• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
2,947
590
64
Detroit
✟76,475.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
When one makes an argument based upon a promise, that premise should be open for debate.
II am not seeing your point.
Perhaps you can help me.

Right now, the way I am seeing this, is like the following scenario.
A couple elders approach a brother, and admonishes him that his shirt is too tight.
The brother looks at the elders, and says, "It's not a shirt."
Okay..... after some words of acknowledgement, the elders kindly let the brother know, that is not the point, or the subject of their concern.
The brother says, 'but you need to address that, since you made a premise about a shirt'.

I don't know how you see that, but I see it as the brother ignoring the issue to detract to a non-issue, and probably waste the elders time.
How do you see it, and how is this different to persons focusing, on... not the subject, but a non-essential, that's not relevant to the subject.

No one is righteous until God declares them so. You say: As for me, I am trying my best not to practice sin, and I know that God considers me righteous, when I do so.
Okay.

This seems to infer that your righteousness is based on what you do and not on what God does. I do not practice sin because God grants me his righteousness.
Okay.

Now before you get on my case about derailing this thread, please consider that you made your original position in post 1 based on what you claim are “good” people and “bad” people. Is it not therefore apropos to examine what consists of a “ good person” and a “bad person.” Or are you expecting everyone to argue on the basis of your judgement and conclusions?
The OP does not make any claims about what are good people and bad people.
Can you please point out the exact words to such a claim?

Yes, I have. Have you considered the scriptures I quoted? How do you refute these? All truly good people will be saved and all truly bad people will be lost if we use God’s judgements as the standard.
I both acknowledged, and responded to the scriptures you quoted, but you have asked the same question twice, although I have said the same thing you asked.
However, they do not relate to the subject of the OP, nor the question you raised, which pertain to heavenly life, or otherwise.

The thread isn't about whether people will be saved or not. I did say that before.
 
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
751
218
65
Boonsboro
✟84,304.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
II am not seeing your point.
Perhaps you can help me.

Right now, the way I am seeing this, is like the following scenario.
A couple elders approach a brother, and admonishes him that his shirt is too tight.
The brother looks at the elders, and says, "It's not a shirt."
Okay..... after some words of acknowledgement, the elders kindly let the brother know, that is not the point, or the subject of their concern.
The brother says, 'but you need to address that, since you made a premise about a shirt'.

I don't know how you see that, but I see it as the brother ignoring the issue to detract to a non-issue, and probably waste the elders time.
How do you see it, and how is this different to persons focusing, on... not the subject, but a non-essential, that's not relevant to the subject.
If the topic is about a shirt being too tight, then a shirt must necessarily be part of that conversation. Thus, if the topic is, are there good people in do all good people go to heaven, then goodness must be part of the conversation. For instance, if I think a person is good because they give money to the poor and they don’t cuss or swear, and they follow the rules of my church perhaps I’m missing the point of what being good is. Since Christ told us that only God is good in order for a person to be good then, they must have God’s goodness.

All good people will be saved and safe in Christ. Many people whom we judge as good but are not, so will not be saved and safe in Christ. The short answer to your question is yes, all good people will be saved and safe in Christ for eternity.
Okay.


Okay.


The OP does not make any claims about what are good people and bad people.
Can you please point out the exact words to such a claim?
It is inferred by suggesting that not all good people are saved or go to heaven. How can you make such a truth claim without defining what good is? You quoted a verse from the old covenant as your definition of good and yet Romans also has a definition of good, which is faith. Faith is what is counted for righteousness not works.

The works of righteousness are not righteousness itself. Works of righteousness come from a righteous heart and a righteous heart as a gift of God to us by faith.

Therefore, we are saved by grace and not of works less any should boast. So all good people will be those who are saved by grace and they will be with God forever.
I both acknowledged, and responded to the scriptures you quoted, but you have asked the same question twice, although I have said the same thing you asked.
However, they do not relate to the subject of the OP, nor the question you raised, which pertain to heavenly life, or otherwise.

