SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : The Kingdom of God

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

Quote:
Proud papa,
With much seeking and thought,this what I believe what this Scripture,
" every Spirit that confesses that Jesus has come in the flesh, "
" every spirit that confesses not,that Jesus has come in ( our) the flesh,"

* Every spirit that confesses NOT that Jesus has come into our flesh,....
Meaning,every spirit that is NOT of God,...
far-instant,( whatever that comes up in me,you,or anyone,)
Like,unforgiveness spirit,..a hatred spirit,......a contention spirit,....a lying ....etc....Whatever that is not Godly.

IT is an ANTI- CHRIST spirit
Meaning,it is AGAIST Christ. ( Anti Christ)

On the other hand,..Every Spirit that resonates / comes from / confesses,
That Jesus Christ has come into our flesh,....( the fruits of The Spirit,..
Love,Joy ,Peace,Long-suffering,gentleness,kindness,...etc.
His attributes,)...God' [ly]Spirit is of God.

We do not just confess with our mouths,...We confess by how we are ,
Our actions.

Is that how you see it Proud papa ?

You ask such a GREAT question

-------------------

elizabeth



Amen...

Quote:

by proudpapa on 2016/6/8 15:06:25

Elibeth, RE: /// Is that how you see it Proud papa ?///

absolutely.



...and Amen!!


2Cor 4:7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

 2016/6/8 15:28









 Re:

This is a post that Julius21 promoted and endorsed
Much more but why bother, he will twist and turn and evade for ever.

"Mr. Preston has finally gone on record! Mr. Preston claims Christ Jesus no longer possesses the body of His birth and resurrection. Mr. Preston attempts to downplay the implication of his heresy by qualifying his position as a “physical” body, but this is simply more intellectual dishonesty on his part. Webster’s 1830 definition of the term “body” is, “The frame of an animal; the material substance of an animal, in distinction from the living principle of beasts and soul of man”, “Matter, as opposed to spirit”, “any extended solid substance”. The fact is human bodies are “physical”. Inherent within the concept of a human body is the concept of “physical”. Thus when Dr. Kenneth Gentry points out Paul in, Col 2:8, 9, explains Christ Jesus has His body, Paul is referring to the fact Christ Jesus possesses the human body of His birth and resurrection. If Christ Jesus no longer has the body of His birth and resurrection, He is no longer human."

The implication of Mr. Preston’s view, whether he wants to admit it or not is that the historical Christ Jesus no longer exists. In other words, according to Mr. Preston, Christ Jesus temporally made use of a human body, the incarnation was only temporary! This, of course is essentially the same position held by the second century docetics, “Doceticism refers to the doctrine that the manhood of Christ was apparent not real, that as in some Greek myths, a divine being was dressed up as a man in order to communicate revelations, but was not really involved in the human state…” 1 According to Dr. Roger E. Olson, “…sophisticated doectics held a dualistic Christology that strongly distinguished between “Christ”, a heavenly, spiritual redeemer and “Jesus,” the human taken over by the Christ and used as his instrument for a time on earth.” 2 Indeed, this is the Christ of Mr. Preston, a Christ who no longer possesses the body of His birth and resurrection. The fact of the matter is Mr. Preston is advocating a “sophisticated” heretical view which dates back to the second century. The logical implication is that Christ is no longer the God-man. That is damnable heresy and Criswell knew it and called Preston on it.

 2016/6/8 15:33









 Re:

EDIT:

Quote:
by Rev__Enue on 2016/6/8 15:33:58

This is a post that Julius21 promoted and endorsed
Much more but why bother, he will twist and turn and evade for ever.

"Mr. Preston has finally gone on record! Mr. Preston claims Christ Jesus no longer possesses the body of His birth and resurrection. Mr. Preston attempts to downplay the implication of his heresy by qualifying his position as a “physical” body, but this is simply more intellectual dishonesty on his part. Webster’s 1830 definition of the term “body” is, “The frame of an animal; the material substance of an animal, in distinction from the living principle of beasts and soul of man”, “Matter, as opposed to spirit”, “any extended solid substance”. The fact is human bodies are “physical”. Inherent within the concept of a human body is the concept of “physical”. Thus when Dr. Kenneth Gentry points out Paul in, Col 2:8, 9, explains Christ Jesus has His body, Paul is referring to the fact Christ Jesus possesses the human body of His birth and resurrection. If Christ Jesus no longer has the body of His birth and resurrection, He is no longer human."

The implication of Mr. Preston’s view, whether he wants to admit it or not is that the historical Christ Jesus no longer exists. In other words, according to Mr. Preston, Christ Jesus temporally made use of a human body, the incarnation was only temporary! This, of course is essentially the same position held by the second century docetics, “Doceticism refers to the doctrine that the manhood of Christ was apparent not real, that as in some Greek myths, a divine being was dressed up as a man in order to communicate revelations, but was not really involved in the human state…” 1 According to Dr. Roger E. Olson, “…sophisticated doectics held a dualistic Christology that strongly distinguished between “Christ”, a heavenly, spiritual redeemer and “Jesus,” the human taken over by the Christ and used as his instrument for a time on earth.” 2 Indeed, this is the Christ of Mr. Preston, a Christ who no longer possesses the body of His birth and resurrection. The fact of the matter is Mr. Preston is advocating a “sophisticated” heretical view which dates back to the second century. The logical implication is that Christ is no longer the God-man. That is damnable heresy and Criswell knew it and called Preston on it.



You should post the link so all can see the context of your machinations.

I remember that. I was posting a video by him on a completely different subject. Up to the time I found the video, I had never heard of him. I saw a video of him having a very civilized and loving conversation with Michael Brown that had nothing to do with what you wrote above. The writing above is your post not mine. You are not fooling anyone.

People quote others and post videos and links by others but don't necessarily agree with everything that person stands for and many times (as in this case) they don't even know all the things a person believes (which was my case with Preston).

If this is all you have, you have nothing yet you have based severe libel and slander on your post, not mine. You should apologize to Elibeth and Toszu.

This is eating you up and you are spending a lot of time spinning your wheels.

I agreed with one thing Preston talked about. That does not mean I agree with everything. Anybody can figure that out.

You are employing "guilt by association" something Roman Catholic Inquisitors did on a regular basis.

 2016/6/8 15:51









 Re:

Julius stated:

"Now having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, 'The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; nor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or 'There it is!' For behold, the kingdom of God is within you." (Luke 17:20,21)

It is not physical:"


Wrong and heretical. It is most certainly physical, material and eternal in it's
final form when Jesus Christ reigns on earth from Jerusalem.

 2016/6/8 16:06
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Mr. Preston

Oracio wrote :

Yes, unfortunately I will have to agree that Mr. Preston holds to full Preterism (denying the Second Coming of Christ and bodily resurrection of believers), making him a a heretic who should be shunned by believers.


_________________


Julius21 responded :

Oracio,

I earlier distanced myself from Full Preterism, and that was not what this debate was about.


_______________

Oracio responded :
|
Brother Julius, this thought also came to mind. Let's say someone here were to post a teaching by let's say for example Joel Osteen and say they agree with that particular teaching in some respects. It would be hard for many of us to take seriously anything coming from Osteen. We wouldn't even want to give him the time of day. Hope you understand that's how I feel regarding anyone who holds to Full Preterism, as I see it to be that serious of an error.

_______________

Julius21 responded :
|
I do fully understand, Oracio. I agree it is definitely a serious error, too. Being corrected and even alerted to error does not offend me. I am actually thankful for it.


https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=55639&forum=36&start=20&viewmode=flat&order=1




 2016/6/8 16:21Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5621
NC, USA

 Re: Mr. Preston

Julius just said that he does not hold to Docetism. He certainly is not teaching it.

That's good enough for me. If some here don't believe him there is nothing he can say that will change your mind so just let God handle it.

Quoting someone without fully vetting their every nuance of belief is not a crime. I am sure we have all done it.


_________________
Todd

 2016/6/8 18:15Profile
docs
Member



Joined: 2006/9/16
Posts: 2206


 Re: Your motives are transparent

/David

If I ask you who Jesus is you will tell me and what you will say
will line up with the Word of God and the witness of the Holy Spirit I am sure.

When asked this person did not respond but continues to camouflage
and go in circles. He has proclaimed another spirit and another jesus on a number of occasions, Many of the brethren here know it and some have told me as much. Producing the evidence is easy, just read his many posts and you will be able to parse the information yourself.

Also the Spirit bears witness that we are children of God and he also warns of the anti-Christ spirit that permeates so much of religion. Even in this place sadly./

One second after I read your first hints not long ago of a heretic or heretics being on the forum I knew you were out to get Julius by beginning to drop hints like you did. Then you said well I am not allowed to name names but all along it was obvious you were planning for it to get out who you were referring to. You've doe that which was your goal from the beginning. Then you said there are numerous instances of where he said these things and the specific quotes are available to anyone who wants to see them. But all you can come up with is well just go and read his posts. Julius has explained the one reference that you posted accusing him. Where are the numerous other examples you should be able to readily provide after making such strong accusations? You motives are transparent and motivated by a personal grudge and vendetta against Julius. It's shameful to go into the lady's thread and do this. Your disrespect for Greg and his ethical wishes for this forum remain enormous in my opinion. Just saying it like it is since this thread is likely to get locked anyway but you and NDY have ruined it anyway and gone off into subjects not even vaguely remoted to the original question of the person who began the thread. But you have an axe to grind so I guess you think it is okay. Things were going along pretty dang good on the forum with many subjects and comments from more than a few. I would apologize to the person who began this thread with very good intentions and had a good discussion going worthy of reading. I knew what you were up to from the very first second you mentioned heretics not long ago. There is a much better and more Christian way to do things. I apologize to everyone reading but something needs to be said. If the thread gets locked maybe it's on me but even a small whit of spiritual discernment can show something is out of kilter here.




_________________
David Winter

 2016/6/8 19:00Profile
docs
Member



Joined: 2006/9/16
Posts: 2206


 Re: Perhaps TMK

Perhaps if someone may believe that Christ came again spiritually in 70 AD their view may be associated with the notion that they believe Christ did not rise physically but spiritually and therefore came again spiritually in 70 AD. I guess. I don't believe he came spiritually in 70 AD nor came at all then. I'm just wondering out loud. To my knowledge, limited as it may be, those who believe Christ came again spiritually in 70 AD do not necessarily believe He did not rise physically and will not return physically at the second advent. I'm just wondering if one view (he came spiritually in 70 AD) may make one automatically suspect of believing he did not rise physically. I'm not sure this is always the case.

Blessings.


_________________
David Winter

 2016/6/8 19:11Profile
docs
Member



Joined: 2006/9/16
Posts: 2206


 Re: Hebrews 6:4-5 and the Kingdom of God

4 For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,

5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, (Hebrews 6:4-5)

One thing that has blessed me in my understanding of the kingdom is the significance of Christ's two fold advent and not just one. Especially since the powers of the age to come will be on full display and manifestsation in the day He comes again. Yet, even now, the powers of the age to come have already been inaugurated and unexpectedly brought into this age by Christ and His pouring out of the Holy Spirit from on high. The power of the kingdom is even now overlapping with htis present evul age. The kingdom is 'already" here in power but "not yet" in the power and glory we will see when Christ returns. I am waiting for that day but already have a significant down payment and am already tasting of the powers of that day. Christ "already" reigns we just "not yet" see the full manifestation of His reign. But it has begun! The age to come and the powers thereof are overlapping into this age causing a overlapping of the two ages. Both are here, one is coming and one is going. All roads in this age lead to the day of the Lord which is the day of Christ's second advent yet, going against the grain of common thought, Christ unexpectedly has loosed the powers of the age to come into this age. BEFORE the day of the Lord! O glory be!


_________________
David Winter

 2016/6/8 19:42Profile
InTheLight
Member



Joined: 2003/7/31
Posts: 2772
Phoenix, Arizona USA

 Re: The Kingdom of God

I recently went through a study on the kingdom of God with help from the Vines entry for the word kingdom (basileia). I will post the entry here, prayerfully searching through all the Scriptures that are referenced will be helpful to this consideration of the Kingdom of God;

<1,,932,basileia>
is primarily an abstract noun, denoting "sovereignty, royal power, dominion," e.g., Rev. 17:18, translated "(which) reigneth," lit., "hath a kingdom" (RV marg.); then, by metonymy, a concrete noun, denoting the territory or people over whom a king rules, e.g., Matt. 4:8; Mark 3:24. It is used especially of the "kingdom" of God and of Christ.

"The Kingdom of God is (a) the sphere of God's rule, Ps. 22:28; 145:13; Dan. 4:25; Luke 1:52; Rom. 13:1,2. Since, however, this earth is the scene of universal rebellion against God, e.g., Luke 4:5,6; 1 John 5:19; Rev. 11:15-18, the "kingdom" of God is (b) the sphere in which, at any given time, His rule is acknowledged. God has not relinquished His sovereignty in the face of rebellion, demoniac and human, but has declared His purpose to establish it, Dan. 2:44; 7:14; 1 Cor. 15:24,25. Meantime, seeking willing obedience, He gave His law to a nation and appointed kings to administer His "kingdom" over it, 1 Chron. 28:5. Israel, however, though declaring still a nominal allegiance shared in the common rebellion, Isa. 1:2-4, and, after they had rejected the Son of God, John 1:11 (cp. Matt. 21:33-43), were "cast away," Rom. 11:15,20,25. Henceforth God calls upon men everywhere, without distinction of race or nationality, to submit voluntarily to His rule. Thus the "kingdom" is said to be "in mystery" now, Mark 4:11, that is, it does not come within the range of the natural powers of observation, Luke 17:20, but is spiritually discerned, John 3:3 (cp. 1 Cor. 2:14). When, hereafter, God asserts His rule universally, then the "kingdom" will be in glory, that is, it will be manifest to all; cp. Matt. 25:31-34; Phil. 2:9-11; 2 Tim. 4:1,18.

"Thus, speaking generally, references to the Kingdom fall into two classes, the first, in which it is viewed as present and involving suffering for those who enter it, 2 Thess. 1:5; the second, in which it is viewed as future and is associated with reward, Matt. 25:34, and glory, Matt. 13:43. See also Acts 14:22.

"The fundamental principle of the Kingdom is declared in the words of the Lord spoken in the midst of a company of Pharisees, "the Kingdom of God is in the midst of you," Luke 17:21, marg., that is, where the King is, there is the Kingdom. Thus at the present time and so far as this earth is concerned, where the King is and where His rule is acknowledged, is, first, in the heart of the individual believer, Acts 4:19; Eph. 3:17; 1 Pet. 3:15; and then in the churches of God, 1 Cor. 12:3,5,11; 14:37; cp. Col. 1:27, where for "in" read "among."

"Now, the King and His rule being refused, those who enter the Kingdom of God are brought into conflict with all who disown its allegiance, as well as with the desire for ease, and the dislike of suffering and unpopularity, natural to all. On the other hand, subjects of the Kingdom are the objects of the care of God, Matt. 6:33, and of the rejected King, Heb. 13:5.

"Entrance into the Kingdom of God is by the new birth, Matt. 18:3; John 3:5, for nothing that a man may be by nature, or can attain to by any form of self-culture, avails in the spiritual realm. And as the new nature, received in the new birth, is made evident by obedience, it is further said that only such as do the will of God shall enter into His Kingdom, Matt. 7:21, where, however, the context shows that the reference is to the future, as in 2 Pet. 1:10,11. Cp. also 1 Cor. 6:9,10; Gal. 5:21; Eph. 5:5.

"The expression 'Kingdom of God' occurs four times in Matthew, 'Kingdom of the Heavens' usually taking its place. The latter (cp. Dan. 4:26) does not occur elsewhere in NT, but see 2 Tim. 4:18, "His heavenly Kingdom." ... This Kingdom is identical with the Kingdom of the Father (cp. Matt. 26:29 with Mark 14:25), and with the Kingdom of the Son (cp. Luke 22:30). Thus there is but one Kingdom, variously described: of the Son of Man, Matt. 13:41; of Jesus, Rev. 1:9; of Christ Jesus, 2 Tim. 4:1; "of Christ and God," Eph. 5:5; "of our Lord, and of His Christ," Rev. 11:15; "of our Lord, and of His Christ," Rev. 11:15; "of our God, and the authority of His Christ," 12:10; "of the Son of His love," Col. 1:13.

"Concerning the future, the Lord taught His disciples to pray, "Thy Kingdom come," Matt. 6:10, where the verb is in the point tense, precluding the notion of gradual progress and development, and implying a sudden catastrophe as declared in 2 Thess. 2:8.

"Concerning the present, that a man is of the Kingdom of God is not shown in the punctilious observance of ordinances, which are external and material, but in the deeper matters of the heart, which are spiritual and essential, viz., 'righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit,' Rom. 14:17." * [* From Notes on Thessalonians by Hogg and Vine, pp. 68-70.]

"With regard to the expressions "the Kingdom of God" and the "Kingdom of the Heavens," while they are often used interchangeably, it does not follow that in every case they mean exactly the same and are quite identical.

"The Apostle Paul often speaks of the Kingdom of God, not dispensationally but morally, e.g., in Rom. 14:17; 1 Cor. 4:20, but never so of the Kingdom of Heaven. 'God' is not the equivalent of 'the heavens.' He is everywhere and above all dispensations, whereas 'the heavens' are distinguished from the earth, until the Kingdom comes in judgment and power and glory (Rev. 11:15, RV) when rule in heaven and on earth will be one.

"While, then, the sphere of the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven are at times identical, yet the one term cannot be used indiscriminately for the other. In the 'Kingdom of Heaven' (32 times in Matt.), heaven is in antithesis to earth, and the phrase is limited to the Kingdom in its earthly aspect for the time being, and is used only dispensationally and in connection with Israel. In the 'Kingdom of God', in its broader aspect, God is in antithesis to 'man' or 'the world,' and the term signifies the entire sphere of God's rule and action in relation to the world. It has a moral and spiritual force and is a general term for the Kingdom at any time. The Kingdom of Heaven is always the Kingdom of God, but the Kingdom of God is not limited to the Kingdom of Heaven, until in their final form, they become identical; e.g., Rev. 11:15, RV; John 3:5; Rev. 12:10.".


_________________
Ron Halverson

 2016/6/8 20:00Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy