Is the Kingdom of God earthly or heavenly?

[Terrywoodenpic]

Any scriptural references to support these assertions?

It is not necessary to maintain mumbo jumbo beliefs to be a Christian.

There is not much logic or science to be found in the Bible.
I would not rely on Old testament myths as an argument for anything.
And Revelation is mystical rubbish.

It is against logic to use references from the Bible as proof of itself.

 

[james2ko]

It is not necessary to maintain mumbo jumbo beliefs to be a Christian. There is not much logic or science to be found in the Bible. I would not rely on Old testament myths as an argument for anything.And Revelation is mystical rubbish.It is against logic to use references from the Bible as proof of itself.

I didn't think so... You post a comment like that on a foundational doctrine of the Christian faith in a scriptural debate thread, which you refer to as a mumbo jumbo, and not have any scriptural references to support your claims? Smells like trolling to me...

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I didn't think so... You post a comment like that on a foundational doctrine of the Christian faith in a scriptural debate thread, which you refer to as a mumbo jumbo, and not have any scriptural references to support your claims? Smells like trolling to me...

It is just that I have a completely different understanding as to what christianity is about.

It is not about believing every thing that was selected to be included in our Bible to be the literal word of God.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

It is just that I have a completely different understanding as to what christianity is about.
It is not about believing every thing that was selected to be included in our Bible to be the literal word of God.

Then, how do you explain 2nd Timothy 3 vs16,17?____________________

 

[Beta]

Then, how do you explain 2nd Timothy 3 vs16,17?____________________

Since TW does not believe half of what is written in the Bible (and no one knows which half) he does not have to explain anything

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Then, how do you explain 2nd Timothy 3 vs16,17?____________________

When Paul was writing that verse, the vast majority of scripture that was available was Jewish, even his own letters like this one, were not yet established as scriptural. The Bible was not yet collected or selected from all that was available in new or old texts.
Many well establish scriptural texts were not selected.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God" seems to cover both that which was not selected during the compilation of the Bible, and also all that has has been written since.

So how do we define Scripture...? Each church has arrived at a different selection and established their own canon, and have made their own interpretations.

I suggest it is ones own "inspiration of God" that leads one to have faith in and understanding of what is Christian scripture.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The first-century writings that were already regarded as reliable gave us the Christian NT Scriptures. Ancient manuscripts support Bible canon. So Bible canon was established very early on, so no one had to establish canon but merely testify to what was already accepted as canon.

Jesus teaching references and quotations were taken from already existing accepted Hebrew OT Scripture. That is why Jesus said, "Thy Word is truth" -John 17v17
[God's written Scriptures is religious fact]

The apocryphal books exclude themselves being out of harmony with Scripture.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The first-century writings that were already regarded as reliable gave us the Christian NT Scriptures. Ancient manuscripts support Bible canon. So Bible canon was established very early on, so no one had to establish canon but merely testify to what was already accepted as canon.

Jesus teaching references and quotations were taken from already existing accepted Hebrew OT Scripture. That is why Jesus said, "Thy Word is truth" -John 17v17
[God's written Scriptures is religious fact]

The apocryphal books exclude themselves being out of harmony with Scripture.

There are massive Difficulties in determining what is or was Christian Scripture.
The OT has certainly been accepted as forming the roots of it, and has been used by many as a proof of the divinity of Jesus.

During the ministry of the apostles it was probably the most understood but not easily available.

The Jewish texts were carefully protected and not available to just anyone. If a new community wanted a copy it could only be obtained by commissioning one, from an authorised scribe. The process was difficult and lengthy.

So what do we mean by "Scripture" To a scribe or person in authority it would have meant both written down and that which was passed down verbally.
To the man in the street, It would be what he was told by preachers or Read to him as part of a congregation.

The problem of dispersal of "Scripture" in written form, would have been even more difficult for the early Christians. few "official" scribes would have become Christians, and few if any would have had access to all the epistles and proto Gospels, scattered through the new Churches.

