If sin is not imputed without the law, how can some claim that babies and children die because Adam's sin is imputed to them?

[PaulThomson]

So the mortal putting on immortality is what then, a ruse, conditional immortality? (which, as I'm sure you know, is an oxymoron)

1 Corinthians 15:53
For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

I can't see how the tree of life will be necessary unless one is equating it as symbolic of the power of God.

I can agree that we will always live by the grace of God whether in the here and now or whether in the eternal state and God will continue to uphold the new heavens and earth just as He upholds this one (Heb.1:3), but I cannot see how or why, we as creatures, will need to rely on another created thing to live eternally.

We will put on immortality when we are resurrected in the first resurrection. This does not mean that the means of experiencing ongoing immortality must all be effected at the time we put on immortality.

I may first put on the authority of a policeman when I put on my badge after I am sworn in. This does not mean that I have the authority of a policeman at every moment thenceforth. I need to keep on putting on the authority by putting on my badge and /or uniform going on duty.

 

[Genez]

So, why do you think God mentions the tree of life as some kind of reward in Rev. 2 and 22?

That's not for the Bride who is bone of His bones, and glorious flesh of His glorious body.
For we will have eternal life functioning within as like the air we breathe..

The Tree of Life will be for all those who will live among each other on earth, calling their home the New Earth, which is to be called the Home of Righteousness. 2 Peter 3:13

In contrast to those who will not be the Bride of Christ?
Our home will be the new Heaven!
And theirs will be the new Earth!

Those on the new earth will have access to the Tree of Life.
They will always be living like Adam lived before his fall.

But in keeping with his promise,
we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth,
where righteousness dwells.

Something tells me I am in for something good!
​

 

[Genez]

So, when it suits the defence of your theology, our bodies must be exactly like Jesus' glorified body in all the ways that are needed to make your theology necessary; but when it suits the defence of your theology, our bodies are not exactly like Jesus' glorious body in the ways that are needed to make your theology viable.

The term "confirmation bias" comes to mind.

What are the genuine scope and limits of saying that X is like or the same as Y? Must it imply that X is a clone of Y? Or does it mean that X and Y share some features. We are made in God's image and after His likeness. We are like God in some aspects, but we are not clones of God in very respect.

You seem to be forcing the boundaries of the biblical language in order to make your concept of our glorification sound compelling.

It is possible for our resurrection bodies to be fashioned like Jesus glorious body, but for us to need to ingest at intervals the healing compounds in the fruit and leaves of the tree of life to rejuvenate our bodies, while Jesus can rejuvenate His own body by simply speaking to it.
I can honestly say that an automatic Ford Laser has a body like the manual Ford Laser, while it also being true that one changes gears differently when driving an automatic that one does when driving a manual.

Stop it...

 

[Genez]

We will put on immortality when we are resurrected in the first resurrection. This does not mean that the means of experiencing ongoing immortality must all be effected at the time we put on immortality.

I may first put on the authority of a policeman when I put on my badge after I am sworn in. This does not mean that I have the authority of a policeman at every moment thenceforth. I need to keep on putting on the authority by putting on my badge and /or uniform going on duty.

Misplaced anaolgy...

 

[sawdust]

I think the fact that in Revelation overcomers are promised to start eating again from the tree of life is evidence that the tree of life is associated both in Eden and in paradise with the maintenance of endless life. The fact that the tree of life is provided by God in the new heaven and the new earth 1000 years after the resurrection, which is when many assume the saints become perpetually immortal, is evidence that access to and eating from the tree of life was necessary for Adam's continuing life even before he sinned.

Why would the promise of eating from the tree of life have any pull power to people who are already permanently immortal?

Rev 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
Rev 22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
Rev 22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

In answer to your question which I bolded. It wouldn't which, is why I don't believe the tree of life was ever meant for the purpose you are trying to assign it.

As Rev. 2:7 says, it is for overcomers. Overcomers of what exactly? It can't be death as anyone in Christ has already passed from death to life (John 5:24 & 1 John 3:14). Could it be overcoming the apathy that Jesus mentioned in the letter ie. losing their first love?

Also, in Rev.21, you will notice it wasn't the fruit that healed the nation but the leaves.

I think it evidence, not of necessity for life, but of rewarded privilege for those who do the will of God.

 

[sawdust]

We will put on immortality when we are resurrected in the first resurrection. This does not mean that the means of experiencing ongoing immortality must all be effected at the time we put on immortality.

I may first put on the authority of a policeman when I put on my badge after I am sworn in. This does not mean that I have the authority of a policeman at every moment thenceforth. I need to keep on putting on the authority by putting on my badge and /or uniform going on duty.

Yes but unlike the policeman, we won't be taking our immortal bodies on and off. It's a permanent body.

