the 144,000 are in your eschatology, they were apparently unprotected and unknown and illusory/nonexistent so far as history is concerned. And if they escaped your tribulation, no doubt they would be alive today.

FOR THEY ARE WITHOUT FAULT BEFORE THE THRONE OF GOD". Not on earth.

No, their sins are covered. This has nothing to do with LOCATION as you yourself should know. Do YOU have "faults" before God's throne? They are on earth -- they qualify as priests (Ezek) like you and I. I believe that "firstfruits" means that they are indwelt (don't quote me on that :laugh like we are and the first of those who will receive the Spirit in the MK to come (likely priests of Zadok, Ezek 44:17-31 -- you CAN'T "make this stuff up," Bob).

skypair

 

[skypair]

Bob,

Putting a "delay" in the "new" covenant is what is silly and says the Lord was not able to finish His work and when He said "it is finished", was not true, for according to you He failed with Israel.

"Delay" only as regarding Israel. But you would know that if you knew anything about Daniel's 70th week. :laugh:

skypair

 

[Brother Bob]

Bob,

"Delay" only as regarding Israel. But you would know that if you knew anything about Daniel's 70th week. :laugh:

skypair

You got no scripture for a delay and you know it. It is just something you picked up from the Jews, who would not accept Christ.

Rom 2:10But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

This is not going to happen in the "end times" but is going on now.

Notice!!!!! It is to the Jew first!
__________________

Never say no answer for this.



BBob,

 

[Brother Bob]

Duh, no. That's why he is saying we haven't seen them yet. Not, certainly, at the resurrection of bodies in Mt 27. Are you claiming that they were virgins?

All the prerequisites in Rev 14 are merely those of the preists in Ezek 40-48. But you wouldn't know about that, would you, Bob?

:laugh: This is the POSTRIB resurrection of the OT saints (Psa 50:3-5, Dan 12:2, Job 19:25-27, Ezek 37:12-14) into the MK of Messiah! Was Job one of those "many" seen in Jerusalem? How about David? Or Daniel?

Only the "souls" of them that were beheaded for the word of God in the MK, remember? Go read it again!!! Just virgins were in that resurrection, which Christ was the First Resurrection and the firstfruits. It was them, not their spirits before the throne of God.

If you will notice, there are "harpers" in heaven and 144,000 on earth. These are the only ones who can sing this song.

Now notice Rev 15:2 -- "And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God." These are directly related. The "harpers" are the heavenly counterparts (perhaps spirits) of the 144,000. And in Rev 15, we learn their song. IOW, the 144,000 pass through the 'sea of glass mingled with flame'/GT unhurt as Rev 7:3 suggests. That is, Bob, whoever you are saying the 144,000 are in your eschatology, they were apparently unprotected and unknown and illusory/nonexistent so far as history is concerned. And if they escaped your tribulation, no doubt they would be alive today.

Rev 4:6And before the throne [there was] a sea of glass like unto crystal: and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, [were] four beasts full of eyes before and behind.

No, their sins are covered. This has nothing to do with LOCATION as you yourself should know. Do YOU have "faults" before God's throne? They are on earth -- they qualify as priests (Ezek) like you and I. I believe that "firstfruits" means that they are indwelt (don't quote me on that :laugh like we are and the first of those who will receive the Spirit in the MK to come (likely priests of Zadok, Ezek 44:17-31 -- you CAN'T "make this stuff up," Bob).

skypair

Isaiah the prophet prophesied of these FIRSTFRUITS that rose with Jesus. (Isaiah 26:19 ) "Thy
dead men ( the many bodies ) shall live, ( resurrected) TOGETHER WITH MY DEAD BODY
(CHRIST'S BODY) SHALL THEY ARISE. Awake and sing,

Why won't you take the word of God by Isaiah the Prophet????????

It is comical how you make it up as you go.................!!!!!!!!!!!

You been covered up and don't have enough understanding to know it.


BBob,

 

[Outsider]

Brother Bob,

You may have stated this in an earlier post, but if not, I would like your take on this.

According to the new covenant, God will set everything right in the MK.

It was established in the MK.

When was it?

there is only a remnant of Israel that will be saved. Not all of Israel are Israel. That is scripture.

Could it be that we are not always seperating the "Israels".
All of Israel (Believers in Christ) will be saved.
All of (Natural) Israel will not.

 

[Brother Bob]

Brother Bob,

You may have stated this in an earlier post, but if not, I would like your take on this.

When was it?
I believe it was a spiritual thing that started with the death of Christ and when He conquered over death hell and the grave, He won the victory. He was the First Resurrection, which was to take place at the end of the MK and many of the bodies of the saints arose with Him after His resurrection and went into that Holy City and many were seen of many. The Greek word for "thousand" says "an indefinite period of time", so scripture also says that 1 days is as a thousand years with the Lord. Also, it says that a thousand was as if it were yesterday. I don't think we should get hung up on the 1000 years, for it is God's time. When Jesus hung on the cross, it turned completely dark and they begin to confess His name for fear. The same as it will be in the end of time. Such fear that men's hearts will fail them, and all will confess His Name.
Many believe it was all spiritual and started with the first coming of Christ, and that was preached for over 1600 years, by may theologians.

The "new" covenant was established by His blood. Jer. plainly says the "new" covenant is to Israel and when Christ came, He came to Israel, but only a remnant received Him and He gave them power to become the sons of God. Then the Gentiles were grafted into Israel, the remnant that received Christ. Satan knew what Jesus was here for and could not stop Him from setting up the Grace Covenant.

Isaiah prophesied of it in his time.

Isaiah the prophet prophesied of these FIRSTFRUITS that rose with Jesus. (Isaiah 26:19 ) "Thy
dead men ( the many bodies ) shall live, ( resurrected) TOGETHER WITH MY DEAD BODY
(CHRIST'S BODY) SHALL THEY ARISE. Awake and sing,




Could it be that we are not always seperating the "Israels".
All of Israel (Believers in Christ) will be saved.
All of (Natural) Israel will not.

True!

BBob,

 

[Outsider]

Brother Bob,

I believe it was a spiritual thing that started with the death of Christ and when He conquered over death hell and the grave, He won the victory. He was the First Resurrection, which was to take place at the end of the MK and many of the bodies of the saints arose with Him after His resurrection and went into that Holy City and many were seen of many. The Greek word for "thousand" says "an indefinite period of time", so scripture also says that 1 days is as a thousand years with the Lord. Also, it says that a thousand was as if it were yesterday. I don't think we should get hung up on the 1000 years, for it is God's time.

I see. So are you saying that it is still continuing today? We are in the MK?

When Jesus hung on the cross, it turned completely dark and they begin to confess His name for fear. The same as it will be in the end of time. Such fear that men's hearts will fail them, and all will confess His Name.

I completely agree.

Just a couple more questions.
Where do you place the tribulation?
Where do you place Revelations 20:1-8?

Thanks for your help.

 

[Brother Bob]

Brother Bob,

Just a couple more questions.
Where do you place the tribulation?

First I consider the tribulation and the wrath of God as two different events.
1. Tribulation will be in the last days, right before the second coming of Christ. No flesh would be saved, except those days were shortened.

Where do you place Revelations 20:1-8?

It was while Christ was preaching His own everlasting Gospel, the actual time I would put it at the Cross, when such a fear came upon man when the mountains did rent and the earth turned dark, that because of that fear, the devil could deceive no one, for even those who killed Him, confessed Him to be the Christ.

The same as Isaiah said,
Thanks for your help.

Isaiah the prophet prophesied of these FIRSTFRUITS that rose with Jesus. (Isaiah 26:19 ) "Thy
dead men ( the many bodies ) shall live, ( resurrected) TOGETHER WITH MY DEAD BODY
(CHRIST'S BODY) SHALL THEY ARISE. Awake and sing,

I believe satan was helpless at this time. Then he was loosed for a little season, of which I believe we are living in now.
It is when we obtained the victory over sin, and when this resurrection took place, a new and living way was set up and satan could not stop it. It has spread throughout the world and is still spreading. The greatest happening ever to take place on earth.

BBob............

 

[Outsider]

I believe satan was helpless at this time. Then he was loosed for a little season, of which I believe we are living in now.
It is when we obtained the victory over sin, and when this resurrection took place, a new and living way was set up and satan could not stop it. It has spread throughout the world and is still spreading. The greatest happening ever to take place on earth.

Thanks for your help. I appreciate you helping me understand this better.

 

[TCGreek]

My position does not cut out who the Gentiles were grafted in to.
My position does not cut out that Paul said he might save some of the partial blinded of Israel in his day.
My position does not give the covenant to the Gentiles but rather gives it to the remnant of Israel (true Israel), and the Gentiles were grafted in to it.
My position sure does not say that Christ failed in delivering the "new" covenant.
My position makes Israel and the Gentiles the same, they both must believe in Jesus Christ to be saved.
My position does not say there will be animal sacrifices again, but that Jesus fulfilled that part by making a perfect sacrifice.

I respect your positions on the relevant issues.

1. I have not replaced Israel with the Gentiles.

2. I have not stated that Christ failed.

3. And I believe that Jews and Gentiles are saved the same way in this church age (Rom 1:16; 10:9-13).

Everything you say, takes the covenant away from Israel. Talk about a replacement, that would be one. The promise was made to Israel and not the Gentiles.

4. How could I have taken the covenant away from Israel when God is going to return to them as a nation during the Tribulation time into the MK.

Again, what was the Gentiles grafted in to????????

You still fail to see that Paul was talking about some of those who were blinded, which could not be saved until the fulness of the Gentiles, yet he said he might save some of them.

You read it again, for you are adding something to that scripture that is just not there.


BBob,

Save some of them now, during the church age, but the fulness of the Gentiles hasn't come in, neither have we seen the literal fulfillment of Rom 11:26, 27.

 

[PrmtvBptst1832]

The Revelation contains figurative language, but we must not forget that this figurative language teaches us literal truths. We are not to exect a beast rising up out of the sea with seven heads and ten horns, but whatever the Holy Spirit meant to convey in Revelation 13:1 is real. We cannot hide behind the fact that it contains figurative language and deprive it of any meaning and significance whatever. Even so, 1000 years may or may not be 1000 years. Either way, though, it means something. I guess the question is, what does it mean?

 

[EdSutton]

According to the scripture of God, if they die in their sins, where the Lord is, they can not come. Take it or leave it.

Also, it does say lived and reigned (past tense) doesn't it. One other little point, it was only the "souls" of them that were beheaded.

Rev. 20:4 says nothing about "if they died in their sins". etc.. I know. I actually read the verse. That was the verse you were speaking of. And what I above posted was a factual correction, nothing more.

I suspect I am at least somewhat aware of Augustine's theology, as you are, FTR.

I have no intention of getting deep into this, again.

I have given, along with two others, in the past, accurate information about the Greek tense(s), here, to watch you ignore what was actually being said, not only by me, but them as well, in this verse, then run to, appeal to, and hide behind some commentary, not to mention some 'theological system', plus the English language, which incidentally here, has changed little over 400 years.

IMO, you have shown that you do not have one clue as to what the Greek tenses in the NT actually mean. That alone does not particularly bother me (my valedictorian bride does not have a clue about Greek tenses, either), but is made as a statement of fact, given the accompanying fact that you bring up "Strong's Greek" to support your arguments from time to time. [I've also previously painstakingly posted (as I had to type out each letter and symbol, including italics, bolded letters, etc.) exactly what James Strong has said about the plan and mode of usage of his dictionaries, as well, which does not seem to have gotten through, either. So I'll not waste my time reprinting that again, either.]

And I'll not waste my and your time to do so, on these same verse(s) over and over again. I'm not angry, but I have other things I can do more profitably, at this time, considering that I have farm work that I need to do. And you can argue with some others, as you choose.

What I said has already been published for anyone who really desires it, to read it. Just look at some of the threads that deal with this subject.

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

Brother Bob - BTW; I believe the saints that arose after Christ arose and went into that Holy City, were the 144,000.

EdSutton - I gotta' admit, that's a new one to me.

Brother Bob - Surely you jest????

EdSutton - Nope! No jest. Never heard anyone, not even you, say that before, in 40+years, at least that I can recall.

Ed