An Analysis on the 144,000 in Revelation

[Everlasting-Grace]

He drew you into a personal back and forth.
Put him on ignore
He stopped debating rationally a long time ago.

When God makes a promise. and someone states God will not keep that promise.

That's calling God a liar.

Until he can explain how the promise of God given to one nation (an eternal promise) is no longer valid. Then he has nothing.

Thats why he is doing what he is doing. He knows he can't counter what I said. so he is tryign to blame shift.

 

[Jocund]

When God makes a promise. and someone states God will not keep that promise.

That's calling God a liar.

Until he can explain how the promise of God given to one nation (an eternal promise) is no longer valid. Then he has nothing.

Thats why he is doing what he is doing. He knows he can't counter what I said. so he is tryign to blame shift.

Please read Romans 9 and Galatians 3.

The promises were not made to the "nation" of Israel. It's not as though the promises were made in vain. It is a fact that not all of Israel are Israel. The promise is counted through the singular seed of Abraham, not the seeds. Christ is that seed. And if you are Christ's you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise.

 

[godlovejoy]

You accuse, Yet you will not openly state what sins I am accused of.

Yes...please show us the sin that was committed!!

 

[FreeGrace2]

What's the difference? First is Satan, then the others follow. That's the beginning of the end.

The difference?? Satan is NOT a "judgment". He is a fallen angel, the worst of all of them.

The seal judgments ARE judgments, and they are NOT Satan.

That's the difference. I am pointing out that we can't put a specific time frame on WHEN any of the 4 horsemen begin their judgment, but by the 4th one, about one-fourth of the population will be killed.

We have to wait for the 6th seal in order to have a specific start time.

 

[Jocund]

Yes...please show us the sin that was committed!!

I'm posting this not so much for your sake as just generally for anyone that does not condone gaslighting.

The offending quotes are as follows:

But for you to twist, and pervert the word of God and call him a liar. Well that just wrong. .

You should be praising God. Not calling hm a liar

The accusation is that these statements are an act of bearing false witness. David never called God a liar therefore his claim is justified. David made it very clear which posts were the offending posts.

My suggestion is that you should attack what you perceive to be bad doctrine instead of attacking someone personally by claiming they said something they never said. Personal attacks are unwelcome and have no place here.

That said, don't do it again and there'll be no hard feelings. Let's all get along and share in God's love.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Please read Romans 9 and Galatians 3.

The promises were not made to the "nation" of Israel. It's not as though the promises were made in vain. It is a fact that not all of Israel are Israel. The promise is counted through the singular seed of Abraham, not the seeds. Christ is that seed. And if you are Christ's you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise.

Please read Gen 15, 17 and others concerning the promise of land given to one child and his descendants as an eternal promise

The LAND promise was given to one nation and one nation only.

Romans 11 asserts that this promise is still valid. As Israel (the nation physical descendents) are blinded in part until the time of the gentile is complete. Then ALL Israel will be saved,

Its all over the OT.

 

[Oblio]

Two-house theology...the commonwealth of Israel. It's where the Lord's led me!

 

[Runningman]

If the sheep and goat separation is at the Great white throne judgment then this would be the second resurrection where all the dead will be raised and judged whether they have done go

Yes I agree, but I don’t have a commonly-held view on the first resurrection. I’ll try to briefly explain my interpretation of the scriptures.

Revelation 20:4-6 KJV
4And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 6Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Do you see the first resurrection is divided into two categories?

The bonus first resurrection is that those martyred in the great tribulation get to enjoy the perks of having a resurrected, glorified, body during the millennial kingdom while all of the other saints get to be in the millennial kingdom in their spirit form.

After the 1,000 years are complete, those who were not given a resurrection body are then given a resurrection body. And they follow Christ to the Great White Throne Judgement but receive mercy for their sins. The second resurrection is just for unrepentant unsaved sinners.l; they will receive second death. I hope someone else can see this too.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

I'm posting this not so much for your sake as just generally for anyone that does not condone gaslighting.

The offending quotes are as follows:





The accusation is that these statements are an act of bearing false witness. David never called God a liar therefore his claim is justified. David made it very clear which posts were the offending posts.

My suggestion is that you should attack what you perceive to be bad doctrine instead of attacking someone personally by claiming they said something they never said. Personal attacks are unwelcome and have no place here.

That said, don't do it again and there'll be no hard feelings. Let's all get along and share in God's love.

Actually, Yes he did call God a liar. Not once but twice

I proved my case.

So it is him who is a liar.

 

[Jocund]

Actually, Yes he did call God a liar. Not once but twice

I proved my case.

So it is him who is a liar.

Please provide the post numbers for where this occurred.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Please provide the post numbers for where this occurred.

when you and him state Gods promise to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and his 12 sons and their families as an eternal promise is no longer valid. You call him a liar.

When you say the 144000 are not from Israel. You call the angel who told John to write that number down, and God, who gave him the message, liars.

Lets just stick with that why don't we

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Please read Romans 9 and Galatians 3.

The promises were not made to the "nation" of Israel. It's not as though the promises were made in vain.

Here's where the study of "SEED [PLURAL]" and "SEED [SINGULAR]" in Genesis comes in (as I've pointed out in past posts of other threads). = )

It is a fact that not all of Israel are Israel.

No one disputes this fact.

There ARE differing interpretations of just what this verse MEANS, however.

For example, J.Piper (for one example), in one of his books, mistranslates this verse by his moving the negative FROM the first clause TO the second clause in the sentence, thereby completely changing the MEANING of the text to express the opposite of what Paul is actually conveying here (which many people also mistakenly think this text means).


Another author, who correctly translates this verse (keeping the negative in the proper clause), has this to say about the verse:

"Paul draws a contrast of two Israels: Israel the whole, and believing Israel within Israel the whole. Both Israels comprise Jews only. While some Covenant Theologians wish to make the believing Israel the Church, other Covenant Theologians agree that this verse contrasts Jews who believe and Jews who do not."

-- http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/reformed/israelaf.htm - [bold and underline mine]
[SCROLL DOWN to where the verse "Romans 9:6" is being covered (for the above quote); See also the entries under "Romans 11:26"... "Galatians 6:16"... and "Ephesians 2:12"... which are the other key verses which the two main interpreting-bodies interpret differently... to see why / how).

The bottom line of that article (at link) being, ALL 73 references to the term "Israel" in the NT ALL mean "Israel"...


... so Rom9:6 speaks (as this author puts it) of: "Israel the whole, and believing Israel WITHIN Israel the whole. BOTH Israels comprise JEWS ONLY; ... [i.e.] Jews who believe and Jews who do not." That's the CONTEXT.


It isn't clear which of these two ways ^ (that ppl are interpreting this verse) that YOU are interpreting it to mean. Would you care to clarify what it is you believe this verse is conveying? (I THINK I have an idea, based on the rest of your post, but I'm not sure how you're seeing it.)

The promise is counted through the singular seed of Abraham, not the seeds. Christ is that seed. And if you are Christ's you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise.

Again, studying "SEED [PLURAL]" and "SEED [SINGULAR]" in Genesis, will aid one's understanding of just why Paul is speaking in Galatians 3:16 of "SEED [SINGULAR]" (rather than referring to the other, which is also a thing )

 

[Jocund]

Here's where the study of "SEED [PLURAL]" and "SEED [SINGULAR]" in Genesis comes in (as I've pointed out in past posts of other threads). = )



No one disputes this fact.

There ARE differing interpretations of just what this verse MEANS, however.

-- http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/reformed/israelaf.htm - [bold and underline mine]
[SCROLL DOWN to where the verse "Romans 9:6" is being covered (for the above quote); See also the entries under "Romans 11:26"... "Galatians 6:16"... and "Ephesians 2:12"... which are the other key verses which the two main interpreting-bodies interpret differently... to see why / how).

The bottom line of that article (at link) being, ALL 73 references to the term "Israel" in the NT ALL mean "Israel"...


... so Rom9:6 speaks (as this author puts it) of: "Israel the whole, and believing Israel WITHIN Israel the whole. BOTH Israels comprise JEWS ONLY; ... [i.e.] Jews who believe and Jews who do not." That's the CONTEXT.


It isn't clear which of these two ways ^ (that ppl are interpreting this verse) that YOU are interpreting it to mean. Would you care to clarify what it is you believe this verse is conveying? (I THINK I have an idea, based on the rest of your post, but I'm not sure how you're seeing it.)

Oh excellent, you've finally agreed to read and reply to my post:

You didn't read my post, this is a waste of time.

Thank you very much for taking the time.

"And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the Lord, who appeared unto him." - Gen 12:7 KJV

In Genesis 12, we see that "seed" is indeed singular and related to a promise. This fits in with Galatians 3 where it is stated that Christ is the sole seed of the promise.

"That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;" - Gen 22:17 KJV

There are two seeds in Gen 22:17. I agree with your/W.Kelly's assessment that this is a multiple of seeds / seeds of flesh ussage in the first instance of seed in Gen 22:17. This passage lines up well with Romans 9:27.

"Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:" - Romans 9:27 KJV

There is no explicit promise to the multiple seed in Gen 22:17, only that Abraham is promised to have a multitude of descendants. And of these descendants through Israel only a remnant is saved. The second seed in Gen 22:17 however very clearly lines up with Christ.

"I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture." - John 10:9 KJV

"Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate." - Heb 13:13 KJV

"I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death." - Rev 1:18 KJV

When we look at Gen 22:18, this also in reference to the singular seed that is Christ.

"And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice." - Gen 22:18 KJV



"Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." - Romans 9:7-8 KJV

"Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ." - Galatians 3:16 KJV

The seed of the promise (Christ) was called in Isaac's line (e.g. Matthew 1:1-25 KJV).



The seed is Christ, not Isaac.



"And the Lord shall make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath; if that thou hearken unto the commandments of the Lord thy God, which I command thee this day, to observe and to do them:" - Deut 28:13 KJV

The entirety of Deuteronomy 28 starts with an "IF" statement, and that "IF" statement is repeated in the line that talks about the tail and head.

The fact is that no one except for Christ fulfilled the law, therefore He is the only one that could be the recipient of the promises listed there. Christ is the head.

"For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." - James 2:10 KJV



"And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the Lord: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me." - Isaiah 49:23&26 KJV

This was addressed to the Israelites of the day.



I realize this is just a quoted section from William Kelly, but assuming you are advocating for the same position, are you proposing that Isaiah 49 contains a bestowed stewardship that is not continuous with Christ (who is of Israel) but is continuous with those of Israel that reject Christ?

If this is the case, why does it not apply to Christ? And why do you perceive it as a bestowed stewardship as opposed to a prophesy?



"For he that is dead is freed from sin." - Romans 6:7 KJV



The time-frame is an interesting question. I'm not terribly familiar with the context of the years. It sounds like a teachable moment and I would love to hear more on this.



I don't think anyone is making the claim that anything promised was voided or spoken falsely in scripture. The dispute is usually about what specifically was promised, how it was promised, and to whom it was promised.

And now back to your recent post:

For example, J.Piper (for one example), in one of his books, mistranslates this verse by his moving the negative FROM the first clause TO the second clause in the sentence, thereby completely changing the MEANING of the text to express the opposite of what Paul is actually conveying here (which many people also mistakenly think this text means).

KJV. Look at KJV and the source Greek. I don't care about random authors. Cut out the middle man. Go to the source.

... so Rom9:6 speaks (as this author puts it) of: "Israel the whole, and believing Israel WITHIN Israel the whole. BOTH Israels comprise JEWS ONLY; ... [i.e.] Jews who believe and Jews who do not." That's the CONTEXT.

Yes. And the only part of Israel that fulfilled the law and is heir to the promise is Christ. And from Gal 3, those that are in Christ are coheirs to the promise.

Again, studying "SEED [PLURAL]" and "SEED [SINGULAR]" in Genesis, will aid one's understanding of just why Paul is speaking in Galatians 3:16 of "SEED [SINGULAR]" (rather than referring to the other, which is also a thing )

Look back at the other thread, I disputed your point. The promise to Abraham was to Christ and those in Christ, no one else.

 

[Jocund]

when you and him state Gods promise to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and his 12 sons and their families as an eternal promise is no longer valid.

Please provide the post number where someone claimed this.

When you say the 144000 are not from Israel.

Please provide the post number where someone claimed that.

 

[DavidTree]

Please read Gen 15, 17 and others concerning the promise of land given to one child and his descendants as an eternal promise

The LAND promise was given to one nation and one nation only.

Romans 11 asserts that this promise is still valid. As Israel (the nation physical descendents) are blinded in part until the time of the gentile is complete. Then ALL Israel will be saved,

Its all over the OT.

AGREE - Please read when this will happen in Matthew ch23 and Zechariah chapter 14

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

KJV. Look at KJV and the source Greek. I don't care about random authors. Cut out the middle man. Go to the source.

The only reason I brought up "the middle man [/men]" is because, at least it SOUNDED to me as though, your viewpoint on Romans 9:6 was the same conclusion J.Piper also comes to (in his re-arranging of the negative to the second clause of the sentence), as to what this verse is conveying.







For the readers: (a quote also from the LINKED article I had provided in that post)...


[quoting from linked article]

Abraham, the Father of All Who Believe (Romans 4)

[MTBC] Abraham is the father of all who believe (Romans 4:11,16). He is the perfect person to fill this role because he was both a Gentile and a Jew. He put his faith in the Lord (Gen. 15:6) long before he was circumcised (Romans 4:10), and Gentiles need to believe God as he did. He was the father of the Jewish people (along with Isaac and Jacob) and the sign of circumcision began with him. The Jewish people need to believe God as he did and imitate father Abraham's faith. So Abraham is the father of all who believe, both Gentiles and Jews.

"[Paul] is not teaching that Gentiles become 'spiritual Jews.' Rather, those who follow the pattern of Abraham and exercise faith are the true children of Abraham. By calling all believers the sons of Abraham, he does not call all believers 'spiritual Jews.' Jewishness is not determined by Abraham alone, but by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It is interesting that Gentile believers are never referred to as 'the sons of Jacob,' only as the sons of Abraham. So by calling Gentile believers the sons of Abraham, Paul does not mean they are spiritual Jews, but rather they follow Abraham's pattern in that they go on the basis of faith, not on the basis of works. Those who are the sons of Abraham are not spiritual Jews, but simply followers of Abraham's pattern, because that is what the phrase 'sons of' generally means in Hebrew; that is, 'a follower of.' Spiritual Jews are Jews who happen to believe and exercise faith. Gentiles who believe and exercise faith are spiritual Gentiles and are the spiritual seed of Abraham, but that does not make them spiritual Jews"

[Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Faith Alone--The Condition of Our Salvation--An Exposition of the Book of Galatians and Other Relevant Topics].


[MTBC] Believing Jews are actually imitating Abraham's great act of faith performed when he was a Gentile (Genesis 15:6).

[end quoting from linked article in my Post #432; bold and underline mine -- http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/reformed/israelaf.htm ]


[TDW: ...that is,... before "Israel" was a thing
Note the CHRONOLOGY of Romans 4 (as spelled out in the third sentence of the above article): KEY!]

 

[RR]

Just a reminder:
Can you find a directive from the LORD or the Apostles that the LORD will leave behind His Saints and then come back for them after the Resurrection?

Where did I say he did?

 

[RR]

Wow Amazing You speak Truth Brother...I hear the same in the spirit I feel so connected I’ve written on other blogs about these two groups you are so eloquent in you’re writing as I am not...it’s hard for me to get my point across...🙏🏼

Thank you Sis!

 

[RR]

Your interpretation that the foolish virgins eventually find salvation is interesting, but how do you address the imagery of wailing and gnashing of teeth that happens at the end of that parable (and at the end of the parable of the wedding banquet) and is usually associated with hellfire and damnation in the Lake of Fire? The foolish virgins can't be part of Christ and by the conclusion of the parable aren't destined to be saved.

No offense, but could you share some scriptures? Thanks!

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Please provide the post number where someone claimed this.



Please provide the post number where someone claimed that.

You have not been reading very well have you?