You Know You Are Gaining Ground When the Mormons Call you Names:

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by MichaellS

Using your Matt 19:28 reference which points us,

“that they will sit on 12 thrones and judge the tribes of Israel, ,”

Fair enough question. Because nothing I can find tells us we have ended the thousand year reign while the final judgement begins.

The second “rulers of many things” point I can agree, as can happen then or now. But,

“Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained” (Acts 17:31)

No one I can find sufficiently details that the great white throne judgement happens outside of the ending thousand year reign. Even with the Rev 20 wording.

May I ask, were you working up to something by asking Alan “you do not explain WHY Christ would tell them this.”?

Because clearly, the Bible teaches us that after our deaths, Christ continues to appoint us as judges and rulers. I can see that being a "judge" may end at the end of the 1000 year reign, but not necessarily. And about being a "ruler"--there is nothing to state clearly in the Bible that this will end--and why should it?

The reason I gave you the "in my Father's house" scripture is because we normally do not think of a mansion being inside a house--correct? Yet clearly, Christ makes the statement that inside of His Father's house are many other houses.

By looking at the "judges and rulers" verses as well as the mansion and other verses that we see Christ teach us of the next life, it reads that Christ will continue to use those He has chosen in this life also in the next life. And why not?

The Christian world seems to have this belief that God--who can do all things and is all powerful, chose to design this world in one way, organize this world in one way and then upon our deaths, He changes. Suddenly he does not delegate the same, create the same, judge the same.

But I do NOT see that supported in the Bible, do you?

[alanmolstad]

Now as for the question, "What shall be the type of authority that they who sit on thrones have?"

Itsa natural question to ask....
Right now all we have is a system where people incharge tellthe people under them in the chain of command what to do.
Everywhere you look you see this same basic idea where people with offical positions have authority and boss around the people under them.

Thats this world's system.

and......its not God's.



What is God's system?....what is the system that will be in the Kingdom?

The answer is found at Matthew 20:25
"Jesus called them together and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them.
Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant
and whoever wants to be first must be your slave--
just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Now as for the question, "What shall be the type of authority that they who sit on have?"

Itsa natural question to ask....
Right now all we have is a system where people incharge tellthe people under them in the chain of command what to do.
Everywhere you look you see this same basic idea where people with offical positions have authority and boss around the people under them.

Thats this world's system.

and......its not God's.



What is God's system?....what is the system that will be in the Kingdom?

The answer is found at Matthew 20:25
"Jesus called them together and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them.
Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant
and whoever wants to be first must be your slave--
just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

For ignoring me, you sure are commenting a lot on this.

Okay, so the greatest "ruler" is the greatest servant--who is Jesus Christ. I agree.

You still did not answer, WHY did he tell the twelve that they would sit on 12 thrones and judge? Why does he tell us the parable of the talents where the "good and faith SERVANT" will be "ruler" of many? How will they rule? Who are the "many" they be serving in the next life and how?

[MichaellS]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Because clearly, the Bible teaches us that after our deaths, Christ continues to appoint us as judges and rulers. I can see that being a "judge" may end at the end of the 1000 year reign, but not necessarily. And about being a "ruler"--there is nothing to state clearly in the Bible that this will end--and why should it?

The reason I gave you the "in my Father's house" scripture is because we normally do not think of a mansion being inside a house--correct? Yet clearly, Christ makes the statement that inside of His Father's house are many other houses.

By looking at the "judges and rulers" verses as well as the mansion and other verses that we see Christ teach us of the next life, it reads that Christ will continue to use those He has chosen in this life also in the next life. And why not?

The Christian world seems to have this belief that God--who can do all things and is all powerful, chose to design this world in one way, organize this world in one way and then upon our deaths, He changes. Suddenly he does not delegate the same, create the same, judge the same.

But I do NOT see that supported in the Bible, do you?