 

[PaulThomson]

Misplaced anaolgy...

A policeman could keep his badge on him at all times, and remain authorised to enforce the law at all times and thereby remain perpetually authorised to enforce the law. But his continuous authority would be contingent upon this condition of perpetually having his badge on his person. It is not absolute. The fact that a policeman often divests himself of his badge when off duty, but the resurrected saints might never do so, does not logically refute the contingency of eating from the tree of life in order to remain immortal.

You claim that based on the language used in scripture, immortality must be imparted as a permanent non-contingent attribute. With my analogy I am pointing out that the language used in scripture does not require immortality to be a permanent non-contingent attribute, but it is quite in keeping with the language of scripture to understand immortality as a potentially permanent attribute contingent upon occasionally partaking of the tree of life. You are seeking to dismiss my analogy by finding mere incidentals in the experience of policemen re their vested authority, that you consider not to be commensurate with immortality being experienced perpetually by resurrected saints: namely, that policemen often experience being without their badge and so without their vested authority, but the resurrected saints never experience being without their vested immortality,

Your argument against immortality remaining contingent on intermittently partaking of the tree of life is circular and question begging. I am still waiting for you to explain how being granted access to the tree of life (Rev 2 and 22) is in any way a reward for those who can remain non-contingently immortal and perfectly healthy, without ever partaking of the tree of life.

 

[PaulThomson]

PaulThomson said:
So, when it suits the defence of your theology, our bodies must be exactly like Jesus' glorified body in all the ways that are needed to make your theology necessary; but when it suits the defence of your theology, our bodies are not exactly like Jesus' glorious body in the ways that are needed to make your theology viable.

The term "confirmation bias" comes to mind.

What are the genuine scope and limits of saying that X is like or the same as Y? Must it imply that X is a clone of Y? Or does it mean that X and Y share some features. We are made in God's image and after His likeness. We are like God in some aspects, but we are not clones of God in very respect.

You seem to be forcing the boundaries of the biblical language in order to make your concept of our glorification sound compelling.

It is possible for our resurrection bodies to be fashioned like Jesus glorious body, but for us to need to ingest at intervals the healing compounds in the fruit and leaves of the tree of life to rejuvenate our bodies, while Jesus can rejuvenate His own body by simply speaking to it.
I can honestly say that an automatic Ford Laser has a body like the manual Ford Laser, while it also being true that one changes gears differently when driving an automatic that one does when driving a manual.

Stop it...

Stop what? Demonstrating the flaws in your arguments?

 

[Genez]

A policeman could keep his badge on him at all times, and remain authorised to enforce the law at all times and thereby remain perpetually authorised to enforce the law. .

He keeps his badge with him at all times. Not "on him."

 

[Genez]

Stop what? Demonstrating the flaws in your arguments?

That too...

 

[PaulThomson]

That's not for the Bride who is bone of His bones, and glorious flesh of His glorious body.
For we will have eternal life functioning within as like the air we breathe..

The Tree of Life will be for all those who will live among each other on earth, calling their home the New Earth, which is to be called the Home of Righteousness. 2 Peter 3:13

In contrast to those who will not be the Bride of Christ?
Our home will be the new Heaven!
And theirs will be the new Earth!

Those on the new earth will have access to the Tree of Life.
They will always be living like Adam lived before his fall.

But in keeping with his promise,
we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth,
where righteousness dwells.
​

​

2 Pet. 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,

12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.

Rev. 22 comes after Rev. 21 and after the destruction of the world that is and the creation of new heavens and a new earth. Can you, please, explain who these non-church people are and where they come from in order to live on the new earth with access to the tree of life? And where you find these people designated elsewhere in scripture. as populating the new earth after the destruction of thia present world?

Interesting, that you have this very passage, 2 Pet. 3:13, as your moniker "

But in keeping with his promise,
we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth,
where righteousness dwells.​

 

[PaulThomson]

He keeps his badge with him at all times. Not "on him."

That is merely a hair-splitting snappy snipe to avoid dealing with the substance of the argument. you appear to be flailing.

 

[Genez]

That is merely a hair-splitting snappy snipe to avoid dealing with the substance of the argument. you appear to be flailing.

Just thought I'd help. Since many would have taken what you said in a wrong way.

 

[PaulThomson]

PaulThomson said:
I think the fact that in Revelation overcomers are promised to start eating again from the tree of life is evidence that the tree of life is associated both in Eden and in paradise with the maintenance of endless life. The fact that the tree of life is provided by God in the new heaven and the new earth 1000 years after the resurrection, which is when many assume the saints become perpetually immortal, is evidence that access to and eating from the tree of life was necessary for Adam's continuing life even before he sinned.