The thread isn't about whether people will be saved or not. I did say that before.
I think you’re trying to make a distinction without a difference. Under what possible scenario will a good person not be in heaven?
 
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
2,947
590
64
Detroit
✟76,475.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
If the topic is about a shirt being too tight, then a shirt must necessarily be part of that conversation.
The tightness of the shirt, or whether or not it's a shirt?

Thus, if the topic is, are there good people in do all good people go to heaven, then goodness must be part of the conversation.
The topic is not "are there good people in do all good people go to heaven".

For instance, if I think a person is good because they give money to the poor and they don’t cuss or swear, and they follow the rules of my church perhaps I’m missing the point of what being good is. Since Christ told us that only God is good in order for a person to be good then, they must have God’s goodness.
That is not relevant to whether or not it is true that all good people go to heaven.

All good people will be saved and safe in Christ. Many people whom we judge as good but are not, so will not be saved and safe in Christ. The short answer to your question is yes, all good people will be saved and safe in Christ for eternity.
The subject is not about whether good people or righteous people will be saved or not.

It is inferred by suggesting that not all good people are saved or go to heaven.
Saved is not the same thing as go to heaven.

How can you make such a truth claim without defining what good is?
I did not make any such claim.
The OP seems not to be clear to you.

You quoted a verse from the old covenant as your definition of good and yet Romans also has a definition of good, which is faith. Faith is what is counted for righteousness not works.

The works of righteousness are not righteousness itself. Works of righteousness come from a righteous heart and a righteous heart as a gift of God to us by faith.

Therefore, we are saved by grace and not of works less any should boast. So all good people will be those who are saved by grace and they will be with God forever.

I think you’re trying to make a distinction without a difference. Under what possible scenario will a good person not be in heaven?
I think you changed the subject all together.
It might help if you read the OP again, and respond to it.

Suppose we all agree on what makes a person good or righteous. The OP is saying that heaven is not the destination of all the good, or righteous, or saved.
I have provided you the links that address your question.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
751
218
65
Boonsboro
✟84,304.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The tightness of the shirt, or whether or not it's a shirt?


The topic is not "are there good people in do all good people go to heaven".


That is not relevant to whether or not it is true that all good people go to heaven.


The subject is not about whether good people or righteous people will be saved or not.


Saved is not the same thing as go to heaven.


I did not make any such claim.
The OP seems not to be clear to you.


I think you changed the subject all together.
It might help if you read the OP again, and respond to it.

Suppose we all agree on what makes a person good or righteous. The OP is saying that heaven is not the destination of all the good, or righteous, or saved.
I have provided you the links that address your question.
Your premise “All good people do not go to heaven, and both bad and good people go to hell” is faulty unless you use a different definition of “good” than Christ used.

My point is that it is God who declares people good or bad.and it is He who brings all the good into his kingdom.
 
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
2,947
590
64
Detroit
✟76,475.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Are you suggesting that some saved people will not go to heaven?
You didn't read the posts carefully then. Would you like to take a look at it again.
I asked another poster to tell me what they got from it, but they never responded.
Perhaps you can give a brief summary of what you find there. Here is the link again.

Your premise “All good people do not go to heaven, and both bad and good people go to hell” is faulty unless you use a different definition of “good” than Christ used.
Thank you.
I am looking for someone to point out the fault... using the scriptures.
The thread offers an open discussion on the subject.
Please show me the fault.

My point is that it is God who declares people good or bad.and it is He who brings all the good into his kingdom.
Can you show me in the Bible, please, where Christ "brings all the good into his kingdom"?
 
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
751
218
65
Boonsboro
✟84,304.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Can you show me in the Bible, please, where Christ "brings all the good into his kingdom"?
For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. ~
Romans 14:17 This establishes that the kingdom of God will be made up of righteousness, and all who are there will be righteous. Who will be left out? Let's see what the bible says? “How blessed are those who wash their robes! The Tree of Life is theirs for good, and they’ll walk through the gates to the City. But outside for good are the filthy curs: sorcerers, fornicators, murderers, idolaters—all who love and live lies." Rev 14-15 Now we see a picture emerging of those who have been washed clean and by Christ's blood vs. those who have not and one cannot honestly say that any of those who are without are good.