There was certainly no Canon of any sort.

It was not until Constantine insisted on the Church being "Regularised" at Nicea would any thing like a Canon come into being.

At the Time of Paul's missions and even at his death in AD68 The various texts had not even been brought together.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Didn't the synagogues have the Hebrew scrolls for people to read ? - Luke 4vs16,17
Acts 13v15; 15v31

True, they did not have what we have today,
but the ancient manuscripts supporting Hebrew canon were already in existence.

Zacharias used a wax writing tablet of the day. -Luke 1v63.
The tablet was a wooden frame with bee's wax coating
[kind of like an etch-a-sketch] that could be used over and over.

The church did not establish canon but merely testified to the collection of Bible books.
The church merely recognized first-century writings as the authoritative Word from God.

As far as the 'collection of Bible books' being in book form of course did not come about until the time of the printing press.

It was during the time of the so-called 'dark ages' when people were 'told' by preacher.
Philip, on the other hand, 'guided' the Ethiopian official as to what he was 'reading' at Acts 8 vs28-35

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Didn't the synagogues have the Hebrew scrolls for people to read ? - Luke 4vs16,17
Acts 13v15; 15v31

True, they did not have what we have today,
but the ancient manuscripts supporting Hebrew canon were already in existence.

Zacharias used a wax writing tablet of the day. -Luke 1v63.
The tablet was a wooden frame with bee's wax coating
[kind of like an etch-a-sketch] that could be used over and over.

The church did not establish canon but merely testified to the collection of Bible books.
The church merely recognized first-century writings as the authoritative Word from God.

As far as the 'collection of Bible books' being in book form of course did not come about until the time of the printing press.

It was during the time of the so-called 'dark ages' when people were 'told' by preacher.
Philip, on the other hand, 'guided' the Ethiopian official as to what he was 'reading' at Acts 8 vs28-35

Of Course the Jewish texts were available to religious scholars But certainly not the man in the street.

The first individual Christian scrolls were rare indeed and would crtainly be kept very carefully, There is no certainty that any were written down till the 2nd century.

Scripture was mostly a verbal tradition.

The earliest known actual writing, the Didache, is dated somewhere between 50 and 70 CE

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Of Course the Jewish texts were available to religious scholars But certainly not the man in the street.
The first individual Christian scrolls were rare indeed and would crtainly be kept very carefully, There is no certainty that any were written down till the 2nd century.
Scripture was mostly a verbal tradition.
The earliest known actual writing, the Didache, is dated somewhere between 50 and 70 CE

Didn't the Jewish 'man in the street' go to the local synagogues?

Jesus would have had to have a scroll in order to read from it. Luke 4

Since all the 'Bible writers' died before the 2nd century it is highly impossible they wrote anything down in the 2nd century.

The Pharisees taught 'verbal or oral' tradition [Mark 7v7,13; Matt 15v9]
The religious leaders were teaching outside of written Scripture as Scripture.

 

[Ben Masada]

If the Kingdom of God is earthly or heavenly? Neither. It is esoteric, which means, within ourselves. Read Luke 17:21.
Ben

 

[URAVIP2ME]

If the Kingdom of God is earthly or heavenly? Neither. It is esoteric, which means, within ourselves. Read Luke 17:21.
Ben

and please also read Luke 17v20.

Jesus in verses 20,21 is Not talking to his disciple but addressing his enemies.
Would the kingdom be inside of the Pharisees who were against Jesus ?

It is not until after Jesus concludes what he says to the Pharisees,
then, in verse 22 Jesus addresses his disciples.

The Greek carries the idea of among you.
Jesus was among the Pharisees or within their midst.

Please continue reading to Luke chapter 19. Luke 19 vs11-15 Jesus gives an illustration how the kingdom or government would not appear right away but first Jesus [nobleman] would go away to a far country [heaven] and then return after he [Jesus] receives the kingdom or royal government.
-Psalm 110v1

 

[kylixguru]

and please also read Luke 17v20.

