the virgin army

[meadowlark]

Genuine Christian fellowship can be extremely deep and satisfy all the characteristics of marriage, except sexual intimacy.

Good point. Sex before marraige requires abstainance according to Christian standards. That can also spiritually be looked at as not being adulterous with the world but finding satisfaction within Christian structure, usually according to conscience, being careful what the conscience is allowed.

 

[candle glow]

It's my understanding that the 144k are literal Jews that have turned to Christ during the time after the rapture of the church and before the tribulation has ended.
Virgins of the Christ are also those betrothed to Him and awaiting the marraige supper. Their 'old husband' has died, leaving them free to remarry.

Hi meadow. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I've heard this interpretation several times before, based on Rev 7 where it talks about 144k of the children of Israel being sealed.

However, if you look carefully you will see that it is not possible for this 144k to be literal Jews, because the tribe of Judah is only one tribe out of the 12.

All the other tribes have been lost. It is impractical and a bit contrived to assume that God will bring back all those other tribes for this purpose, when the message of Jesus and the NT writers very much suggests that God is not longer concerned about the flesh, but looks at the heart and motivation.

Jesus tells the Jews of his time that if they were really the children of Abraham, then they would have the faith of Abraham. (john 8)

Paul mentions the distinction several times, but he goes into the most detail in Galations, where he says that the promises to Abraham to to Abrahams seed (not seeds) and that seed was Jesus.

On a more practical note, regardless of scriptural evidence, it makes no sense that God would choose to use people who openly deny his son's authority and divinity, especially in a situation where the description of these people says that they "follow the lamb whithersoever he goeth".

If any Jews WERE to turn from their ways and accept Jesus, then they wouldn't be Jews anymore; they would just be followers of Jesus like the rest of us.

 

[candle glow]

Good point. Sex before marraige requires abstainance according to Christian standards. That can also spiritually be looked at as not being adulterous with the world but finding satisfaction within Christian structure, usually according to conscience, being careful what the conscience is allowed.

Sorry, I think I've not understood you, though it sounds like you may have a fairly good point here. Would you mind clarifying for me? Thanks.

 

[meadowlark]

Hi meadow. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I've heard this interpretation several times before, based on Rev 7 where it talks about 144k of the children of Israel being sealed.

However, if you look carefully you will see that it is not possible for this 144k to be literal Jews, because the tribe of Judah is only one tribe out of the 12.

All the other tribes have been lost. It is impractical and a bit contrived to assume that God will bring back all those other tribes for this purpose, when the message of Jesus and the NT writers very much suggests that God is not longer concerned about the flesh, but looks at the heart and motivation.

Jesus tells the Jews of his time that if they were really the children of Abraham, then they would have the faith of Abraham. (john 8)

Paul mentions the distinction several times, but he goes into the most detail in Galations, where he says that the promises to Abraham to to Abrahams seed (not seeds) and that seed was Jesus.

On a more practical note, regardless of scriptural evidence, it makes no sense that God would choose to use people who openly deny his son's authority and divinity, especially in a situation where the description of these people says that they "follow the lamb whithersoever he goeth".

If any Jews WERE to turn from their ways and accept Jesus, then they wouldn't be Jews anymore; they would just be followers of Jesus like the rest of us.

Not to be dogmatic but Israel was the northern kingdom and the book of Amos (who was Judaen) and the book of Hosea (who was of the northern kingdom) tells me different. I pointed out that they would be after the church age so they actually would not be "like us"
Not at all contrived.

 

[meadowlark]

"church age" would end at the rapture, but that brings it also into a debatable Eschatology topic since not everyone believes in the rapture because it's not a biblical word, as trinity isn't. So I would be coming from the standpoint of believing it to be a fact. So after the church age would be (depending on your standpoint of tribulation theory) (midtrib in my case) after the rapture. If you don't believe there will be a rapture then I can understand your confusion.
The point of bringing up Gomer and Hosea is to clarify God's standpoint in the OT of His bride (which is also the 2 sisters of Judea and Isreal) to see how He progresses through to the NT train of thought. While we deal mostly with NT scripture it's important to understand OT. Fortunately we had an expert in Paul to translate it to the spiritual culminating in Christ's Bride, the new Jerusalem. Romans explains that the Jews will not be forgotten.
cause and effect: Amos 3:3-8
I have no further interest in debate. I'll leave it at that. Welcome to the forum....lots of kooky people here

 

[candle glow]

a n y w a y....

the point of celibacy still remains. The "virgin army" is described as those who are willing to "follow the lamb withersoever he goeth" and suggest that these people are those who keep themselves from the emotional cuddlies that so easily distract us from the disciplines that it takes to act on Jesus' teachings.

For example, "go into all the world to preach the gospel". While marrieds could still fulfill this command, it becomes much more difficult because they cannot just leave. They must consider the feelings of their partner which could (and very often does) lead to a lot of emotional stress, especially when one partner does not feel the same calling as the other a few years down the line.

But even if both partners do feel the same calling, circumstances may dictate separation, especially in situations where specific needs arise which necessitate one partner leaving the other, even if for a fixed period of time.

It becomes even more difficult with children.

 

[x141]

It's my understanding that the 144k are literal Jews that have turned to Christ during the time after the rapture of the church and before the tribulation has ended.
Virgins of the Christ are also those betrothed to Him and awaiting the marraige supper. Their 'old husband' has died, leaving them free to remarry.

I have found these to be the doctrines of men.

 

[meadowlark]

I have found these to be the doctrines of men.

Some have interpreted them that way and others adhere because it seems the right interpretation according to their research. Others follow blindly with no research. But because it's left to interpretation it's all doctrines of men. That's what makes it debatable material that whole forums have been designed to accomadate end time doctrines, theories etc.

 

[meadowlark]

Another interpretation is that of completion, which is the spiritual aspect. There's always the material and spiritual at work.

Revelation 14:1
1 And I saw, and behold, the Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with Him a hundred and forty-four thousand, having His name and the name of His Father written on their foreheads

Revelation 21:17
And he measured its wall, a hundred and forty-four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of an angel.

A hundred and forty-four is twelve times twelve. Times a thousand is ultimate.Twelve times twelve signifies the ultimate perfection and eternal and perfect completion. The city proper is like a mountain with a height of twelve thousand stadia, whereas the wall itself, from the foundation to the top, has a height of a hundred and forty-four cubits.
In resurrection mankind will be like the angels . Hence, the measure of a man, that is, of an angel indicates that the wall of the city is not natural but is in resurrection.

Matthew 22:30
For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

 

[candle glow]

I have found these to be the doctrines of men.

Thanks for sharing that, 141 (though I'd be open to hearing a bit more details on how you've come to that conclusion!)

But because it's left to interpretation it's all doctrines of men. That's what makes it debatable material that whole forums have been designed to accomadate end time doctrines, theories etc.

Actually, I already pointed out an area where it's NOT up to interpretation. You suggested that the 144k will be literal flesh Jews.

However, the tribe of Judah (i.e. the Jews) are only ONE tribe out of the twelve mentioned in the Revelation. From a purely physical, DNA point of view, it is not open to interpretation that the 144k will be all Jews.

How do you see it?

 

[meadowlark]

Another interpretation is that of completion, which is the spiritual aspect. There's always the material and spiritual at work.


A hundred and forty-four is twelve times twelve. Times a thousand is ultimate.Twelve times twelve signifies the ultimate perfection and eternal and perfect completion. The city proper is like a mountain with a height of twelve thousand stadia, whereas the wall itself, from the foundation to the top, has a height of a hundred and forty-four cubits.
In resurrection mankind will be like the angels . Hence, the measure of a man, that is, of an angel indicates that the wall of the city is not natural but is in resurrection.

I'll stick more to the spiritual aspects and leave "man" to debate.

 

[LovebirdsFlying]

MOD HAT ON

This thread has been cleaned up.
If you want to debate points raised, please start a thread in one of the debate areas.
Thanks
MOD HAT OFF​

 

[meadowlark]

I've been into celibacy for over a decade yet I've never considered it a criteria for the exclusive 144000. The reason being is that Jesus was never into being exclusive. It does give me the freedom to focus more on the Kingdom but much can also be said about the lessons learnt in the sanctioned marraige (spiritual lessons about how the Bridegroom relates to the Bride) that those who are celibate never get to experience.

 

[Forge3]

I am a 49 year old virgin and that does not make me in a 'higher' position than one married and raising children. Each pathway or vocation to God has it's own particular challenges. I can sit back and admire parents raising children in a Godly way more than of myself just because I feel called to not have sex or touch. I quite simply do not feel called to that vocation (marriage/children). And in ways I see that as tougher than not giving into lust.

 

[candle glow]

I've been into celibacy for over a decade yet I've never considered it a criteria for the exclusive 144000. The reason being is that Jesus was never into being exclusive. It does give me the freedom to focus more on the Kingdom but much can also be said about the lessons learnt in the sanctioned marraige (spiritual lessons about how the Bridegroom relates to the Bride) that those who are celibate never get to experience.

Hey meadow. It's interesting that you are also a celibate. I think the point of the spirit being able to flow where ever it wants is that God can be exclusive and inclusionist whenever he wants to based on the motives of those he's judging.

I also agree that celibacy is not a requirement for inclusion in the 144k. I think the virginity mentioned probably refers more to a spiritual attitude than a physical state (which is consistent with Jesus' teachings about how God looks on the inside while man looks on the outside).

I believe the spiritual virginity being talked about here relates more to our attitudes towards emotions and sex, where we refuse to let our emotions influence us in situations where a rational examination of the situation is necessary. I think this is consistent with what Jesus said about forsaking family etc.

Celibacy provides an advantage in this area because it requires us to face those issues head on.

I am a 49 year old virgin and that does not make me in a 'higher' position than one married and raising children. Each pathway or vocation to God has it's own particular challenges. I can sit back and admire parents raising children in a Godly way more than of myself just because I feel called to not have sex or touch. I quite simply do not feel called to that vocation. And in ways I see that as tougher than not giving into lust.

hi forge. WOW! 49? Congratulations on that kind of discipline. I only made it to 18
I belive that when it comes to a "higher" spiritual position, we cannot make a rule about it one way or the other. Celibacy really could put someone in that position, or it could mean nothing in God's eyes. So much depends on our motivations.

Paul made it quite clear that there really are spiritual benefits to staying single and Jesus described it as something that people do "for the kingdom of Heaven's sake". Celibacy is the superior option, but only if it's done for the right reasons.

 

[Forge3]

Hey meadow. It's interesting that you are also a celibate. I think the point of the spirit being able to flow where ever it wants is that God can be exclusive and inclusionist whenever he wants to based on the motives of those he's judging.

I also agree that celibacy is not a requirement for inclusion in the 144k. I think the virginity mentioned probably refers more to a spiritual attitude than a physical state (which is consistent with Jesus' teachings about how God looks on the inside while man looks on the outside).

I believe the spiritual virginity being talked about here relates more to our attitudes towards emotions and sex, where we refuse to let our emotions influence us in situations where a rational examination of the situation is necessary. I think this is consistent with what Jesus said about forsaking family etc.

Celibacy provides an advantage in this area because it requires us to face those issues head on.



hi forge. WOW! 49? Congratulations on that kind of discipline. I only made it to 18
I belive that when it comes to a "higher" spiritual position, we cannot make a rule about it one way or the other. Celibacy really could put someone in that position, or it could mean nothing in God's eyes. So much depends on our motivations.

Paul made it quite clear that there really are spiritual benefits to staying single and Jesus described it as something that people do "for the kingdom of Heaven's sake". Celibacy is the superior option, but only if it's done for the right reasons.

To be fair and true it wasn't a choice I made from the beginning. I was shy and awkward. Later on in life I accepted it as my vocation but only after great frustration and struggle. Now I see it as an offering to God and a calling. I have accepted it.

 

[candle glow]

It does give me the freedom to focus more on the Kingdom but much can also be said about the lessons learnt in the sanctioned marraige (spiritual lessons about how the Bridegroom relates to the Bride) that those who are celibate never get to experience.

Actually, I think I've said before that, from what I can see, the only difference between a married couple and Christian singles can be sexual intimacy. Single Christians can experience what marrieds experience in areas like taking responsibility for one another, dealing with tensions, dealing with finances, looking after children (i.e. the children of couples in the community), sharing with one another about life experiences or spirituality in general, and working together.

I've heard it argued that the same thing it takes to be a caring, responsible Christian single is precisely what is most likely to make that person more attractive to Christians of the opposite sex. The same qualities it takes to have successful Christians relationships between Christians are the same qualities it takes to have a successful marriage.

At least, that's what I've heard from other married couples in various Christian communities I've lived in.

 

[candle glow]

To be fair and true it wasn't a choice I made from the beginning. I was shy and awkward. Later on in life I accepted it as my vocation but only after great frustration and struggle. Now I see it as an offering to God and a calling. I have accepted it.

Interesting, because I kinda feel something similar in my own case. I feel I have also accepted it as my calling, though it wasn't always like that for me. Even now I still struggle with the emotional cuddlies which can come from marriage, though I don't feel those struggles are enough to convince me that I should abandon my conviction.

 

[meadowlark]

Actually, I think I've said before that, from what I can see, the only difference between a married couple and Christian singles can be sexual intimacy. Single Christians can experience what marrieds experience in areas like taking responsibility for one another, dealing with tensions, dealing with finances, looking after children (i.e. the children of couples in the community), sharing with one another about life experiences or spirituality in general, and working together.

I've heard it argued that the same thing it takes to be a caring, responsible Christian single is precisely what is most likely to make that person more attractive to Christians of the opposite sex. The same qualities it takes to have successful Christians relationships between Christians are the same qualities it takes to have a successful marriage.

At least, that's what I've heard from other married couples in various Christian communities I've lived in.

The same argument can be made for those who think that gay marraige is sanctioned....its not scriptural but if those who kept themselves exclusive of sexual dealings would still be within Christian structure.
Those who can place others before themselves, etc. can experience the proper spiritual meaning of marriage according to the Bridegroom and Bride....by seeing God as Who He is......however the pattern is in the marraige and having that before us through the centuries is why His vision has never been lost.

 

[Forge3]

Interesting, because I kinda feel something similar in my own case. I feel I have also accepted it as my calling, though it wasn't always like that for me. Even now I still struggle with the emotional cuddlies which can come from marriage, though I don't feel those struggles are enough to convince me that I should abandon my conviction.

Even people in marriage or general relationships experience loneliness. Being in a relationship has many advanatages. I have had lots of lust filled dreams but lately more about just 'being' with someone. Holding and being held. Loving and being loved. In my calling I endeavor to sublimate that by a closer walk with God through deeper prayer and serving the poor in my ministry.