Supported? In an attempt to answer, I may miss the desired application to answer you correctly when I say, , He doesn’t change, but upon our p***ing from this world, everything else does, sin and natural corruption, etc. This is of course not to be confused with our being baptized in His death here on earth so we then can resume with the rest of God’s people judging matters within the Body of Christ. Still, another point could be raised:

“, , then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.” (I Cor 13:12)

As in from here to there the same, isn’t that how you read that? The change for judging the unbelieving I think is obvious, till that which is perfect happens to us, it’s hands-off of the unbelieving. In fact, a complete reversal occurs upon our p***ing, we no longer judge those within but without, but till that that time we go to be with Him, we judge everything within and not without.

- - -

I didn’t attempt to align many mansions due some past disagreements I’ve encountered. I’m a bit surprised you haven’t pressed in on that “mansions” handling. In my earlier student times this was one of the first items to be noted as being a poor translation. Please consider if this isn’t agreeable to you,

“The Greek word for “mansions” occurs again in the New Testament only in John 14:23, where it is rendered abode.” Wiclif and the Geneva version read “dwellings.” It is found in the Greek of the Old Testament only in 1 Maccabees 7:38 (“Suffer them not to continue any longer”—“give them not an abode”). Our translators here followed the Vulgate, which has “mansiones “with the exact meaning of the Greek, that is; “resting-places,” “dwellings.” In Elizabethan English the word meant no more than this, and it now means no more in French or in the English of the North. A maison or a manse, is not necessarily a modern English mansion. It should also be noted that the Greek word is the substantive answering to the verb which is rendered “dwelleth” in John 14:10, and “abide” in John 15:4-10.” – Ellicott’s

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by MichaellS

......

[INDENT][I]“The Greek word for “mansions” occurs .......“with the exact meaning of the Greek, that is; “resting-places" ...]

I have a little story about this issue.

About 25 years ago I was working construction on a large house outside the Seattle area.
It was not just a very large house, it was going to be the headquarters of some type of religious person that just came here from China. (or was it Korea?...Im not really sure?)

I was told that many, many people would be at the house from time to time.

I worked on the house for about 2 months.
In that times we watched as different rooms were finished and things were taken into the house.

There were a lot of people from China also working around the house, and during our lunch breaks we would sit inside the house to get out of the rain and wind, and so I began to have a look around to see what was new?

Now near the end of my time working there about the last days before the house was going to be turned over to the people that would be running the place, I noticed that a truck showed up and they unloaded large box after box of the same thing?

Lots of boxes?........all the same?

So I had to find out what they were setting up inside one of the longest rooms?

I took my next break and during lunch I walked over to where some of the guys from China that were now friends with me were working on opening the boxes.

It was bunk beds????????

It looked like it was about 60 to about 100 bunk beds!

They set them inside this one very long room that I always wondered what the room would be used for?
It turns out to look like army barracks!

I had to know more...so i asked the guys from China about the room, and i was told that their religious leader puts on events and members of their religion all gather and so this room is where they would stay.

Then,(and here is the part that connects with your post)

Then the guy from China went on to talk about the Bible verse where is says that "In my Father house there are many ____" and he then translated the Greek word into a different word, and that word into a word that he said carried much the same meaning as the room they were setting up with all the bunk beds!


The context was the same as the Bible's word , of a room where lots of people can find a "safe place to find shelter, to rest and relax/sleep".


Thus, "Bunk Beds"

[alanmolstad]

Now Im not saying that "Bunk Beds"is a perfect word-for-word correct translation for the words used in the bible there.

But it was interesting to see how the guy from China had managed to make a strong case that the room they were setting up and the use of 100 bunk beds did result in something that he felt was a very close to the true understanding of the real "idea" that the Lord was talking about.


In my Father's house there are many......
http://www3.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/D...DFonvm3uql.jpg

...places to find rest...

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by MichaellS

Supported? In an attempt to answer, I may miss the desired application to answer you correctly when I say, , He doesn’t change, but upon our p***ing from this world, everything else does, sin and natural corruption, etc. This is of course not to be confused with our being baptized in His death here on earth so we then can resume with the rest of God’s people judging matters within the Body of Christ. Still, another point could be raised:

“, , then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.” (I Cor 13:12)

As in from here to there the same, isn’t that how you read that? The change for judging the unbelieving I think is obvious, till that which is perfect happens to us, it’s hands-off of the unbelieving. In fact, a complete reversal occurs upon our p***ing, we no longer judge those within but without, but till that that time we go to be with Him, we judge everything within and not without.