Jesus in verses 20,21 is Not talking to his disciple but addressing his enemies.
Would the kingdom be inside of the Pharisees who were against Jesus ?

It is not until after Jesus concludes what he says to the Pharisees,
then, in verse 22 Jesus addresses his disciples.

The Greek carries the idea of among you.
Jesus was among the Pharisees or within their midst.

Please continue reading to Luke chapter 19. Luke 19 vs11-15 Jesus gives an illustration how the kingdom or government would not appear right away but first Jesus [nobleman] would go away to a far country [heaven] and then return after he [Jesus] receives the kingdom or royal government.
-Psalm 110v1

The Gospel of Luke pertains to the 2nd gentile dispensation in its prophetic aspect. This is when the Kingdom would actually be offered, which corresponds to Day 6 of the creation cycle, which corresponds to the advent of Adam. Unfortunately, the kingdom is taken by violence and it falls into a state of ruination in the far away country (America). But, Adam received His kingship and did lay the foundation for the new creation. Thus, on Day 1 of the new creation, Adam is redeemed by His Son and He is restored to His throne. At this point, He then returns to the original holy land and saves them from their calamity.

 

[faithofabraham]

to the origianl question- is the kingdom of God earthly or heavenly?

Kingdom of God is heavenly for God has created it and it awaits us.
Its earthly because no man other than Jesus will live in that kingdom until it resides on earth.
Rev. 21:1-3 rather literal.

As you look thru the old testament youll find that those of God realized that there is nothing after the time of death, until a change come. From Jesus' teachings you see that he said he must prepare a place for us in the Kingdom of God. Hes there now doing that. And at the appointed time he shall return, bringing a change at the last trumpet, from mortal to immortal(those of the first resurrection). These still shall not enter the kingdom of God until the 2cd resurrection when all shall be judged and those who are deemed unworthy by God shall be cast in the lake of fire. Also the devil and death shall be cast in. Then Rev. 21 God shall literaly bring down his Kingdom and shall reside with us forever. As you see there is a new heaven and earth for God destroyed the heavens and earth that we live on now as he did before with the flood, but this time with fire. A earth is still here when he comes and it is where we shall reside.

FOA

 

[Jacksnyte]

Humans - especially unconverted Humans do not have the ability to even perceive true Spirit and are in need of the physical example and presence of Christ. That is why he will be able to appear in both states as necessary for the work ahead of him ie. correcting the nations .
Let us not forget he resurrected in the body he had before his death and was recognized by afterwards. I do believe this is significant for his future earthly rulership during his 1000 year reign 1Cor.15v25-28.

I beg to differ: there are many, many people who do see spirits, and are not "converted"! This ability is sometimes innate in a person, in fact, I believe all of us have this ability from childhood to some degree or another, and it is often squelched by overly strict and unimaginative upbringing. The idea that certain abilities are evil and wrong unless utilized by Christians is patently silly! People were using these abilities for thousands of years before Christianity, and they probably will for thousands of years after it.
On the subject of the return of Jesus, He did say he would return before many of his contemporaries were dead. He did not. Keep on setting the date for his return, and then re-setting it when you are proven wrong, it really doesn't make a difference to rest of us unless you start to become violent, and attempt to create another Christian theocracy! Then we might have a problem!

 

[URAVIP2ME]

As you see there is a new heaven and earth for God destroyed the heavens and earth that we live on now as he did before with the flood, but this time with fire. A earth is still here when he comes and it is where we shall reside.
FOA

'fire' in Scripture is often symbolic of destruction and not literal fire.

Please notice the 'fire' of 2nd Peter 3v7 is reserved for the destruction or perdition of the ungodly. [not earth]

Proverbs 2vs20-22 mentions the wicked [ungodly] being removed from earth.

