What kind of virgin will you be?

[Marcia]

Originally posted by James_Newman:
I'm not sure what your objection is, webdog. They are indeed two parables telling the same story.

1 Corinthians 12:3
3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

I don't see how this means physically saying the word "Lord." It means acknowledging Jesus as Lord. I said "Lord" years before I was saved! Matt. 7 is clearly speaking of unbelievers.

 

[Bill Brown]

Originally posted by npetreley:
I want to be a vestal virgin. I don't really know what those are, but I'm hoping it means they get to wear really cool vests.

Is that like vestigal organ...like my appendix?

 

[Hope of Glory]

Jesus never denied that they did those things in his name; just not in his will.

 

[James_Newman]

Originally posted by StraightAndNarrow:
The Kingdom of God = The Kingdom of Heaven

The five foolish virgins are not prepared for the Second Coming of Christ and will be shut out of the kingdom (of Heaven). They will go to Hell.

Thats exactly what I'm saying.

 

[James_Newman]

Originally posted by Marcia:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by James_Newman:
I'm not sure what your objection is, webdog. They are indeed two parables telling the same story.

1 Corinthians 12:3
3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

I don't see how this means physically saying the word "Lord." It means acknowledging Jesus as Lord. I said "Lord" years before I was saved! Matt. 7 is clearly speaking of unbelievers. </font>[/QUOTE]That is certainly a traditional baptist interpretation of it. Clearly, based on what? Just because a man is chastened at the judgment seat of Christ does not mean he is an unbeliever.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Hope of Glory:
About goats: Numbers 18:17 "But the firstling of a cow, or the firstling of a sheep, or the firstling of a goat, thou shalt not redeem; they are holy: thou shalt sprinkle their blood upon the altar, and shalt burn their fat for an offering made by fire, for a sweet savour unto the LORD."

Goats are holy, not unholy.

It drives me crazy when someone takes something from one context, and tries to refute it by using a verse from a TOTALLY UNRELATED context.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Bill Brown:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by npetreley:
I want to be a vestal virgin. I don't really know what those are, but I'm hoping it means they get to wear really cool vests.

Is that like vestigal organ...like my appendix? </font>[/QUOTE]Finally. Another Baptist with a warped sense of humor.

Good one.

 

[James_Newman]

Originally posted by npetreley:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Hope of Glory:
About goats: Numbers 18:17 "But the firstling of a cow, or the firstling of a sheep, or the firstling of a goat, thou shalt not redeem; they are holy: thou shalt sprinkle their blood upon the altar, and shalt burn their fat for an offering made by fire, for a sweet savour unto the LORD."

Goats are holy, not unholy.

It drives me crazy when someone takes something from one context, and tries to refute it by using a verse from a TOTALLY UNRELATED context. </font>[/QUOTE]Why would God use a clean animal as an analogy for unsanctified, unclean unbelievers? Did the Lord forget that goats didn't need to be redeemed? Surely an appropriate comparison would be a pig or an ass. I can see it now, the separation of the sheep from the asses. Nevertheless, a goat is holy, clean, and acceptable for sacrifice.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by James_Newman:
Why would God use a clean animal as an analogy for unsanctified, unclean unbelievers? Did the Lord forget that goats didn't need to be redeemed? Surely an appropriate comparison would be a pig or an ass. I can see it now, the separation of the sheep from the asses. Nevertheless, a goat is holy, clean, and acceptable for sacrifice.

Why not use goats? If it makes the point (and it does), then where's the problem?

He told them still another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into a large amount of flour until it worked all through the dough."

Yeast almost always represents evil. So is Jesus saying that the kingdom of heaven is like evil that works its way into everything?

And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine into new wineskins."

Again, new wine has bacteria (which almost always represents evil) in it, which is what causes the wineskin to expand (as the bacteria produces gas through fermentation). So why would Jesus use new wine in this example? Why not just stop after giving the example of sewing a new cloth patch onto an old garment?

Do you see the point? You can't just yank something out of an entirely different context in order to force a new interpretation on a simple, obvious analogy.

 

[James_Newman]

It seems to me that goats could mean whatever you want it to mean then.

Ezekiel 34:17
17 And as for you, O my flock, thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I judge between cattle and cattle, between the rams and the he goats.

These goats are part of His flock.

 

[Hope of Glory]

It drives me crazy when someone takes something from one context, and tries to refute it by using a verse from a TOTALLY UNRELATED context.

The CONTEXT of any passage in the Bible is Genesis 1:1 through Revelation 22:21.

Unless, of course, you think the Holy Spirit made an error, or Jesus simply had a slip of the tongue.

 

[webdog]

Originally posted by James_Newman:
I'm not sure what your objection is, webdog. They are indeed two parables telling the same story.

1 Corinthians 12:3
3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

My objection is that I don't believe all of the virgins are believers, as the second parable in the same chapter shows, and compared to what Christ says in chapter 7.

 

[Hope of Glory]

Everything in that passage is dealing with the coming Kingdom; everything in that passage is dealing with saved people. There is nothing that even remotely suggests the fallacy of a "false conversion"; only someone who is saved, but is not wise. (By "conversion", I'm assuming you are referring to salvation, even though only a saved person can be "converted".)

Virgins are clean; goats are clean; they are "his" servants!

 

[webdog]

HOG, this verse in 25:41 is speaking of the same people compared earlier to the 5 foolish virgins...
"Then He will also say to those on the left, 'Depart from Me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the Devil and his angels!"
These don't sound like saved, converted, born again, regenerated, etc., etc.

 

[James_Newman]

The believer may experience a temporary hell for a thousand years during the time of the kingdom if they will not live obediently. They aren't foolish virgins for not believing (that is still how to be saved, right?} They are foolish for thinking that once they were saved that they would not be accountable to their Lord who shed His own blood to save them from the eternal death in the lake of fire. So they decided to live for this world instead of getting ready for the next.

Matthew 16:24-26
24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

The salvation of the soul during the millennium age is based upon obedience, losing our lives in this age that we may find it in the next. If we will deny our Lord, He will deny us. The foolish virgins, the wicked slothful servant, they are all the disobedient believer who rises up to play in the face of every warning that God has given.

 

[Andy T.]

Originally posted by James_Newman:
The believer may experience a temporary hell for a thousand years during the time of the kingdom if they will not live obediently. They aren't foolish virgins for not believing (that is still how to be saved, right?} They are foolish for thinking that once they were saved that they would not be accountable to their Lord who shed His own blood to save them from the eternal death in the lake of fire. So they decided to live for this world instead of getting ready for the next.

Matthew 16:24-26
24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

The salvation of the soul during the millennium age is based upon obedience, losing our lives in this age that we may find it in the next. If we will deny our Lord, He will deny us. The foolish virgins, the wicked slothful servant, they are all the disobedient believer who rises up to play in the face of every warning that God has given.

It's ironic how false doctrine sometimes meets full circle with other false doctrines. Here is a case in point - this hyper-dispensationalism is very similar, yea almost identical to the Catholic teaching of purgatory. Yuck, and again I say, yuck.

 

[James_Newman]

Yes this doctrine is similar to purgatory just like the Lord's supper is similar to the mass. Thats a typical knee-jerk response to scriptural truth. Purgatory is not the same teaching and anyone familiar with the Catholic teaching of purgatory would know the difference.

 

[Hope of Glory]

Boy, our pro-life stance is almost identical to the Catholic pro-life stance. We must abandon it at once!

BTW, from my understanding, Purgatory is a place where others can pray for your salvation. Your salvation is decided here, based on whether you accept the free gift that has been offered.

On the other hand, Scripture teaches that at the Judgment Seat of Christ, there will be rewards, loss, and even chastisement handed out.

Virgins are pure! Goats are holy! They are "his" servants! They are his...

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by James_Newman:
It seems to me that goats could mean whatever you want it to mean then.

I wouldn't say that. I'd say goats can represent whatever God wants them to represent. If in one place God uses goats as part of a metaphor or analogy that include them in God's flock, then so be it. If in another place God uses goats as part of a metaphor or analogy where the goats represent the unsaved, then so be it. If God uses yeast to represent evil in one story, but uses yeast to represent the start of a new covenant in another, so be it.

Who are we to tell God He has to use the same exact symbols in the same exact way for every lesson?

 

[James_Newman]

The idea behind using a metaphor is that the symbolic teaches us a truth about the literal, not the other way around. In what way does a goat represent an unsaved person?