- - -

I didn’t attempt to align many mansions due some past disagreements I’ve encountered. I’m a bit surprised you haven’t pressed in on that “mansions” handling. In my earlier student times this was one of the first items to be noted as being a poor translation. Please consider if this isn’t agreeable to you,

“The Greek word for “mansions” occurs again in the New Testament only in John 14:23, where it is rendered abode.” Wiclif and the Geneva version read “dwellings.” It is found in the Greek of the Old Testament only in 1 Maccabees 7:38 (“Suffer them not to continue any longer”—“give them not an abode”). Our translators here followed the Vulgate, which has “mansiones “with the exact meaning of the Greek, that is; “resting-places,” “dwellings.” In Elizabethan English the word meant no more than this, and it now means no more in French or in the English of the North. A maison or a manse, is not necessarily a modern English mansion. It should also be noted that the Greek word is the substantive answering to the verb which is rendered “dwelleth” in John 14:10, and “abide” in John 15:4-10.” – Ellicott’s

In my father's house are many "dwelleth"---hmm, doesn't translate well.

In my fathers house are many dwellings---makes more sense. But lets maybe say it means, many dwell in my father's house. I can accept that. But once again, why are we told that good and faithful servants will be "ruler of many things." If I put "dwelling" in then this other scripture makes more sense.

So, once again, what "many things" will you rule over if you are a good and faithful servant? I have yet to see an answer for this or why God calls his "gods" children of the Most High. Care to answer either of these?

[MichaellS]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

In my father's house are many "dwelleth"---hmm, doesn't translate well.

In my fathers house are many dwellings---makes more sense. But lets maybe say it means, many dwell in my father's house. I can accept that. But once again, why are we told that good and faithful servants will be "ruler of many things." If I put "dwelling" in then this other scripture makes more sense.

So, once again, what "many things" will you rule over if you are a good and faithful servant? I have yet to see an answer for this or why God calls his "gods" children of the Most High. Care to answer either of these?

Been awhile since being here Julie, out on the road for some time off, and still am.

The rule over many things I believe are a apportioned to both earthly and heavenly applications. The earthy one, if we are found “being faithful with little” will in time receive more is a principle the Lord gave that deals with God’s own blessing covering all areas authority.

The heavenly grants far more ability, with Paul’s description (v12) of what he will be known as at that point in heaven is very telling and will be the outcome for the rest of us as well. The “many things” effect to rule over therefore, won’t prevent that growth that happened to us here on earth per Christ’s forming within us. But this “rule” in heaven is a mighty big step once we put on the incorruptible body. The “many things” question is then, will the mind and unity of Christ’s body then “rule” in such a way that isn’t shackled as we currently are as natural mortals? Absolutely not. We will likely move, judge and “rule” in an instant with the mind of Christ, holding together all the various glories of the body will rule everything. On earth we are held in much of the same corruption but the extensiveness of ruling is the same,

For whether “things present or things to come; all things belong to you” (1 Corinthians 3:22)

"Now you are full, now you are rich, you have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God you did reign, that we also might reign with you."(I Corinthians 4:8)

So, if we are carrying all those abilities of the body acquired here on earth to a perfect collective body there in heaven to rule by, the way I read that is there is nothing that isn’t covered under the God ordained rule of Christians.

Now this has taken on a few select labels like “dominionism” which is the result of misunderstanding the extensiveness of living at peace “with all men” (Romans 12:18).
.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by MichaellS

Been awhile since being here Julie, out on the road for some time off, and still am.

The rule over many things I believe are a apportioned to both earthly and heavenly applications. The earthy one, if we are found “being faithful with little” will in time receive more is a principle the Lord gave that deals with God’s own blessing covering all areas authority.

The heavenly grants far more ability, with Paul’s description (v12) of what he will be known as at that point in heaven is very telling and will be the outcome for the rest of us as well. The “many things” effect to rule over therefore, won’t prevent that growth that happened to us here on earth per Christ’s forming within us. But this “rule” in heaven is a mighty big step once we put on the incorruptible body. The “many things” question is then, will the mind and unity of Christ’s body then “rule” in such a way that isn’t shackled as we currently are as natural mortals? Absolutely not. We will likely move, judge and “rule” in an instant with the mind of Christ, holding together all the various glories of the body will rule everything. On earth we are held in much of the same corruption but the extensiveness of ruling is the same,

For whether “things present or things to come; all things belong to you” (1 Corinthians 3:22)

"Now you are full, now you are rich, you have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God you did reign, that we also might reign with you."(I Corinthians 4:8)

So, if we are carrying all those abilities of the body acquired here on earth to a perfect collective body there in heaven to rule by, the way I read that is there is nothing that isn’t covered under the God ordained rule of Christians.

Now this has taken on a few select labels like “dominionism” which is the result of misunderstanding the extensiveness of living at peace “with all men” (Romans 12:18).
.

So, to you, the "many things" we will rule is everything because we will be the "body" of Christ? Will we lose our own ability to think or make decisions? Will we be something like the Borg in which Christ now mind controls us?

[MichaellS]

Edited back

[MichaellS]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

So, to you, the "many things" we will rule is everything because we will be the "body" of Christ? Will we lose our own ability to think or make decisions? Will we be something like the Borg in which Christ now mind controls us?

“Lose” ability? Is it forbidden to give any acknowledgment whatsoever to a non-Mormon? We could have applied a couple of things already. How do those who v12 “reign” lose anything except the prevention of sufferings that will happen to us at the hands of godless thinking of a corrupt world? We don’t lose anything I am aware of, we gain that which is to be revealed to us.

For this life, ruling with the richness from God as “kings” (I Corinthians 4:8)

"He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much." (Luke 16:10)

For the life to come, ruling jointly with Christ in peace and “freedom”

“The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him. For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.” (Romans 8:16-21)

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by MichaellS

“Lose” ability? Is it forbidden to give any acknowledgment whatsoever to a non-Mormon? We could have applied a couple of things already. How do those who v12 “reign” lose anything except the prevention of sufferings that will happen to us at the hands of godless thinking of a corrupt world? We don’t lose anything I am aware of, we gain that which is to be revealed to us.

For this life, ruling with the richness from God as “kings” (I Corinthians 4:8)

"He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much." (Luke 16:10)

For the life to come, ruling jointly with Christ in peace and “freedom”

“The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him. For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.” (Romans 8:16-21)

So, you seem to be saying that you acknowledge we will be rulers and joint heirs with Christ and to you it will be of everything. Right?

[MichaellS]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

So, you seem to be saying that you acknowledge we will be rulers and joint heirs with Christ and to you it will be of everything. Right?

Let me weigh in further on that one question before continuing.

Is it forbidden for a Mormon to give acknowledgment of credible insight that was presented by a non-Mormon?

Can they be specifically that open?

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by MichaellS

Let me weigh in further on that one question before continuing.

Is it forbidden for a Mormon to give acknowledgment of credible insight that was presented by a non-Mormon?

Can they be specifically that open?

Mormons give credibility to non-Mormons all of the time. I was merely asking you to clarify what you are saying. it appear you are saying we will be "rulers' because we are joint heirs with Christ and therefore we will be "rulers" of everything, correct?

[MichaellS]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Mormons give credibility to non-Mormons all of the time. I was merely asking you to clarify what you are saying. it appear you are saying we will be "rulers' because we are joint heirs with Christ and therefore we will be "rulers" of everything, correct?

Well yes, I would hope you agree w/me on the conditions, that there is no end to the authority stated in Rev 20, no end right unto the time the saints are “surrounded” (v9). Though tempting, a precipitation of hostility leading up to that surrounding would still be adding to the stated “reign”.

I don’t understand. How can you give say, a moderately high (formal) level of credibility to a non-Mormon? It would eventually have to transform itself into defense if it took root under the nose of leadership, wouldn’t it? Honestly, would you care to venture a bottom line in one sentence? What divides the two of us more, for instance, does it come down to faulted leadership (what they subjected themselves to) more than the doctrine (what they subjected us to) they brought, or something else?