Psalm 92v7 mentions the forever destruction [annihilation] of the wicked.

So, just as Noah and family were not removed from earth, the humble, meek sheep-like ones of Matthew 25vs32,46 will not be removed from earth.
This time instead of flood waters, Jesus fiery 'words' will remove the wicked.
-Isaiah 11v4; Rev 19 vs11,14,15; Jeremiah 25vs31-33

 

[kylixguru]

'fire' in Scripture is often symbolic of destruction and not literal fire.

Please notice the 'fire' of 2nd Peter 3v7 is reserved for the destruction or perdition of the ungodly. [not earth]

Proverbs 2vs20-22 mentions the wicked [ungodly] being removed from earth.

Psalm 92v7 mentions the forever destruction [annihilation] of the wicked.

So, just as Noah and family were not removed from earth, the humble, meek sheep-like ones of Matthew 25vs32,46 will not be removed from earth.
This time instead of flood waters, Jesus fiery 'words' will remove the wicked.
-Isaiah 11v4; Rev 19 vs11,14,15; Jeremiah 25vs31-33

Fire represents spiritual death. It's the death of the soul.

When the Savior comes back, all those who refuse to hear Him or who fight against Him shall be severed from spiritual life. There really aren't that many people who have spiritual life right now anyway so most people probably won't notice much. Their death won't be physical removal due to Him. Rather, they simply won't be enabled to partake of the blessings He comes to offer. That blessing is resurrection to "life", meaning spiritual life.

 

[faithofabraham]

'fire' in Scripture is often symbolic of destruction and not literal fire.

Please notice the 'fire' of 2nd Peter 3v7 is reserved for the destruction or perdition of the ungodly. [not earth]

Proverbs 2vs20-22 mentions the wicked [ungodly] being removed from earth.

Psalm 92v7 mentions the forever destruction [annihilation] of the wicked.

So, just as Noah and family were not removed from earth, the humble, meek sheep-like ones of Matthew 25vs32,46 will not be removed from earth.
This time instead of flood waters, Jesus fiery 'words' will remove the wicked.
-Isaiah 11v4; Rev 19 vs11,14,15; Jeremiah 25vs31-33

2 Peter 3:6 says that the earth was overflowed with water, verse 7 says that this earth has fire reserved for it. Dont see a big difference.
looking at 2 Peter 3:9-11 sounds a little more specific to the heavens, the earth, and then also the works(mankinds) on earth shall melt. it lists also the elements, that could be taken a few ways, but its kind of funny that we have a chart of the elements, that pretty much makes up everything that we as man know, not to get too scientific on ya. verse 11 says that all these things listed shall be dissolved.

Proverbs 2vs20-22 mentions the wicked [ungodly] being removed from earth.

Psalm 92v7 mentions the forever destruction [annihilation] of the wicked

.

to me these verses are saying the same thing, the ungodly will be removed from the earth forever by death.

I do believe the wicked shall receive a reward of actual fire, but i also believe that the earth shall get a little crispy. Just as Sodom and Gomorrha got burned.

FOA

 

[Jacksnyte]

2 Peter 3:6 says that the earth was overflowed with water, verse 7 says that this earth has fire reserved for it. Dont see a big difference.
looking at 2 Peter 3:9-11 sounds a little more specific to the heavens, the earth, and then also the works(mankinds) on earth shall melt. it lists also the elements, that could be taken a few ways, but its kind of funny that we have a chart of the elements, that pretty much makes up everything that we as man know, not to get too scientific on ya. verse 11 says that all these things listed shall be dissolved.

.

to me these verses are saying the same thing, the ungodly will be removed from the earth forever by death.

I do believe the wicked shall receive a reward of actual fire, but i also believe that the earth shall get a little crispy. Just as Sodom and Gomorrha got burned.

FOA

Maybe a gamma burst: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/gamma/milkyway.html