Why would the promise of eating from the tree of life have any pull power to people who are already permanently immortal?

Rev 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
Rev 22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
Rev 22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
In

In answer to your question which I bolded. It wouldn't which, is why I don't believe the tree of life was ever meant for the purpose you are trying to assign it.

As Rev. 2:7 says, it is for overcomers. Overcomers of what exactly? It can't be death as anyone in Christ has already passed from death to life (John 5:24 & 1 John 3:14). Could it be overcoming the apathy that Jesus mentioned in the letter ie. losing their first love?

Also, in Rev.21, you will notice it wasn't the fruit that healed the nation but the leaves.

I think it evidence, not of necessity for life, but of rewarded privilege for those who do the will of God.

From your response, I see I did not phrase my question well. What I meant to ask is,

"Why would the promise of eating from the tree of life have any pull power on people who are already promised a permanent immortality that is not contingent upon eating from that tree of life?"

Granted that the overcomers are those who return to their first love, the question still stands unanswered.
"Why would the promise of eating from the tree of life to those who return to their first love, have any pull power on people who are already promised a permanent immortality that is not contingent upon eating from that tree of life, but only requires that they they have put their faith in Christ?"

You say, "I think it evidence, not of necessity for life, but of rewarded privilege for those who do the will of God."

You are affirming that it is a reward, but you have not given a reason for it being attractive as a reward. Is its pull power merely curiosity. The saints wonder what the tree of life tastes like, and if they return to their first love, their curiosity will be assuaged?

Your theory does not explain why the leaves are for the healing of the nations in the new heaven and the new earth, (Rev. 22) which is populated only with people who love and submit to Jesus Christ as Lord (Eph. 1:9-10) -

9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

My theory is that we were not created to be non-contingently immortal. We are designed to gradually experience physical wear and tear that needs to be healed/repaired before it becomes debilitating. Those who are submitting to Christ are given free access to an elixir that repairs any wear and tear, via the tree of life. Those who are reject Christ as Lord are prohibited from having access to this healing tree and therefore their bodies degenerate toward debilitation leading to eventual death. I am proposing that free access to this tree allows the resurrected saints to live in a constant state of optimal health, if they choose, so that they never die (i.e. they are effectively immortal) albeit contingently immortal. I see this theory as coherent with all of scripture. I have yet to see anyone present any scripture that contradicts this theory of mine.

It seems to me that God granting a non-contingent immortality to saints who have free will, risks such saints eventually rebelling sometime in ages future, but nevertheless remaining immortal. This risk would be eliminated by making immortality contingent upon intermittent eating from the tree of life.

 

[Genez]

Why would the promise of eating from the tree of life have any pull power to people who are already permanently immortal?

Rev 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
Rev 22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
Rev 22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
In



From your response, I see I did not phrase my question well. What I meant to ask is,

"Why would the promise of eating from the tree of life have any pull power on people who are already promised a permanent immortality that is not contingent upon eating from that tree of life?"

If your meaning is to be correct? That means only the totally faithful believers will be remaining alive for eternity.
That is not what, 1 Corinthians 3:15, tells us!

Verse 15, speaks of the total loser believers who does everything wrong after salvation!

​

If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—​

even though only as one escaping through the flames. ​

​

Loss of reward. Not eternal life!​

Eating from the Tree of Life is God's way of saying and revealing God's full approval of such a resurrected believer.
It is telling them that the way they conducted themselves and transformed into by means of the Spirit, has God's full approval!
That would want them to be that way forever!

In Christ. Grace and peace!

 

[PaulThomson]

Just thought I'd help. Since many would have taken what you said in a wrong way.

If your meaning is to be correct? That means only the totally faithful believers will be remaining alive for eternity.
That is not what, 1 Corinthians 3:15, tells us!

Verse 15, speaks of the total loser believers who does everything wrong after salvation!

​

If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—​

even though only as one escaping through the flames. ​

​

Loss of reward. Not eternal life!​

Eating from the Tree of Life is God's way of saying and revealing God's full approval of such a resurrected believer.
It is telling them that the way they conducted themselves and transformed into by means of the Spirit, has God's full approval!
That would want them to be that way forever!

In Christ. Grace and peace!

No, Genez. It is not a logical entailment of my view. that "only the totally faithful believers will be remaining alive for eternity."

It is quite possible under my view that saints in the future ages may not perfectly fulfil their duties according to the will of Christ, humbly acknowledge their failure at once, and find mercy and be granted to keep on having access to the tree of life. This would be an example of a saint who is not totally faithful nevertheless retaining immortality.