The basis for the verdict of God's judgement is found in John 3:19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. There is no room for good people to be left out of the kingdom. And there is no room for bad people in the kingdom. So unless you have a different definition of good and bad then the bible is pretty clear on the matter.

God said that the soul that sins shall die. He never says that the soul of a good man will die. All who wash their robes in the blood of the lamb are made perfect forever. (Heb 14:10) If God says you are perfect forever, who can call you a bad person?
 
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
2,947
590
64
Detroit
✟76,475.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Thank you for the scriptures.

For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. ~
Romans 14:17 This establishes that the kingdom of God will be made up of righteousness, and all who are there will be righteous.
Of course.

Who will be left out? Let's see what the bible says? “How blessed are those who wash their robes! The Tree of Life is theirs for good, and they’ll walk through the gates to the City. But outside for good are the filthy curs: sorcerers, fornicators, murderers, idolaters—all who love and live lies." Rev 14-15 Now we see a picture emerging of those who have been washed clean and by Christ's blood vs. those who have not and one cannot honestly say that any of those who are without are good.
This is a very good scripture, you chose to support your statement. Beautiful.
However, the perspective one has does affect how that verse is understood in relation to the statement made.

For example , at Revelation 21:1-5, it does show that people are "outside the city", which is New Jerusalem - Revelation 3:12... and these are righteous people, according to Revelation 21:3, 4.
Also, please see Revelation 21:22-27

So, it's a matter of how one is using, the phrase "in the kingdom".
There are those, "in the kingdom", in that they are actual citizens of the kingdom (Philippians 3:20) since they are ruling in it from the heavens, and there are those, who are the subjects of the kingdom - that is, they submit to the kingdom's rule... For one, angels, who aren't ruling in the kingdom, and people on earth, who aren't in the kingdom, as rulers, but can be "in the kingdom", as subjects of the kingdom.
Please see Daniel 7:13, 14, 27

Hence, to be in harmony with the scriptures, we must recognize the entirety of the kingdom - that is, the ruling part, and the domain - what's being ruled over - Revelation 5:9, 10; Revelation 14:1-4.

I actually am working on a... I guess you can call it illustration of the Bible's message.
It demonstrates the entirety of the kingdom... to a degree, since it's not finished. :smile:
You can take a look at it, and I would be interested in anything you find wrong with it.
Revealing Secrets.

The basis for the verdict of God's judgement is found in John 3:19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. There is no room for good people to be left out of the kingdom. And there is no room for bad people in the kingdom. So unless you have a different definition of good and bad then the bible is pretty clear on the matter.
The problem is more with the phrase "in the kingdom", and what that means to a person.
Once we get agreement on that, we should be good.

God said that the soul that sins shall die.
Beautiful.
Wholeheartedly agree.

He never says that the soul of a good man will die.
What do you say to these scriptures?
He poured out His soul unto death - Isaiah 53:12​
Acts 2:24-27​
24 whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it. 25 For David says concerning Him:​
‘I foresaw the Lord always before my face, For He is at my right hand, that I may not be shaken.​
26 Therefore my heart rejoiced, and my tongue was glad; Moreover my flesh also will rest in hope.​
27 For You will not leave my soul in Hades, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.​

All who wash their robes in the blood of the lamb are made perfect forever. (Heb 14:10) If God says you are perfect forever, who can call you a bad person?
Does Hebrews have 14 Chapters?
From which store did you purchase your Bible? I just want to know so I can warn people not to go there. :grin:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
751
218
65
Boonsboro
✟84,304.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
2,947
590
64
Detroit
✟76,475.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
This does not show righteous people outside the city. But be that as it may you may need to consider the Bible’s use of metaphors.
You do not consider these righteous?
Revelation 7:15-17; Revelation 21:3, 4
Well Jesus does, so you should agree with Jesus, shouldn't you?

What are you saying about metaphors here?
 
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
751
218
65
Boonsboro
✟84,304.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You do not consider these righteous?
Revelation 7:15-17; Revelation 21:3, 4
Well Jesus does, so you should agree with Jesus, shouldn't you?

What are you saying about metaphors here?
They are righteous and they are in the New Jerusalem. Where does it indicate that they are not.
 
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
2,947
590
64
Detroit
✟76,475.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
They are righteous and they are in the New Jerusalem. Where does it indicate that they are not.
I showed you where a moment ago. You are reading my posts, aren't you?
I noticed you have not address that point, nor the questions I asked.
Isn't it supposed to be a discussion?
 
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
751
218
65
Boonsboro
✟84,304.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I showed you where a moment ago. You are reading my posts, aren't you?
I noticed you have not address that point, nor the questions I asked.
Isn't it supposed to be a discussion?
I can’t address an unproven assertion. There is nothing in the quoted scripture you provided the indicates that they are outside the city.
 
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
2,947
590
64
Detroit
✟76,475.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I can’t address an unproven assertion. There is nothing in the quoted scripture you provided the indicates that they are outside the city.
You consider a body of facts that someone provides, and comments on, to be an assertion?

That's not what an assertion is.
An assertion is
Something declared or stated positively, often with no support or attempt at proof.

For example, exactly like this...
He never says that the soul of a good man will die.
That's an assertion. Where no evidence is provided, or no attempt is made at supporting the statement.
Just a bold blanket statement.

Also, when answering to, or addressing what one thinks is an assertion, making an assertion, does not address the "assertion". It's simply a wave of the hand... like this...
200.gif


For example...
This does not show righteous people outside the city. But...
They are righteous and they are in the New Jerusalem.
No evidence, nor any attempt at supporting the assertions.

To address assertions, one must provide some evidence against them.
For example...
What do you say to these scriptures?​
He poured out His soul unto death - Isaiah 53:12

24 whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it. 25 For David says concerning Him:​
‘I foresaw the Lord always before my face, For He is at my right hand, that I may not be shaken.​
26 Therefore my heart rejoiced, and my tongue was glad; Moreover my flesh also will rest in hope.​
27 For You will not leave my soul in Hades, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.​

When the person becomes silent - has no response, or runs away, the assertion has been thoroughly addressed, and debunked, and the person, is either too ashamed to admit it, or not honest and humble enough to do so.

For example, when Jesus put a scriptural question to the Pharisees, and they knew the answer, but refused to give an answer. Matthew 22:41-46
By using evidence against their many claims, Jesus exposed their dishonesty by using the scriptures - facts.

I hope that helps you put an assertion in proper perspective.

With that said though, I can provide more facts.
What and where is the city?
The answer from the Bible is...

The city is New Jerusalem. Revelation 3:12
New Jerusalem isn't an actual literal city. It is the Bride of Christ - given as wife in marriage. Revelation 21:9-14 ...Which takes place, as John sees...
The city - New Jerusalem "coming down out of heaven from God, beautifully dressed as a bride for her husband. Revelation 21:2
New Jerusalem is not said to be on earth, as many assert, but is a "tent" or "tabernacle" over mankind on earth Revelation 21:3, as Jesus Christ - high priest, king and judge, serves with his "wife" - the New Jerusalem, which is made up of 144,000 kings, judges and priests. Revelation 14:1; Revelation 5:9, 10; Revelation 20:4, 6

Where are those, whom God is with, and whom are led to waters of life, and their tears are wiped from their face?
Revelation 21:1-4
The earth made new.

Thus, these ones are not in the New Jerusalem, nor make it up, since it's not a literal place, but the bride of Christ, which is the holy ones.
The people on earth are not the bride, which is on heavenly Mount Zion. Hebrews 12:22; Revelation 14:1
Please state what you disagree with, and any scripture that says otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
751
218
65
Boonsboro
✟84,304.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You consider a body of facts that someone provides, and comments on, to be an assertion?

That's not what an assertion is.
An assertion is
Something declared or stated positively, often with no support or attempt at proof.

For example, exactly like this...
He never says that the soul of a good man will die.
That's an assertion. Where no evidence is provided, or no attempt is made at supporting the statement.
Just a bold blanket statement.

Also, when answering to, or addressing what one thinks is an assertion, making an assertion, does not address the "assertion". It's simply a wave of the hand... like this...
200.gif


For example...
This does not show righteous people outside the city. But...
They are righteous and they are in the New Jerusalem.
No evidence, nor any attempt at supporting the assertions.

To address assertions, one must provide some evidence against them.
For example...
What do you say to these scriptures?​
He poured out His soul unto death - Isaiah 53:12

24 whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it. 25 For David says concerning Him:​
‘I foresaw the Lord always before my face, For He is at my right hand, that I may not be shaken.​
26 Therefore my heart rejoiced, and my tongue was glad; Moreover my flesh also will rest in hope.​
27 For You will not leave my soul in Hades, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.​

When the person becomes silent - has no response, or runs away, the assertion has been thoroughly addressed, and debunked, and the person, is either too ashamed to admit it, or not honest and humble enough to do so.

For example, when Jesus put a scriptural question to the Pharisees, and they knew the answer, but refused to give an answer. Matthew 22:41-46
By using evidence against their many claims, Jesus exposed their dishonesty by using the scriptures - facts.

I hope that helps you put an assertion in proper perspective.

With that said though, I can provide more facts.
What and where is the city?
The answer from the Bible is...

The city is New Jerusalem. Revelation 3:12
New Jerusalem isn't an actual literal city. It is the Bride of Christ - given as wife in marriage. Revelation 21:9-14 ...Which takes place, as John sees...
The city - New Jerusalem "coming down out of heaven from God, beautifully dressed as a bride for her husband. Revelation 21:2
New Jerusalem is not said to be on earth, as many assert, but is a "tent" or "tabernacle" over mankind on earth Revelation 21:3, as Jesus Christ - high priest, king and judge, serves with his "wife" - the New Jerusalem, which is made up of 144,000 kings, judges and priests. Revelation 14:1; Revelation 5:9, 10; Revelation 20:4, 6

Where are those, whom God is with, and whom are led to waters of life, and their tears are wiped from their face?
Revelation 21:1-4
The earth made new.

Thus, these ones are not in the New Jerusalem, nor make it up, since it's not a literal place, but the bride of Christ, which is the holy ones.
The people on earth are not the bride, which is on heavenly Mount Zion. Hebrews 12:22; Revelation 14:1
Please state what you disagree with, and any scripture that says otherwise.
The use of many words does not make a good argument. None of this proves that your assertions were correct. But we will address the second part of your post and hopefully there we can find some meat.
 
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
751
218
65
Boonsboro
✟84,304.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
New Jerusalem isn't an actual literal city. It is the Bride of Christ - given as wife in marriage. Revelation 21:9-14 ...Which takes place, as John sees...
The city - New Jerusalem "coming down out of heaven from God, beautifully dressed as a bride for her husband. Revelation 21:2
As I am sure you are aware, the Church is also described as the bride of Christ.

Eph5: 31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.

Now either Christ has two wives or the Church and The New Jerusalem are metaphors for all of the saved and righteous people of God. This, of course, does not preclude them from being actual objects in none of themselves such as the new Jerusalem being a city.

If you’re suppositions were to be true, it would mean that there would be righteous and good people outside of Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
751
218
65
Boonsboro
✟84,304.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
New Jerusalem is not said to be on earth, as many assert, but is a "tent" or "tabernacle" over mankind on earth Revelation 21:3
You are conflating the new Jerusalem with the term tabernacle, which means dwelling place. You’re beginning to confuse your metaphors here because how can it be the bride of Christ and the dwelling place of God also?

As I pointed out earlier The new Jerusalem is the bride of the lamb, and the church is also the bride of the lamb, which would seem to indicate that the new Jerusalem and the church are equivalent metaphors.

However, the term Tabernacle, is never referred to as the bride of Christ. So, as you can see, the text, Revelation 21:3, is not indicating that the new Jerusalem is the Tabernacle but instead, it is saying that God‘s dwelling place or tabernacle is now among men.
 
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
751
218
65
Boonsboro
✟84,304.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Jesus Christ - high priest, king and judge, serves with his "wife" - the New Jerusalem, which is made up of 144,000 kings, judges and priests. Revelation 14:1; Revelation 5:9, 10; Revelation 20:4, 6
Trying to support the assertion that the new Jerusalem is is comprised only of Christ with a wife of literally 144, 000 kings, judges and priests using theses disconnected texts is confused at best.

What need will there be for kings, judges and priests in a perfect utopia where all have direct access to God face to face?
 
Upvote 0

CoreyD

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2023
2,947
590
64
Detroit
✟76,475.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
As I am sure you are aware, the Church is also described as the bride of Christ.
Yes. Unfortunately, some people think the Church, or congregation, is an actual building, but yo are correct. The Church is the bride of Christ - the same bride described in Revelation. They are one and the same.
Which makes it even easier for us to see that not all righteous people are members of the body of Christ, since no individual living, and dying prior to Jesus establishing the Church, can be said to be Christ's body. Nor part of it.
Please see Matthew 16:18

At Hebrews 12:22, 23, the scriptures tell us, the body, and bride of Christ, is enrolled in heaven, upon heavenly Mount Zion, as is referenced in Revelation 14:1.

Eph5: 31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.

Now either Christ has two wives or the Church and The New Jerusalem are metaphors for all of the saved and righteous people of God.
Christ has only one wife. The one described at Revelation 14:1; Revelation 21:9-14
They are all metaphors. From the city, to its 12 gates, to its pillars, right down to the 12 foundation stones, and the cornerstone, Jesus Christ.
Even bride and husband are metaphors.

These scriptures however, do not refer to all the saved.
The 144,000 on Mount Zion, are not the great multitude seen at Revelation 7:9.
Both groups however, are righteous.
Only one group - the 144,000, is the Bride of Christ.

This, of course, does not preclude them from being actual objects in none of themselves such as the new Jerusalem being a city.
Can you rephrase that statement please? I don't understand what you are saying.

If you’re suppositions were to be true, it would mean that there would be righteous and good people outside of Christ.
I'm not sure what you mean by "outside of Christ".
Are you saying Christ is the city?

You are conflating the new Jerusalem with the term tabernacle, which means dwelling place. You’re beginning to confuse your metaphors here because how can it be the bride of Christ and the dwelling place of God also?
If you are saying the skéné: Tent, Tabernacle, Dwelling, does not refer to New Jerusalem, you need to explain how you arrive at it being something else, since the context is clear. Revelation 21:1 is connected to Revelation 21:2-4.

Regarding the Greek word skéné...
Word Origin: Derived from the Greek verb σκήνω (skēnō), meaning "to pitch a tent" or "to dwell."

Usually said to be a derivative of Proto-Indo-European *(s)ḱeh₃- (“shade, shadow”), originally referring to a light construction of cloth hung between tree branches to provide a shadow which could be used for shelter and other activities, though the vocalism is difficult to explain as full grade *sḱeh₃- gives σκω (skō) and zero grade *sḱh₃- gives σκο (sko).

Strong's Greek: 4633. σκηνή (skéné) -- a tent
σκηνή, σκηνῆς, ἡ (from the root, ska 'to cover' etc.; cf. σκιά, σκότος, etc.; Latincasa, cassis, castrum; English shade, etc.; Curtius, § 112; Vanicek, p. 1054f), from (Aeschylus), Sophocles and Thucydides down; the Sept. chiefly for אֹהֶל, often also for מִשְׁכָּן, also for סֻכָּה; a tent, tabernacle (made of green boughs, or skins, or other materials): Matthew 17:4; Mark 9:5; Luke 9:33; Hebrews 11:9; αἱ αἰώνιοι σκηναί (see αἰώνιος,

the Greek noun skene, which means "tent". This word appears in the Gospel (Mt 17:1-9) of the Second Sunday of Lent, year A, when, at the Transfiguration of the Lord, Peter suggests building 3 tents:...

The original word usage refers to a tent, of cover - tabernacle, in that sense.
If perrons prefer to picture some building, as if the verse is referring to a literal building, that's really their personal choice, but the verse certainly isn't saying heaven came down to earth, nor any city, for that matter.

The onus is on persons making such claim, to support them, and no scripture says New Jerusalem comes to earth.

As I pointed out earlier The new Jerusalem is the bride of the lamb, and the church is also the bride of the lamb, which would seem to indicate that the new Jerusalem and the church are equivalent metaphors.
If you pointed that out, that's okay.
I already know that the body of Christ is his bride, and the same as New Jerusalem.
The body is referenced on earth, because New Jerusalem does not exist until all the members of the body - the full number 144,000 are in heaven. Revelation 7:1-4; Revelation 14:1-4

However, the term Tabernacle, is never referred to as the bride of Christ. So, as you can see, the text, Revelation 21:3, is not indicating that the new Jerusalem is the Tabernacle but instead, it is saying that God‘s dwelling place or tabernacle is now among men.
Why do you think the tabernacle, or tent, is not New Jerusalem?

Trying to support the assertion that the new Jerusalem is is comprised only of Christ with a wife of literally 144, 000 kings, judges and priests using theses disconnected texts is confused at best.
I am sorry you are confused.
It may have to be that way, as some things have to be.
Can you please explain what's confusing you? Which of the following do you find don't support the fact that the 144, 000 are the Saints that make up the kingdom of God, with Christ as king, high priest and judge, and the heirs of the kingdom ruling with him, and serving as priests and judges?

At Revelation 1:6 we read... [Christ] has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.
At Revelation 5:10 those whom have been redeemed to God by Christ's blood, out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, Christ have made kings and priests to God;
At Revelation 20:4, 6 Those who are raised in the first resurrection, lived and reigned with Christ for the thousand years. They shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years
Luke 22:28-30; 1 Peter 2:5; Matthew 19:23; Revelation 14:1-5; Romans 8:17

What need will there be for kings, judges and priests in a perfect utopia where all have direct access to God face to face?
That's obviously a vision many people have.
Can you point out in the scriptures where you find that?
From my conversations with persons, I have found that many make assumptions because they read certain phrases like "God is with", and "before the throne".

However, those phrases are found throughout the Bible, and never refers to God being on earth, nor people being in heaven.
Far from being face to face, it would have meant certain death.
Is it the phrases that led you to your conclusions?

The use of many words does not make a good argument.
There was no argument.
However, I was hoping the references would have been useful to you.
I would have asked what's an assertion, but I realize certain things will remain the same, so I am learning not to expect anything.

None of this proves that your assertions were correct.
Assertion : Something declared or stated positively, often with no support or attempt at proof.
I did not make an assertion. :frowning:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ARBITER01

Legend
Aug 12, 2007
14,131
1,883
60
✟214,348.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Republican
Rev 21:6 And He said to me, "It has come to pass. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give to him that thirsted of the fountain of the water of life freely.

Rev 21:7 He that overcomes shall inherit these things; and I will be to him a God, and He will be to Me a son.

Rev 21:8
But, for the fearful, and unbelieving, and abominable, and murderers, and fornicators, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all the liars, their part shall be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone; which is the second death."


I don't think Jesus can be anymore specific about what happens to those who are not His.
 
Upvote 0