The Greatness of the Great Commision

[Hammster]

Okay, I didn't mean semantics, but the way you are insisting on interpreting the verse, As
Translated. Matthew 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
I have rejected your interpretation that this means that nations are being discipled and baptized,
because I knew there was a verse that clarifies this to mean "out of every nation".
Revelation 5:9 And they sang a new song, saying:
You are worthy to take the scroll,
And to open its seals;
For You were slain,
And have redeemed us to God by Your blood
Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation.

I am sure you are aware that by the scriptures, there are 70 nations recognized by God as
the nations of the earth, found in Genesis 10, which lists the immediate descendants of Noah,
and is normally referred to as the "table of the nations".[Gk.=ethnos]
Not many of these nations can be identified with current national, geopolitical boundaries, which
are most likely irrelevant. These 70 are ethnos, ethnic distinctions, not nations. Do you know of any
ethnic groups that are fully disciples of Christ? How is that working for the Great Commission?

Revelation 5 is past tense. So it’s not relative to this discussion.

 

[Mr. M]

Revelation 5 is past tense. So it’s not relative to this discussion.

Right! So how about present tense. There is Christian minorities in Syria, Lebanon, Iran...on and on.
Are these models of the Great Commission, established for the discipleship of the nation they are a part
of, or do they more closely represent ethic minorities trying to survive under God's Grace, and evidence
to support
Matthew 5:
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake,
For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11 Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say
all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake.
If you want to talk about past tense, the Great Commission given to Christ's chosen apostles
is apparently forever present. Two thousand years later, how is your version of the Great Commission
working? Let every matter be supported by 2 or 3 witnesses. Your opinion doesn't count. Where is the
Great Commission being played out in the world to show in the present truth? I apologize if you have
already done so, I may have overlooked it in the midst of your half dozen or so dismissive non-responses to my posts. Yes or no, by nations are you referring to present geo-political existence, or
something actually Biblical, such as the table of nations I mentioned in my last post which you have
ignored. If Genesis 10 is also irrelevant because it is past tense, Please say so.

 

[Hammster]

Right! So how about present tense. There is Christian minorities in Syria, Lebanon, Iran...on and on.
Are these models of the Great Commission, established for the discipleship of the nation they are a part
of, or do they more closely represent ethic minorities trying to survive under God's Grace, and evidence
to support
Matthew 5:
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake,
For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11 Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say
all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake.
If you want to talk about past tense, the Great Commission given to Christ's chosen apostles
is apparently forever present. Two thousand years later, how is your version of the Great Commission
working? Let every matter be supported by 2 or 3 witnesses. Your opinion doesn't count. Where is the
Great Commission being played out in the world to show in the present truth? I apologize if you have
already done so, I may have overlooked it in the midst of your half dozen or so dismissive non-responses to my posts. Yes or no, by nations are you referring to present geo-political existence, or
something actually Biblical, such as the table of nations I mentioned in my last post which you have
ignored. If Genesis 10 is also irrelevant because it is past tense, Please say so.

I guess I’m having difficulty in trying to understand why the plain meaning of the text isn’t sufficient for you.

 

[Mr. M]

I guess I’m having difficulty in trying to understand why the plain meaning of the text isn’t sufficient for you.

Don't give up. Don't ever give up. V

 

[John Mullally]

Revelation 5 is past tense. So it’s not relative to this discussion.

First his bringing up Revelation 5:9 is pertinent to the argument Minister Monardo has been patiently trying to make over several posts and whether Revelation 5:9 is past or future tense makes no difference. Second, Revelation 5 occurs in the future to the Apostle John's time per Revelations 4:1 - and it looks to occur just prior to the tribulation - so even this tangential response is almost certainly wrong (note: no one knows the day or the hour of His return).

You have a habit of not responding to the main points of the argument given as evidenced by your frequent one-liner responses that typically address some minutia tangential to the argument given (like this one) or leave you guessing as to what in particular you are referring to (post #103). If that is what you are shooting for, then congratulations.

 

[Hammster]

First his bringing up Revelation 5:9 is pertinent to the argument Minister Monardo has been patiently trying to make over several posts and whether Revelation 5:9 is past or future tense makes no difference. Second, Revelation 5 occurs in the future to the Apostle John's time per Revelations 4:1 - and it looks to occur just prior to the tribulation - so even this tangential response is almost certainly wrong (note: no one knows the day or the hour of His return).

You have a habit of not responding to the main points of the argument given as evidenced by your frequent one-liner responses that typically address some minutia tangential to the argument given (like this one) or leave you guessing as to what in particular you are referring to (post #103). If that is what you are shooting for, then congratulations.

It did take place in the future of John writing it. But it’s past tense to us.

That’s two lines. Don’t be angry because I’m succinct.

 

[John Mullally]

It did take place in the future of John writing it. But it’s past tense to us.

That’s two lines. Don’t be angry because I’m succinct.

What is your evidence it is past tense to us? And what does the tense (past, present, or future) have to do with the argument given on post #100.

And what in particular are you referring to in post #103? Just about everyone that posts here has that kind of thought - but generally we can be more specific.

 

[Hammster]

What is your evidence it is past tense to us?

https://openheavenrhema.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Days-of-Vengeance.pdf

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

It did take place in the future of John writing it. But it’s past tense to us.

That’s two lines. Don’t be angry because I’m succinct.

What does it mean that they said the Lion of the tribe of Judah is worthy to open it, but the Lamb that was slain showed up? Is it past tense for the lion or lamb?

 

[John Mullally]

What is your evidence it is past tense to us? And what does the tense (past, present, or future) have to do with the argument given on post #100.

And what in particular are you referring to in post #103? Just about everyone that posts here has that kind of thought - but generally we can be more specific.

https://openheavenrhema.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Days-of-Vengeance.pdf

Where in this 500+ page document does it address when Revelation 5 occurs?

More importantly, what does the tense (past, present, or future) have to do with the argument given on post #100? If you can't address that, the tense on Revelations 5:9 means nothing.

In addition, what in particular are you referring to in post #103?

 

[Hammster]

What does it mean that they said the Lion of the tribe of Judah is worthy to open it, but the Lamb that was slain showed up? Is it past tense for the lion or lamb?

I’m not going to get into a discussion on Revelation. It’s outside the scope of this thread.

 

[Hammster]

Where in this 500+ page document does it address when Revelation 5 occurs?

More importantly, what does the tense (past, present, or future) have to do with the argument given on post #100? If you can't address that, the tense on Revelations 5:9 means nothing.

In addition, what in particular are you referring to in post #103?

It’s in there. And my point was in relation to his claim about nations. He used Revelation to say it’s future. That portion of Revelation is past. So it’s not a good source for his argument.

 

[John Mullally]

It’s in there.

You are the one making the assertion about Revelation 5:9 being past. Where is it in that document you link to? Its like someone supporting a point by saying I remember reading about it somewhere in the Bible and then giving a link to the entire New King James Version. And then upon further questioning, all you get is "It's in there" - that's no help.

And my point was in relation to his claim about nations. He used Revelation to say it’s future. That portion of Revelation is past. So it’s not a good source for his argument.

Where in post #100 does he relate Revelation 5:9 being in the future? He does not mention tense at all and I still have not been given a reason why tense matters in this instance.

And what are you referring to specifically in Post #103?

Thanks

 

[Hammster]

You are the one making the assertion about Revelation 5:9 being past. Where is it in that document you link to? Its like someone supporting a point by saying I remember reading about it somewhere in the Bible and then giving a link to the entire New King James Version. And then upon further questioning, all you get is "It's in there" - that's no help.

Where in post #100 does he relate Revelation 5:9 being in the future? He does not mention tense at all and I still have not been given a reason why tense matters in this instance.

And what are you referring to specifically in Post #103?

Thanks

I’ve answered your questions. You have too much vitriol to continue to respond. Have a blessed day.

 

[Mr. M]

And my point was in relation to his claim about nations. He used Revelation to say it’s future.

No I did not. As John pointed out, you introduced that tangent.
My only point that you have failed to address is a correct understanding of ethnos,
and translating "nations", rather than the clearly correct understanding of ethnic groups.
Saying that "in Matthew, ethnos is translated 'nation' 70% of the time is a perfect example
of a nebulous point.
Get back to the source.
Please, please clarify you position or drop it.
Matthew 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

What nations do you think Jesus was referring to here?
Or, what would the apostles understand Him to mean?
Was Israel surrounded by nations that they would bring Christ's message?
Most of the Biblical ethnic groups listed in Genesis 10, (table of nations)
were all under the rule of one empire.
We can easily contrast this to the earlier command to go out
"only to the lost sheep of Israel".
This is in vivid contrast to "all ethnos", that they were being sent out to bear witness.
You insist on the plain meaning of the text. Your position suggests that the body of Christ
is to disciple the modern nations, i.e. the United Nations.
Please. ATQ. Is that your position, your present day understanding of the non-Biblical
reference to "The Great Commission"? Is this your way of bringing this command Jesus
gave to the modern church?

 

[John Mullally]

I’ve answered your questions. You have too much vitriol to continue to respond. Have a blessed day.

For the record you have not answered all of my questions. I am still waiting to get specifics on exactly what you meant in post #103.

And now you feign personal insult because someone asks you to defend your one-liner assertions. For the record, I avoid making assertions that I have not spent time thinking about ahead of time - that's one reason I don't post more frequently and why I avoid spamming one-liner responses.

 

[Hammster]

No I did not. As John pointed out, you introduced that tangent.
My only point that you have failed to address is a correct understanding of ethnos,
and translating "nations", rather than the clearly correct understanding of ethnic groups.
Saying that "in Matthew, ethnos is translated 'nation' 70% of the time is a perfect example
of a nebulous point.
Get back to the source.
Please, please clarify you position or drop it.
Matthew 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

What nations do you think Jesus was referring to here?
Or, what would the apostles understand Him to mean?
Was Israel surrounded by nations that they would bring Christ's message?
Most of the Biblical ethnic groups listed in Genesis 10, (table of nations)
were all under the rule of one empire.
We can easily contrast this to the earlier command to go out
"only to the lost sheep of Israel".
This is in vivid contrast to "all ethnos", that they were being sent out to bear witness.
You insist on the plain meaning of the text. Your position suggests that the body of Christ
is to disciple the modern nations, i.e. the United Nations.
Please. ATQ. Is that your position, your present day understanding of the non-Biblical
reference to "The Great Commission"? Is this your way of bringing this command Jesus
gave to the modern church?

I understand that He did not mean geographical borders. But that doesn’t mean that there’s not a great scope in view. He’s talking about His kingdom (all authority on heaven and earth). And He spent quite a bit of time talking about His kingdom, and the scope is spelled out in Matthew 13.

This is relevant as well:


Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were crushed all at the same time and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away so that not a trace of them was found. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain and filled the whole earth.
— Daniel 2:35

 

[Mr. M]

I understand that He did not mean geographical borders. But that doesn’t mean that there’s not a great scope in view. He’s talking about His kingdom (all authority on heaven and earth). And He spent quite a bit of time talking about His kingdom, and the scope is spelled out in Matthew 13.

This is relevant as well:


Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were crushed all at the same time and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away so that not a trace of them was found. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain and filled the whole earth.
— Daniel 2:35

My question was this: are you defining a present day understanding of this term "Great Commission"?
Is the destiny of the body of Christ to disciple nations? This is what your previous posts have suggested, and Matthew 13 and Daniel 2 do not support that notion.

 

[Hammster]

My question was this: are you defining a present day understanding of this term "Great Commission"?
Is the destiny of the body of Christ to disciple nations? This is what your previous posts have suggested, and Matthew 13 and Daniel 2 do not support that notion.

Of course they do. The sower and seeds show the overwhelming vastness of the kingdom. And the mustard seed and leaven show that it just keep growing, even if at a slow pace.

 

[Mr. M]

Of course they do. The sower and seeds show the overwhelming vastness of the kingdom. And the mustard seed and leaven show that it just keep growing, even if at a slow pace.

And this pertains to making disciples of nations how? Is the church actively engaged is this, or
failing to fulfill your understanding of this term "Great Commission"? Is this a call by you for
reform in the mission? Is there an example anywhere of a nation being a disciple?