It is also quite possible under my view that some saint in the future ages may not perfectly fulfil their duties according to the will of Christ, dig their proud toes in and not humbly acknowledge their failure but deny the truth for a day, weeks, possibly years, and be barred from access to the tree of life and the holy city, (as per Rev 22) until they become very sick in their exile. It is possible that they ultimately repent and are restores to holiness and be granted renewed access to the tree of life. This would be another example of a saint who remained immortal, but had not been perfectly faithful.
It is also possible that the recalcitrant "saint" ultimately refuses to repent until they die, and are then cast out of the new heavens and earth into the lake of fire that is outside of the new heavens and earth. This would be an instance of a reprobate believer losing their contingent immortality.

Your assertion re the entailments of my view do not logically follow from my view as i stated it.

 

[Genez]

No, Genez. It is not a logical entailment of my view. that "only the totally faithful believers will be remaining alive for eternity."

It is quite possible under my view that saints in the future ages may not perfectly fulfil their duties according to the will of Christ, humbly acknowledge their failure at once, and find mercy and be granted to keep on having access to the tree of life. This would be an example of a saint who is not totally faithful nevertheless retaining immortality.

It is also quite possible under my view that some saint in the future ages may not perfectly fulfil their duties according to the will of Christ, dig their proud toes in and not humbly acknowledge their failure but deny the truth for a day, weeks, possibly years, and be barred from access to the tree of life and the holy city, (as per Rev 22) until they become very sick in their exile. It is possible that they ultimately repent and are restores to holiness and be granted renewed access to the tree of life. This would be another example of a saint who remained immortal, but had not been perfectly faithful.
It is also possible that the recalcitrant "saint" ultimately refuses to repent until they die, and are then cast out of the new heavens and earth into the lake of fire that is outside of the new heavens and earth. This would be an instance of a reprobate believer losing their contingent immortality.

Your assertion re the entailments of my view do not logically follow from my view as i stated it.

Wow! Super legalism! Wow!

So be it...

 

[PaulThomson]

PaulThomson said:
No, Genez. It is not a logical entailment of my view. that "only the totally faithful believers will be remaining alive for eternity."

It is quite possible under my view that saints in the future ages may not perfectly fulfil their duties according to the will of Christ, humbly acknowledge their failure at once, and find mercy and be granted to keep on having access to the tree of life. This would be an example of a saint who is not totally faithful nevertheless retaining immortality.

It is also quite possible under my view that some saint in the future ages may not perfectly fulfil their duties according to the will of Christ, dig their proud toes in and not humbly acknowledge their failure but deny the truth for a day, weeks, possibly years, and be barred from access to the tree of life and the holy city, (as per Rev 22) until they become very sick in their exile. It is possible that they ultimately repent and are restores to holiness and be granted renewed access to the tree of life. This would be another example of a saint who remained immortal, but had not been perfectly faithful.
It is also possible that the recalcitrant "saint" ultimately refuses to repent until they die, and are then cast out of the new heavens and earth into the lake of fire that is outside of the new heavens and earth. This would be an instance of a reprobate believer losing their contingent immortality.

Your assertion re the entailments of my view do not logically follow from my view as i stated it.

Wow! Super legalism! Wow!

So be it...

How is that super legalism?

 

[Genez]

PaulThomson said:
No, Genez. It is not a logical entailment of my view. that "only the totally faithful believers will be remaining alive for eternity."

It is quite possible under my view that saints in the future ages may not perfectly fulfil their duties according to the will of Christ, humbly acknowledge their failure at once, and find mercy and be granted to keep on having access to the tree of life. This would be an example of a saint who is not totally faithful nevertheless retaining immortality.

It is also quite possible under my view that some saint in the future ages may not perfectly fulfil their duties according to the will of Christ, dig their proud toes in and not humbly acknowledge their failure but deny the truth for a day, weeks, possibly years, and be barred from access to the tree of life and the holy city, (as per Rev 22) until they become very sick in their exile. It is possible that they ultimately repent and are restores to holiness and be granted renewed access to the tree of life. This would be another example of a saint who remained immortal, but had not been perfectly faithful.
It is also possible that the recalcitrant "saint" ultimately refuses to repent until they die, and are then cast out of the new heavens and earth into the lake of fire that is outside of the new heavens and earth. This would be an instance of a reprobate believer losing their contingent immortality.

Your assertion re the entailments of my view do not logically follow from my view as i stated it.

How is that super legalism?

Keeping salvation by works.

 

[PaulThomson]

Keeping salvation by works.

How is relying on the sacrifice of Christ and pledging allegiance to Him in the ages to come suddenly "salvation by works" and s"uper legalism", when in this present age they are salvation in grace through faith. There is no expiry date on the sacrifice of the cross for reconciling sinners to God. Are you trying to limit the unlimited efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ?