# Co-heirs with Christ?



## Artfuldodger

What's ya'lls take on this from Romans 8:17?

Romans 8:17
Now if we are children, then we are heirs--heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.

 "joint-heirs with Christ"

Galatians 4:7
Now you are no longer a slave but God's own child. And since you are his child, God has made you his heir.

2 Timothy 2:12
if we endure, we will also reign with him. If we disown him, he will also disown us;


----------



## hobbs27

The period of time from Pentecost until the fall of Jerusalem,  signifying the end of the Old covenant system, was about 40years in duration, and constituted a " wilderness journey" for the New Testament saints.  They were on their way to the promised land (2 Peter 3:13), the New Heaven and Earth. This journey was one of suffering and hardship. 

The inheritance,  the rest,  the crown,  and the reign lay at the end of that journey. (2Timothy 2:10-12)


----------



## hobbs27

If they endured. 

So many miss this,  they think endure to the end of their life but Matt. 24 gives the context as enduring to the end of the age. 

Matt. 24:3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

Matthew 24:13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Interesting but why do we become co-heirs with Christ? I'm looking at it as a relation to us becoming children of God. Jesus is the Son of God. God is the Father of us all.
What would this make us in relation to Jesus?


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> Interesting but why do we become co-heirs with Christ? I'm looking at it as a relation to us becoming children of God. Jesus is the Son of God. God is the Father of us all.
> What would this make us in relation to Jesus?



 Do we become co-heirs with Christ or are we children of the resurrection (Luke20:35-36)?


----------



## Artfuldodger

"And since they are sons of the resurrection, they are sons of God."

"Now if we are children, then we are heirs--heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ."


----------



## j_seph

Artfuldodger said:


> Interesting but why do we become co-heirs with Christ? I'm looking at it as a relation to us becoming children of God. Jesus is the Son of God. God is the Father of us all.
> What would this make us in relation to Jesus?



Mark 3:35 Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Ephesians 1:5
he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--

I'm trying to picture the connection to us receiving sonship with that of Jesus who was the Son of God.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Mother too, so it must be a special type of unity.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> Ephesians 1:5
> he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--
> 
> I'm trying to picture the connection to us receiving sonship with that of Jesus who was the Son of God.



when you say ( us)  are you referring to us today.. Or the (us)  spoken of in Ephesians 1:5 ?

 I don't think I have yet to understand your question or point.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> when you say ( us)  are you referring to us today.. Or the (us)  spoken of in Ephesians 1:5 ?
> 
> I don't think I have yet to understand your question or point.



I'm not making any point, just presenting for understanding. Are you saying that we aren't predestined  for adoption to sonship because this was addressed to another group?


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> I'm not making any point, just presenting for understanding. Are you saying that we aren't predestined  for adoption to sonship because this was addressed to another group?



Right,  I'm saying we are not predestined for adoption  to sonship!

 There was a small group of elect in the first century. God had His elect throughout the old covenant to establish the new,  but that's all they were. 

If election and predestination were true,  God would have never give man a sense of self,  or individualism.  We would just be puppets controlled by a creator at every decision.. Matter of fact if God were in control of every aspect of our life why am I able to make errors,  why was I able to misspel < that word. I misspelled that word because God gave me freewill and individualism to make choices. 

 Everything is finished in this New Covenant in which  Jesus reigns forever.  The Spirit and the bride say come!  And for whosoever will,  let him take of the waters of life which is freely given.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Right,  I'm saying we are not predestined for adoption  to sonship!
> 
> There was a small group of elect in the first century. God had His elect throughout the old covenant to establish the new,  but that's all they were.
> 
> If election and predestination were true,  God would have never give man a sense of self,  or individualism.  We would just be puppets controlled by a creator at every decision.. Matter of fact if God were in control of every aspect of our life why am I able to make errors,  why was I able to misspel < that word. I misspelled that word because God gave me freewill and individualism to make choices.
> 
> Everything is finished in this New Covenant in which  Jesus reigns forever.  The Spirit and the bride say come!  And for whosoever will,  let him take of the waters of life which is freely given.



Ephesians 1:5
he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--

From your prospective this was before it was finished. You aren't denying election or predestination before it was finished. That God had to orchestrate before it was finished to make sure it happened the way he wanted it to. To ensure his Son died on a cross for our sins, resurrect, ascend, and return.

Now that it is finished, or since it is finished, God has abandoned election and predestination in favor of freewill. 

To me personally, what's interesting about this concept is what or did the bases for salvation change from in this process.

Romans 11:5-6
In the same way, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. 6And if it is by grace, then it is no longer by works. Otherwise, grace would no longer be grace. 7What then? What Israel was seeking, it failed to obtain, but the elect did. The others were hardened, 8as it is written: “God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that could not see, and ears that could not hear, to this very day.”

So this remnant was chosen by grace and the others were hardened by God to make his plan come about. Now it is finished and salvation is based on grace. And if it is by grace, then it is no longer by works. Otherwise, grace would no longer be grace.

I'm trying real hard to see the change.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Revelation 22:17
The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let the one who hears say, "Come!" Let the one who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water of life.

Ephesians 1:5
he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--

Weren't both of these written before it was finished?


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> Right,  I'm saying we are not predestined for adoption  to sonship!
> 
> There was a small group of elect in the first century. God had His elect throughout the old covenant to establish the new,  but that's all they were.



If you believe this, then the promises in Romans 8 have​ no meaning to you. And if so, I don't see how you can have any assurance of salvation whatsoever.


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> If you believe this, then the promises in Romans 8 have​ no meaning to you. And if so, I don't see how you can have any assurance of salvation whatsoever.



 Right and Wrong. Read Roman's 8, they were waiting for the kingdom still... It came in 70ad as Luke 21 shows.  The creation mentioned in Romans 8 is the Kingdom they were looking for and the kingdom we are in. 
◄ 2937. ktisis ►
Strong's Concordance
ktisis: creation (the act or the product)
Original Word: κτίσις, εως, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: ktisis
Phonetic Spelling: (ktis'-is)
Short Definition: creation, creature, institution
Definition: (often of the founding of a city), (a) abstr: creation, (b) concr: creation, creature, institution; always of Divine work, (c) an institution, ordinance.

While I don't look forward to the promises given in Roman's 8, I live in the reality of what they were looking foward to.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> Revelation 22:17
> The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let the one who hears say, "Come!" Let the one who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water of life.
> 
> Ephesians 1:5
> he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--
> 
> Weren't both of these written before it was finished?



written ? Yes,  but Ephesians 1:5 is in present tense pre 70ad 
 Rev. 22 is in future tense pre 70ad

Rev. 22:6 Then he said to me, “These words are faithful and true.” And the Lord God of the holy* prophets sent His angel to show His servants the things which must shortly take place.*


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> Right and Wrong. Read Roman's 8, they were waiting for the kingdom still... It came in 70ad as Luke 21 shows.  The creation mentioned in Romans 8 is the Kingdom they were looking for and the kingdom we are in.
> ◄ 2937. ktisis ►
> Strong's Concordance
> ktisis: creation (the act or the product)
> Original Word: κτίσις, εως, ἡ
> Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
> Transliteration: ktisis
> Phonetic Spelling: (ktis'-is)
> Short Definition: creation, creature, institution
> Definition: (often of the founding of a city), (a) abstr: creation, (b) concr: creation, creature, institution; always of Divine work, (c) an institution, ordinance.
> 
> While I don't look forward to the promises given in Roman's 8, I live in the reality of what they were looking towards.



Romans 8 is written to all who are "in Christ". The same ones described in 2 Corinthians 5:17.

17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.


This is not speaking of old covenant vs. new covenant. This is speaking of a change within a person that takes place when they are born of the Spirit. And Romans 8 is directed specifically to these. 
"There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus..."

They were not waiting, it was NOW to them, and it's NOW to us.

That promise is to us also today, who are in Christ Jesus.(regenerated state)


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> Romans 8 is written to all who are "in Christ". The same ones described in 2 Corinthians 5:17.
> 
> 17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
> 
> 
> This is not speaking of old covenant vs. new covenant. This is speaking of a change within a person that takes place when they are born of the Spirit. And Romans 8 is directed specifically to these.
> "There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus..."
> 
> They were not waiting, it was NOW to them, and it's NOW to us.
> 
> That promise is to us also today, who are in Christ Jesus.(regenerated state)



If your ggggg grandfather left His son an inheritance,  does that make you an heir or his son? 

If you planted a tree and then harvest the ripe fruit on that tree,  you have the first fruits.. No matter how many more harvests you get out of that season,  nothing else will be the first fruits. 

Now... 
You claim they were not waiting,  it was Now to them as it is Now to us. 

 Please explain. 

Romans 8: 18,19,22,23,25,

Romans 8:21 is an exact parallel with Matt. 21:43 


Roman's 8:21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 

Matthew 21:43
Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people, producing the fruit of it.


----------



## hummerpoo

hobbs27 said:


> Romans 8:21 is an exact parallel with Matt. 21:43



A change in leadership of God's people on earth.
is exactly parallel with
the transformation from life on earth to life in heaven.

That takes some mental gymnastics.


----------



## hobbs27

hummerpoo said:


> A change in leadership of God's people on earth.
> is exactly parallel with
> the transformation from life on earth to life in heaven.
> 
> That takes some mental gymnastics.



Instead of life on earth vs.  Life in heaven,  perhaps the contrast is death in flesh (old covenant)  vs  life in Spirit ( new covenant)


----------



## hummerpoo

hobbs27 said:


> Instead of life on earth vs.  Life in heaven,  perhaps the contrast is death in flesh (old covenant)  vs  life in Spirit ( new covenant)



No, the immediate context (18-25) concerns those who are sustained by "hope" of life in heaven while enduring life on earth.


----------



## hobbs27

hummerpoo said:


> No, the immediate context (18-25) concerns those who are sustained by "hope" of life in heaven while enduring life on earth.



Roman's 8:18 ylt 
For I reckon that the sufferings of the present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory about to be revealed in us;

No,  I must disagree,  what they looked for was (Mello) about to come.  Christ,  to glorify them.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Ktisis; creation

The “whole creation” anticipates a deliverance from the bondage of corruption.

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 

I believe the "creation" to be Israel. Now if the restoration has been made yet, I don't know.

I don't see how this would effect my views on me becoming co-heirs with Christ. If my fellow relatives in Christ inherited the Kingdom before me in 70AD, I'm still going to inherit the Kingdom under the same inheritance agreement. Them inheriting it before me doesn't stop my inheritance.

Ephesians 1:5
he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--

That still covers me.


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> If your ggggg grandfather left His son an inheritance,  does that make you an heir or his son?
> 
> If you planted a tree and then harvest the ripe fruit on that tree,  you have the first fruits.. No matter how many more harvests you get out of that season,  nothing else will be the first fruits.
> 
> Now...
> You claim they were not waiting,  it was Now to them as it is Now to us.
> 
> Please explain.
> 
> Romans 8: 18,19,22,23,25,
> 
> Romans 8:21 is an exact parallel with Matt. 21:43
> 
> 
> Roman's 8:21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
> 
> Matthew 21:43
> Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people, producing the fruit of it.



Hobbs I know you believe the Lord chastens us, because I've heard you say it before.

And if He chastens us, then we are His sons. Those that He does not chasten are bas-tards, not sons.

Heb. 12:6-10
6For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bas-tards, and not sons.
9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.



Also notice in verse 10 it speaks about part of our inheritance. "..that we might be partakers of his holiness..."

My point is, if we are in Christ, we are sons. And if sons, then we are also heirs with Him.


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> Hobbs I know you believe the Lord chastens us, because I've heard you say it before.
> 
> And if He chastens us, then we are His sons. Those that He does not chasten are bas-tards, not sons.
> 
> Heb. 12:6-10
> 6For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
> 7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
> 8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bas-tards, and not sons.
> 9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
> 10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
> 
> 
> 
> Also notice in verse 10 it speaks about part of our inheritance. "..that we might be partakers of his holiness..."
> 
> My point is, if we are in Christ, we are sons. And if sons, then we are also heirs with Him.



We can be sons without being heirs. The inheritance was the Kingdom.  Jesus was the seed of Abraham that received the inheritance.  The inheritance came at 70ad per Luke 21:31...at that time Jesus and His Co heirs.. (The elect ) received the inheritance  in its fullness.  Their body was glorified...in other words it was vindicated and justified. 

 They too had suffered with Christ.. In tribulation from the Jewish authority. 

Christ came with His kingdom in Glory and vindicated not only Himself but His Co heirs by destroying what was left of the Old covenant.. Priesthood,  temple,  land,  wealth,  genealogies. 

 The Kingdom was then established.  Jesus along with the elect rule over His kingdom


 We didn't suffer with them in tribulation.  We have a choice,  when we become of age... Or to a point of accountability,  we can answer the calling of the spirit by entering into the already established kingdom that was inherited by Jesus and the elect.... Or we can choose to be idolaters,  liars,  cheats,  etc on the outside. 

What awaits us inside is eternal life inside the restored Eden... IE spiritual kingdom... Or we can do the easy thing and sit outside to perish.


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> We can be sons without being heirs. The inheritance was the Kingdom.  Jesus was the seed of Abraham that received the inheritance.  The inheritance came at 70ad per Luke 21:31...at that time Jesus and His Co heirs.. (The elect ) received the inheritance  in its fullness.  Their body was glorified...in other words it was vindicated and justified.
> 
> They too had suffered with Christ.. In tribulation from the Jewish authority.
> 
> Christ came with His kingdom in Glory and vindicated not only Himself but His Co heirs by destroying what was left of the Old covenant.. Priesthood,  temple,  land,  wealth,  genealogies.
> 
> The Kingdom was then established.  Jesus along with the elect rule over His kingdom
> 
> 
> We didn't suffer with them in tribulation.  We have a choice,  when we become of age... Or to a point of accountability,  we can answer the calling of the spirit by entering into the already established kingdom that was inherited by Jesus and the elect.... Or we can choose to be idolaters,  liars,  cheats,  etc on the outside.
> 
> What awaits us inside is eternal life inside the restored Eden... IE spiritual kingdom... Or we can do the easy thing and sit outside to perish.



No, if we are sons, then we are heirs with Christ. That's the way inheritances work.
The firstborn always got the best; (that was Jesus)
And those born after would have their equally allotted lesser portion. 

But...We are made joint-heirs with Christ.
That means we get all that He gets jointly. See how much better that is.
And not only that, but we have the earnest of that inheritance now through the Spirit.


Are you going to tell me now that we don't have the Spirit?


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> No, if we are sons, then we are heirs with Christ. That's the way inheritances work.
> The firstborn always got the best; (that was Jesus)
> And those born after would have their equally allotted lesser portion.
> 
> But...We are made joint-heirs with Christ.
> That means we get all that He gets jointly. See how much better that is.
> And not only that, but we have the earnest of that inheritance now through the Spirit.
> 
> 
> Are you going to tell me now that we don't have the Spirit?




You aren't a Co heir of the kingdom because the kingdom has already been gifted.  You didn't suffer with Christ by the hands of the Jewish authority... You weren't born when the will was read and the inhertance was given... 

You can enter into this Kingdom,  there's an invitation of this kingdom open to all of us,  but we didn't receive it by inheritance,  we receive it by entering in of the calling and taking of its waters of life. 

You see the difference.. You must,  it's so obvious,  they were receiving the kingdom as an inheritance.. They suffered with Christ,  they were to be vindicated by Christ destroying the old covenant system and taking the kingdom away from that system and giving it to them.


----------



## hummerpoo

hobbs27 said:


> Roman's 8:18 ylt
> For I reckon that the sufferings of the present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory about to be revealed in us;
> 
> No,  I must disagree,  what they looked for was (Mello) about to come.  Christ,  to glorify them.



Mello (soon/about to be/etc.) is a relative term that depends on the context; a millennium is "mello" relative to eternity.   Verse 23 "redemption of our bodies" nails it (1 Cor 15:35 ff).  Everyone, then and now, is charged to be prepared for their imminent passing from life on earth.  But the "hope" of eternal life is the primary message.  We can withstand anything God provides in this life because His promise of glory is true.  Not everything future in the bible points to 70 AD, although I have to admit that you make an effort.


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> You aren't a Co heir of the kingdom because the kingdom has already been gifted.  You didn't suffer with Christ by the hands of the Jewish authority... You weren't born when the will was read and the inhertance was given...
> 
> You can enter into this Kingdom,  there's an invitation of this kingdom open to all of us,  but we didn't receive it by inheritance,  we receive it by entering in of the calling and taking of its waters of life.
> 
> You see the difference.. You must,  it's so obvious,  they were receiving the kingdom as an inheritance.. They suffered with Christ,  they were to be vindicated by Christ destroying the old covenant system and taking the kingdom away from that system and giving it to them.





Sometimes I wonder if you and I are reading the same bible.


----------



## gemcgrew

hobbs27 said:


> If election and predestination were true,  God would have never give man a sense of self,  or individualism.


This looks like fun, let me try it.
If God gave man a sense of self or individualism, it is precisely because election and predestination are true.


hobbs27 said:


> We would just be puppets controlled by a creator at every decision..


The creator is over the puppets as well. 


hobbs27 said:


> Matter of fact if God were in control of every aspect of our life why am I able to make errors,  why was I able to misspel < that word. I misspelled that word because God gave me freewill and individualism to make choices.


Hobbs thinks that he misspelled that word because he has freedom relative to God. When in fact, he misspelled that word because he is not free.

That was fun.

God is sovereign and Hobbs is not free.


----------



## hobbs27

hummerpoo said:


> Mello (soon/about to be/etc.) is a relative term that depends on the context; a millennium is "mello" relative to eternity.   Verse 23 "redemption of our bodies" nails it (1 Cor 15:35 ff).  Everyone, then and now, is charged to be prepared for their imminent passing from life on earth.  But the "hope" of eternal life is the primary message.  We can withstand anything God provides in this life because His promise of glory is true.  Not everything future in the bible points to 70 AD, although I have to admit that you make an effort.




 Sir,  it's not an effort on my part.  It is a major task to put anything in scripture to our future with verses like these in Luke 21:

 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 

28 Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near.”

31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near.

32 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place

Verse 21 alone should settle any question,  knowing that the resurrection is prophesied in old testament. 

 I tried very hard to remain in the amillenial camp.. Then tried even harder to stay in the partial preterist camp,  but scripture would not allow it.  Now that the paradigm shift has taken place,  I read futurist talking about when Christ comes back and just have to shake my head at how silly that belief is and how ignorant I once was.


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> Sometimes I wonder if you and I are reading the same bible.



Me too. 

Daniel 12:7And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.


----------



## hobbs27

gemcgrew said:


> This looks like fun, let me try it.
> If God gave man a sense of self or individualism, it is precisely because election and predestination are true.
> 
> The creator is over the puppets as well.
> 
> Hobbs thinks that he misspelled that word because he has freedom relative to God. When in fact, he misspelled that word because he is not free.
> 
> That was fun.
> 
> God is sovereign and Hobbs is not free.



God is so sovereign.. He allows man to have free will.


----------



## hummerpoo

hobbs27 said:


> Sir,  it's not an effort on my part.  It is a major task to put anything in scripture to our future with verses like these in Luke 21:
> 
> 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
> 
> 28 Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near.”
> 
> 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near.
> 
> 32 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place
> 
> Verse 21 alone should settle any question,  knowing that the resurrection is prophesied in old testament.
> 
> I tried very hard to remain in the amillenial camp.. Then tried even harder to stay in the partial preterite camp,  but scripture would not allow it.  Now that the paradigm shift has taken place,  I read futurist talking about when Christ comes back and just have to shake my head at how silly that belief is and how ignorant I once was.




Adherence to a paradigm explains this astounding statement:


> ... I assure you I have found no dead ends , just one huge complete circle.


http://forum.gon.com/showpost.php?p=10641785&postcount=22


----------



## NE GA Pappy

hobbs27 said:


> 28 Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near.”
> 
> 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near.
> 
> 32 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place
> .




mighty convienent to leave out 29 and 30, which refers to the fig tree sprouting.   

I wonder, just maybe, could that be important, and could Jesus be referring to something in those verses, or was He just jabbering to be heard?


----------



## hobbs27

hummerpoo said:


> Adherence to a paradigm explains this astounding statement:
> 
> http://forum.gon.com/showpost.php?p=10641785&postcount=22




 A dead end is the end... But a circle has no end. 

God brought Adam into a covenantal relationship with Himself.  God and man dwelt together. 
 Sin broke that relationship.  Death entered.  And death reigned the entire Old covenant. Christ sacrificed himself for mankind. Covered sin that man and God can dwell together once again. 

 Christ repaired what Adam broke, and we invited back into the garden.


----------



## hobbs27

NE GA Pappy said:


> mighty convienent to leave out 29 and 30, which refers to the fig tree sprouting.
> 
> I wonder, just maybe, could that be important, and could Jesus be referring to something in those verses, or was He just jabbering to be heard?



It wasnt leaving them out as much as emphasizing the others.. Do any of the verses I did not emphasize change what verse 22 says or means?  I'd love to see that.


----------



## hummerpoo

hobbs27 said:


> A dead end is the end... But a circle has no end.
> 
> God brought Adam into a covenantal relationship with Himself.  God and man dwelt together.
> Sin broke that relationship.  Death entered.  And death reigned the entire Old covenant. Christ sacrificed himself for mankind. Covered sin that man and God can dwell together once again.
> 
> Christ repaired what Adam broke, and we invited back into the garden.



And you have no idea how much scripture you have ignored to make that statement. Amazing.


----------



## NE GA Pappy

hobbs27 said:


> It wasnt leaving them out as much as emphasizing the others.. Do any of the verses I did not emphasize change what verse 22 says or means?  I'd love to see that.



how does v 27 fit into your narrative?  When was 
Son of Man seen coming in a cloud?


----------



## 1gr8bldr

LOL, I thought based on the title that this was about, if Jesus is God, how could he be an heir? But after reading through it all, that was not the intended topic


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> There was a small group of elect in the first century. God had His elect throughout the old covenant to establish the new,  but that's all they were.
> 
> If election and predestination were true,  God would have never give man a sense of self,  or individualism.  We would just be puppets controlled by a creator at every decision.



Since you agree that election and predestination existed before 70AD throughout the old covenant, what does this say about man's individualism during that time? 

Why would God control the events from Adam to the return of Jesus in 70AD knowing full well he made puppets out of men during that time frame?

I could see if you believed predestination never existed but to say it did until 70AD places the men in that era as puppets. This is against your way of thinking that God would not do such a thing. Yet you admit that he did in the past to make the old new.


----------



## Artfuldodger

1gr8bldr said:


> LOL, I thought based on the title that this was about, if Jesus is God, how could he be an heir? But after reading through it all, that was not the intended topic



Actually the intended topic was along those lines or whatever one felt about us becoming co-heirs with Jesus to the Kingdom. The discussion turned into what exactly is the Kingdom that we would be co-heirs to. 

I'm still open to discussing that Jesus is the Son of God and that we can become a co-heir with him. Does that make Jesus the child of God? Do we become the brother of Jesus through adoption? Co-heirs?

Even if we are not the brother or Jesus, why would Jesus be an heir? 

I was just looking at all the different possibilities.


----------



## hobbs27

NE GA Pappy said:


> how does v 27 fit into your narrative?  When was
> Son of Man seen coming in a cloud?



It fits it perfectly as God coming in a cloud represents judgment. 

Isaiah 19:1The burden of Egypt. Behold, the LORD rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it.

The above text is about the judgment of Egypt  With God using the Assyrians around the 7th or 8th century bc...No mention of anyone seeing God in the cloud later on that I have found. 

Isaiah 13:1-17 another judgment by God using Medes to judge Babylon. Notice the tremendous destruction in the apocalyptic language. 

Psalms 18:6-17 .. Another apacolyptic language event that shows God flying about in  Chariot amongst the clouds.. This was David telling of God protecting him against Saul... We learn in scripture it isn't so dramatic. 

So Jesus coming in the clouds supports my narrative of a judgment upon Jerusalem .


----------



## Artfuldodger

Maybe for Jesus to be an heir to the Kingdom, it has to be while he is a man or perhaps earthly or physical. Maybe along the lines of Hobbs way of thinking but in a more physical realm. 
If Jesus has returned spiritually to the Godhead then can he still be an heir to what he already had? So maybe the Kingdom isn't heavenly that we will inherit as co-heirs.
Maybe?

Again, what is the kingdom that Jesus inherited or will inherit that is different than what he already had before he left heaven?  Did he have to become a man to gain his inheritance?

Keep in mind that perhaps at some point in our journey to become co-heirs with Jesus we will be conformed to the image of God's Son.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> Since you agree that election and predestination existed before 70AD throughout the old covenant, what does this say about man's individualism during that time?
> 
> Why would God control the events from Adam to the return of Jesus in 70AD knowing full well he made puppets out of men during that time frame?
> 
> I could see if you believed predestination never existed but to say it did until 70AD places the men in that era as puppets. This is against your way of thinking that God would not do such a thing. Yet you admit that he did in the past to make the old new.



Election was used some in the old Testament, mostly to direct God's plans... Election alone has never saved a soul.  Every man from Adam to now could only find eternal life through faith in Jesus Christ,  and by the power in His blood shed on the cross.


----------



## gemcgrew

NE GA Pappy said:


> how does v 27 fit into your narrative?  When was
> Son of Man seen coming in a cloud?


And do we respect the text? Do we infer that He was coming to earth? Or to the Father?

“I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him." Daniel 7:13


----------



## NE GA Pappy

gemcgrew said:


> And do we respect the text? Do we infer that He was coming to earth? Or to the Father?
> 
> “I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him." Daniel 7:13



well, it is earthlings He is speaking to, and earthlings that he says will see him coming in the clouds, so I would suspect he would be coming where the earthlings are at.  This is not a vison or a dream he is speaking of here.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Election was used some in the old Testament, mostly to direct God's plans... Election alone has never saved a soul.  Every man from Adam to now could only find eternal life through faith in Jesus Christ,  and by the power in His blood shed on the cross.



While I agree salvation does require faith in Jesus and the power in his blood, still you say election was used some in the old testament.
God had to do this to make sure his Son died for our sins. He couldn't leave this very important event to chance. 

Romans 9:17 
For the Scriptures say that God told Pharaoh, "I have appointed you for the very purpose of displaying my power in you and to spread my fame throughout the earth."

This verse and many more show this concept that you agree with.

Romans 11:5-6
So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace.6And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.

Again, you agree they were chosen by grace alone.

Romans 11:7
What then? What the people of Israel sought so earnestly they did not obtain. The elect among them did, but the others were hardened,

Again, God still in control to make sure his Son was crucified. Election and predestination to "some" extent to make sure his plan comes into being.

To some extent from Adam to the 70AD return of Jesus, God was in "some" control of the destiny of "some" individuals. This was based on grace and not of works.

Regardless of how you view it, God was and had to be in control of said individuals to male sure his plan came to be.

You can say their salvation wasn't based on election but that would sure take a lot of explaining considering salvation is based on grace and not of works as based on how the remnant in Romans 11 was chosen.

One final quote from you;

quote;
"The millions of children already dead that didn't hear the Gospel, didn't hear it because God chose them to not hear it." 

This is well past 70AD. Think about what you are saying. Millions of people died never hearing the Gospel because God chose them not to hear it.


----------



## Artfuldodger

From what I gather is; if you hear the gospel from a man, you get a choice for salvation.
If you don't hear the gospel from a man, you don't get a choice or even a chance at salvation. 

So in order for God's sheep to hear his voice, they must hear it from a man.
Salvation is dependent on grace alone but only if man delivers the concept of grace alone to God's sheep. God's sheep will die an eternal, everlasting death if man doesn't deliver  this message. The message to include that no one comes to the Son except from God. The message that no one comes to God except through the Son.

We can also assume that if we don't reach God's sheep, then they really never were God's sheep to begin with. Otherwise God would have provided a way for them to hear the gospel through man.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> While I agree salvation does require faith in Jesus and the power in his blood, still you say election was used some in the old testament.
> God had to do this to make sure his Son died for our sins. He couldn't leave this very important event to chance.
> 
> Romans 9:17
> For the Scriptures say that God told Pharaoh, "I have appointed you for the very purpose of displaying my power in you and to spread my fame throughout the earth."
> 
> This verse and many more show this concept that you agree with.
> 
> Romans 11:5-6
> So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace.6And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.
> 
> Again, you agree they were chosen by grace alone.
> 
> Romans 11:7
> What then? What the people of Israel sought so earnestly they did not obtain. The elect among them did, but the others were hardened,
> 
> Again, God still in control to make sure his Son was crucified. Election and predestination to "some" extent to make sure his plan comes into being.
> 
> To some extent from Adam to the 70AD return of Jesus, God was in "some" control of the destiny of "some" individuals. This was based on grace and not of works.
> 
> Regardless of how you view it, God was and had to be in control of said individuals to male sure his plan came to be.
> 
> You can say their salvation wasn't based on election but that would sure take a lot of explaining considering salvation is based on grace and not of works as based on how the remnant in Romans 11 was chosen.
> 
> One final quote from you;
> 
> quote;
> "The millions of children already dead that didn't hear the Gospel, didn't hear it because God chose them to not hear it."
> 
> This is well past 70AD. Think about what you are saying. Millions of people died never hearing the Gospel because God chose them not to hear it.




 Yes,  I said God chose them to not hear.  I can't back that with scripture,  but how else would one explain?  Does God have a way of giving them faith in Jesus after they die?  Scripture doesn't tell us.  So we are left to struggle with what we ourselves consider to be fairness from an Almighty God... Or we can accept what scripture does tell us, Thank God we know the Gospel and put the unknown in His hands. I don't know the details on this,  it doesn't appear anyone does. 



 One thing I know,  I know,  and that is that there is a God and He sent His only begotten Son to sacrifice Himself that we may be saved. I also know this message has made itself known on every continent in the world,  and this message is the largest religion the world has ever seen.


----------



## Artfuldodger

If God chose some not to hear, how is that different from election? How is it different from those who hear but think it foolish?
While it's true Christianity is large, it hasn't always been. Looking back in the past it didn't reach many of the people who are dead in the ground. If God can call them after their physical death then perhaps he can call them before their physical death.

We still have the issue of predestination and election in the old testament. Was this election for salvation or just salvation from the destruction of Jerusalem?


----------



## Artfuldodger

What is or was Christ to inherit?


----------



## Artfuldodger

"I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, and all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed."  Dan. 7: 13, 14

We discussed this briefly last night. Perhaps it was another verse about Jesus coming in the clouds. So could it be the other way around? Was he coming in the clouds to God in Heaven at his ascencion?

Would this change what Christ inherited or will inherit?


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> If God chose some not to hear, how is that different from election? How is it different from those who hear but think it foolish?
> While it's true Christianity is large, it hasn't always been. Looking back in the past it didn't reach many of the people who are dead in the ground. If God can call them after their physical death then perhaps he can call them before their physical death.
> 
> We still have the issue of predestination and election in the old testament. Was this election for salvation or just salvation from the destruction of Jerusalem?




 The election was to establish the kingdom.  The Kingdom is God's authority... IE Government or rulership.

The New covenant kingdom is ruled by Christ.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Did any of the old testament election, predestination, hardening, blinding, or God making vessels of wrath to establish his kingdom deny  anyone salvation?


----------



## gordon 2

So..ah..I'm in Florida vacationing..and am trying to find what is the motivation for this tread? because I can't follow the drifts of it. And normally I can. So I have to ask is it the vacation or you two?


----------



## Artfuldodger

gordon 2 said:


> So..ah..I'm in Florida vacationing..and am trying to find what is the motivation for this tread? because I can't follow the drifts of it. And normally I can. So I have to ask is it the vacation or you two?



I think we need to start with exactly what Jesus will or did inherit. Then we can figure out what we are or will be co-heirs with and to what.

Riches? Land? A Kingdom? Heaven? Eternal life?


----------



## hobbs27

gordon 2 said:


> So..ah..I'm in Florida vacationing..and am trying to find what is the motivation for this tread? because I can't follow the drifts of it. And normally I can. So I have to ask is it the vacation or you two?



Have fun in Fla.  Bro.  I just got back from a three day weekend @ Keaton Beach.


----------



## gordon 2

Art, we are heirs to the body resurrection. See Paul.


----------



## gordon 2

hobbs27 said:


> Have fun in Fla.  Bro.  I just got back from a three day weekend @ Keaton Beach.


 

Nice beach weather. Good food. Great people.


----------



## Artfuldodger

I read about many things we'll inherit in the bible. Is this the same things we are co-heirs with Jesus? What does or will Jesus inherit that we share with Jesus as co-heirs with?

According to Paul, we are not only God’s children, but also heirs, and not just heirs, but co-heirs with Christ.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> I read about many things we'll inherit in the bible. Is this the same things we are co-heirs with Jesus? What does or will Jesus inherit that we share with Jesus as co-heirs with?



The elect nor us will ever be equal to the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.


----------



## Artfuldodger

1 John 3:2
Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Hebrews 9:15-17
15Therefore Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, now that He has died to redeem them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16In the case of a will, it is necessary to establish the death of the one who made it,  17because a will does not take effect until the one who made it has died; it cannot be executed while he is still alive.

Maybe it's everlasting life that we become co-heirs of with Jesus.


----------



## gordon 2

ACCORDING TO BIBLE'S DEFINITION We have everlasting life now.
So we wait now for the resurrection.WHAT we are co-heirs of is the resurrection.


----------



## hobbs27

gordon 2 said:


> ACCORDING TO BIBLE'S DEFINITION We have everlasting life now.
> So we wait now for the resurrection.WHAT we are co-heirs of is the resurrection.



How does that make sense?  If we have everlasting life now ( I agree)... Then how can we be raised from the dead?


----------



## Artfuldodger

1 Corinthians 15:49
And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man.

Could this be the inheritance we are co-heirs with Christ?


----------



## hobbs27

Art... Notice here the language of (we)  and (our)  in contrast to (you).  There's two groups in this text.  One which received the inheritance (the elect which were predestined)  and another that shared in the HS with the heirs.  The elect which were predestined were the Jew's which first believed.  In Revelation 7 and 14 they are called the 144,000....in Matthew 24 it says the angels would gather his elect from the four corners of the world.... Read revelation 7 .



Ephesians 1:

11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, 12 that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.


13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who* is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.*


----------



## gordon 2

hobbs27 said:


> How does that make sense?  If we have everlasting life now ( I agree)... Then how can we be raised from the dead?



It is because you have an assumption of what eternal life is which is biblecaly and factually  incorrect. Eternal life is the personal encounter of God by a person and human life in His eternal nature. ex. Paul's encounter with Jesus or my experience of Jesus through the Holy Ghost witness of some aspect of our Lord. Don't take my word for it--check scripture.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Ephesians 1:
> 
> 11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, 12 that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.
> 13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who* is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.*


*

I can kinda see what you are talking about. So beyond the fact that only the Jews were predestined to become the elect, what is verse 14 telling us? Isn't it telling us that although salvation was presented to the Jews first, that we as Gentiles were adopted into the inherited promises with those elected Jews? OK so they inherited the promises by predestination and we inherited them by freewill believing. Still though, we inherited the promises along with the Jews. We became joint-heirs of the promises.

I'll see if I can find other verses that show we become children of God and if children then heirs of the promises.*


----------



## Artfuldodger

Romans 8:14-15
For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God.
So you have not received a spirit that makes you fearful slaves. Instead, you received God's Spirit when he adopted you as his own children. Now we call him, "Abba, Father."

These children, do they not become heirs of an inheritance? 

Romans 8:17
Now if we are children, then we are heirs--heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.

Regardless of what Paul is telling the Ephesians, he's now telling the Romans.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> I can kinda see what you are talking about. So beyond the fact that only the Jews were predestined to become the elect, what is verse 14 telling us? Isn't it telling us that although salvation was presented to the Jews first, that we as Gentiles were adopted into the inherited promises with those elected Jews? OK so they inherited the promises by predestination and we inherited them by freewill believing. Still though, we inherited the promises along with the Jews. We became joint-heirs of the promises.
> 
> I'll see if I can find other verses that show we become children of God and if children then heirs of the promises.



In verse 14 I think Paul is turning the discussion back on Him and the other elect... When he says our. So he is not including the recipients of the letter in that sentence.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Hebrews 9:15-17
15Therefore Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, now that He has died to redeem them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16In the case of a will, it is necessary to establish the death of the one who made it, 17because a will does not take effect until the one who made it has died; it cannot be executed while he is still alive.

Is this telling us that only those elected Jews will receive the promised eternal inheritance?

What about the "creation"(Israel) that was waiting eagerly for the revelation of the sons of God?

Romans 8:20-21
For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but because of the One who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

"There is some of that predestination caused by God to make sure his plan came about."

Romans 8:23
Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies.

So now Paul is "we" who is one of the firstfruits, yet is waiting for adoption to sonship.

What is Paul waiting for to become adopted?  Maybe it's part of our inheritance the we'll share with what Jesus inherited.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> In verse 14 I think Paul is turning the discussion back on Him and the other elect... When he says our. So he is not including the recipients of the letter in that sentence.



Like in the gospels when the narrative goes back and forth from the soon to be second coming to the way future second coming.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> Romans 8:14-15
> For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God.
> So you have not received a spirit that makes you fearful slaves. Instead, you received God's Spirit when he adopted you as his own children. Now we call him, "Abba, Father."
> 
> These children, do they not become heirs of an inheritance?
> 
> Romans 8:17
> Now if we are children, then we are heirs--heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.
> 
> Regardless of what Paul is telling the Ephesians, he's now telling the Romans.



Art,  I'm going to look over this more,  as I know the entire audience of Roman's is not Jew's... But it appears Chapter 8 is referring to Jew's,  because the people Paul is writing to in this chapter were at one time subject to the law. 

 8 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life [a]in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death


----------



## Artfuldodger

2 Thessalonians 2:13-14
But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers and sisters loved by the Lord, because God chose you as firstfruits to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth.14To this He called you through our gospel, so that you may share in the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 

Here is a case where God is choosing some Gentiles as firstfruits through the Gospel.

What is their inheritance?


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Art,  I'm going to look over this more,  as I know the entire audience of Roman's is not Jew's... But it appears Chapter 8 is referring to Jew's,  because the people Paul is writing to in this chapter were at one time subject to the law.
> 
> 8 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life [a]in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death



"For all (Jews) who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God?"


----------



## hobbs27

I haven't found yet a greater scripture that shows Paul belongs to a different group than this in 2 Corinthians.... Paul was not part of the bride but was a guest to the wedding. 
2Corinthians 11:2
For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband, so that to Christ I might present you as a pure virgin.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Matthew 25:34
34Then the King will say to those (ews?)on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.

Acts 20:32 
And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you (Jews?)the inheritance among all those who are sanctified. 

Colossians 1:12
Giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified you (Jews?) to share in the inheritance of the saints in light.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> "For all (Jews) who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God?"



No... you're right.  I'm about 90% on this and still studying.  At this stage little nuggets come to me and I get overly excited,  but here's what I see back in Ephesians.  Paul is part of the predestined group.  The other group are believers by hearing the gospel preached by the elect. 
 Together they were going to receive the inheritance. 

Here's why we aren't heirs but they were. Three crucial events are associated with the ending of the Old covenant system: the adoption,  the redemption,  and the inheritance.  While the old system stood,  the saints were considered as minors or heirs of God ( Rom. 8:16-17 : Gal.  4:1-4) Their inheritance was contingent upon their suffering or overcoming until Christ was revealed in glory.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> I haven't found yet a greater scripture that shows Paul belongs to a different group than this in 2 Corinthians.... Paul was not part of the bride but was a guest to the wedding.
> 2Corinthians 11:2
> For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband, so that to Christ I might present you as a pure virgin.



I guess this verse is telling us Paul is God. So Paul is not part of the bride but a guest.
In relation to the wedding scenario vs the sonship scenario, perhaps if Paul isn't divine, he is still a child of God and if a child of God then an heir. And if an heir then a co-heir with Jesus to an inheritance.

A bride is a bride and a son is a son.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> I guess this verse is telling us Paul is God. So Paul is not part of the bride but a guest.
> In relation to the wedding scenario vs the sonship scenario, perhaps if Paul isn't divine, he is still a child of God and if a child of God then an heir. And if an heir then a co-heir with Jesus to an inheritance.
> 
> A bride is a bride and a son is a son.



Not at all,  it shows Paul held a different position , that's all.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Ephesians 2:12
In those days you were living apart from Christ. You were excluded from citizenship among the people of Israel, and you did not know the covenant promises God had made to them. You lived in this world without God and without hope.

Perhaps there was a time when the Gentile was not an heir to the promises. I think it's pretty safe to say that Paul has been given privy to enlighten us, the Gentile, that through the blood of Christ, we can become children of God and heirs to those promises. 
Not only heirs but joint-heirs with Christ. One's beliefs on election doesn't change this fact. 

Now one could say that this was God's plan all along or that since the Jews rejected his Son, he then allowed the adoption of the Gentiles.

I think this passage tells us how it all went down but then this is just the way I see it;

Romans 8:20-21
For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but because of the One who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

Romans 11 backs this up. So it is the will of the One, the plan of the One, and the way of the One.

Regardless to all of that, if we are children of God, then we are heirs.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Not at all,  it shows Paul held a different position , that's all.



A different position or that he was in a different group? You said he was not part of the bride but a guest. 

Could I not present my Navy division in the same way to the Captain? "Captain, this is my division."

or "Christ, this is my daughter, she is a virgin."

It doesn't take me out of the group as you suggest. He does hold a different position as teacher of the mystery to this group. Maybe like a coach presenting his team. He could say; "I'm jealous of this team guys,  they are virgins." Yet he is still a part of that group. He isn't a guest.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> No... you're right.  I'm about 90% on this and still studying.  At this stage little nuggets come to me and I get overly excited,  but here's what I see back in Ephesians.  Paul is part of the predestined group.  The other group are believers by hearing the gospel preached by the elect.
> Together they were going to receive the inheritance.
> 
> Here's why we aren't heirs but they were. Three crucial events are associated with the ending of the Old covenant system: the adoption,  the redemption,  and the inheritance.  While the old system stood,  the saints were considered as minors or heirs of God ( Rom. 8:16-17 : Gal.  4:1-4) Their inheritance was contingent upon their suffering or overcoming until Christ was revealed in glory.



The way I see it is we are heirs through adoption. They(Israel) were heirs to the promises as children. They rejected the way to become heirs(children) by rejecting Jesus. Their rejection, as mentioned in Romans 11, allowed us to be grafted in as children. Thus as adopted children, we became heirs of their promises.

That's the simple version. We could greatly complicate it if we wanted to try and figure out who was elected and predestined before or after the cross or 70AD. 
We could further complicate it if we tried to figure out who Israel was or has always been or who it became.

Regardless of all of that and if God chose us by election or through hearing the message, if we are children, then we are heirs.
There are just too many various verses on inheritance, adoption, grafting in, and becoming children of God for me to narrow it down to  anyone other than children of God.

Could the Jews possibly inherit something or have already inherited something we didn't? Sure, I think Romans 11 says so, but it only adds to who the children of God are, it doesn't take it away. So if Romans 11 says "all Israel will be saved" then it's up to God's mercy and election. It doesn't change who his children are, it just adds to it. Who knows the mind of the Lord? Maybe they inherited some physical Kingdom I'm not privy to. I'm more interest in the eternal inheritance.

God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy. He still decides who his children are. That's a completely different argument on who the children of God are than that they will become co-heirs as children  with Jesus.


----------



## hobbs27

Maybe,  God had to elect a group to preach the Gospel in the beginning to get the new covenant up and going.  Remember how Paul was brought in?  He was pretty much forced,  but those men of Galilee heard Peter preach Jesus and were pricked in the heart at what they heard.  Then they repented and were baptized.


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> Here's why we aren't heirs but they were. Three crucial events are associated with the ending of the Old covenant system: the adoption,  the redemption,  and the inheritance.  While the old system stood,  the saints were considered as minors or heirs of God ( Rom. 8:16-17 : Gal.  4:1-4) Their inheritance was contingent upon their suffering or overcoming until Christ was revealed in glory.



The adoption, redemption, and the inheritance is all by grace. Not contingent upon anything we or they have done.

Another point that's important is that Jesus is the ONLY begotten son that the Father has. All other sons(children) are adopted.

...and if children, then heirs.

Those that receive His Spirit and cry Abba Father are sealed by that same Spirit, and have received the earnest(arrhabon)of their inheritance, which is the pledge until the future full payment is made.


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> The adoption, redemption, and the inheritance is all by grace. Not contingent upon anything we or they have done.
> 
> Another point that's important is that Jesus is the ONLY begotten son that the Father has. All other sons(children) are adopted.
> 
> ...and if children, then heirs.
> 
> Those that receive His Spirit and cry Abba Father are sealed by that same Spirit, and have received the earnest(arrhabon)of their inheritance, which is the pledge until the future full payment is made.



Abraham had two sons. The first born was cast out.. Disinherited sonship.  Then the one in his youth,  a child,  received the right to inheritance by adoption.  See a connection here with Israel?


----------



## hobbs27

Looking at the fact that Abraham had two sons but only the firstborn had an inheritance supports what I have been saying.  We can be sons of God but not heirs.  The inheritance went to our older brothers in the first century.


----------



## Artfuldodger

What was it that Jesus inherited from his Father? Everlasting life? Is this the inheritance that we share with Jesus as adopted sons?


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> Abraham had two sons. The first born was cast out.. Disinherited sonship.  Then the one in his youth,  a child,  received the right to inheritance by adoption.  See a connection here with Israel?



Isaac was not adopted by Abraham. He was his promised son and heir.
 Ishmael was by the bondwoman, and was never promised inheritance.


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> Isaac was not adopted by Abraham. He was his promised son and heir.
> Ishmael was by the bondwoman, and was never promised inheritance.




Romans 8:23New King James Version (NKJV)

23 Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body


Galatians 4:21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, 24 which things are symbolic. For these are the[d] two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar— 25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children— 26 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all


They were already sons also but were waiting for the adoption.  The adoption of what?  They were awaiting adoption of the position of full inheritance.  As long as Ishmael (old covenant Israel)  and Isaac (New covenant Israel)  were living side by side the old held the promise of inheritance.  It took the casting out of Ishmael (destruction of temple)  before Isaac would assume the full promise of inheritance. 

The Kingdom was taken from Ishmael and given to Isaac.  Isaac was the nation producing fruit.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Romans 8:23New King James Version (NKJV)

23 Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body

When did Paul get adopted?


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> Romans 8:23New King James Version (NKJV)
> 
> 23 Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body
> 
> When did Paul get adopted?



Whenever he became a Christian he would have been adopted as a child.  But being a small child in the infancy of Christianity didn't have him adopted as an heir until the older brother Ishmael (old covenant)  was cast out.  Then he would have been adopted into the position of heir to receive the inheritance... IE kingdom. 

Kingdom taken from big brother Ishmael ( fleshly Israel)  and was given to a nation producing fruit ( Isaac)  New covenant (spiritual Israel) 

 I know folks that have always assumed the old covenant ended at the cross will have a hard time understanding this,  but there it is in Galatians 4 clear as day.


----------



## Artfuldodger

I can see where one could become an adopted child and wouldn't receive his inheritance until later.

This kingdom that Paul would eventually inherit, was it what he would be a co-heir of Jesus with? 

What was the redemption of Paul's body that coincided when he received his inheritance?


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> They were already sons also but were waiting for the adoption.  The adoption of what?  They were awaiting adoption of the position of full inheritance.  As long as Ishmael (old covenant Israel)  and Isaac (New covenant Israel)  were living side by side the old held the promise of inheritance.  It took the casting out of Ishmael (destruction of temple)  before Isaac would assume the full promise of inheritance.
> 
> The Kingdom was taken from Ishmael and given to Isaac.  Isaac was the nation producing fruit.



I believe you have this wrong. There was never a promise of inheritance given to Abraham and Hagaar. It was given to Abraham and Sarah.
Abraham took it upon himself to try to speed things up and in unbelief he took Hagaar to attempt to produce the promised heir. God was not pleased with that because it was disobedience against His command.

This text speaks of it:

Rom.9
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.
10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> I believe you have this wrong. There was never a promise of inheritance given to Abraham and Hagaar. It was given to Abraham and Sarah.
> Abraham took it upon himself to try to speed things up and in unbelief he took Hagaar to attempt to produce the promised heir. God was not pleased with that because it was disobedience against His command.
> 
> This text speaks of it:
> 
> Rom.9
> 7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
> 8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
> 9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.
> 10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;



None of that disagrees with my point. Naturally or fleshly Ishmael was the rightful heir.  But he lost that when he lost sonship. 

Who was Jesus speaking to here and who was the people that would bear fruit? 

Matt. 21:43Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people, producing the fruit of it.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> I can see where one could become an adopted child and wouldn't receive his inheritance until later.
> 
> This kingdom that Paul would eventually inherit, was it what he would be a co-heir of Jesus with?
> 
> What was the redemption of Paul's body that coincided when he received his inheritance?



Art,  I think we're mincing over words here.  The Kingdom Paul and the first century Christians received as an inheritance is the very kingdom we live in as Christians.  It's a spiritual kingdom... IE the new heaven and earth or covenant.  It has already been given in inheritance and already established,  but if you insist on saying you inherited it too that's OK with me for sake of argument. 

The redemption of the body was the judgment on those that were persecuting the Christians.  The infant Christian body was in tribulation and persecution by the old covenant body. 

When Jerusalem fell and faced a 3 1/2 year siege,  it was vindication of the saints.  It was the days of vengeance as Luke 21 calls it.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Art,  I think we're mincing over words here.  The Kingdom Paul and the first century Christians received as an inheritance is the very kingdom we live in as Christians.  It's a spiritual kingdom... IE the new heaven and earth or covenant.  It has already been given in inheritance and already established,  but if you insist on saying you inherited it too that's OK with me for sake of argument.
> 
> The redemption of the body was the judgment on those that were persecuting the Christians.  The infant Christian body was in tribulation and persecution by the old covenant body.
> 
> When Jerusalem fell and faced a 3 1/2 year siege,  it was vindication of the saints.  It was the days of vengeance as Luke 21 calls it.



This spiritual kingdom Paul and the others inherited, is this  what they became co-heirs of Christ with? I can see what you are saying they inherited but I'm still trying to figure out what Jesus inherited that they also inherited as joint-heirs.


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> This spiritual kingdom Paul and the others inherited, is this  what they became co-heirs of Christ with? I can see what you are saying they inherited but I'm still trying to figure out what Jesus inherited that they also inherited as joint-heirs.




 The Kingdom.  Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.  He's the king that rules over all Kings,  and the Lord who rules over all lords.  This world has seen lots of Kings come and go.  This king isn't going to go.  His rule and the increase of Hiis kingdom will never end. 
( Isa. 9:6, 7. 1Tim. 6:14-16) 

 Paul and the gang rule with him.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> The Kingdom.  Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.  He's the king that rules over all Kings,  and the Lord who rules over all lords.  This world has seen lots of Kings come and go.  This king isn't going to go.  His rule and the increase of Hiis kingdom will never end.
> ( Isa. 9:6, 7. 1Tim. 6:14-16)
> 
> Paul and the gang rule with him.



How does this relate even if it's already happened?

1 Corinthians 15:23-25
23But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then at His coming, those who belong to Him. 24Then the end will come, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father after He has destroyed all dominion, authority, and power. 25For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.

I see this verse also written with the progression of  Christ, the firstfruits, and then at His coming, those who belong to Him.
Maybe they just forgot the comma after Christ. It tells of the time each of us was or will be made alive.


"I've always thought that at some point Jesus turned over his kingdom to his Father."


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> How does this relate even if it's already happened?
> 
> 1 Corinthians 15:23-25
> 23But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then at His coming, those who belong to Him. 24Then the end will come, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father after He has destroyed all dominion, authority, and power. 25For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.
> 
> "I've always thought that at some point Jesus turned over his kingdom to his Father."





From Pentecost to 70ad was a 40 year period of wandering.  Pentecost or the cross would have been the beginning of Christ's reign but it was not fully given to Him until death was destroyed.. Resurrection. 
 So at the resurrection which we know from Daniel 12:7 and Luke 21 was at the temple destruction in 70 ad.
 Then the Kingdom was delivered up to the Father where Jesus and the saints would reign in the spiritual realm forever.. Under the Father.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Then the Kingdom was delivered up to the Father where Jesus and the saints would reign in the spiritual realm forever.. Under the Father.



"Under the Father"  meaning  inheritance and/or subordinate and/or separation? Perhaps at the spiritual but not literal "right hand?"

Hebrews 1:3-5
3The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His nature, upholding all things by His powerful word. After He had provided purification for sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. 4So He became as far superior to the angels as the name He has inherited is excellent beyond theirs. 5For to which of the angels did God ever say: “You are my Son; today I have become Your Father”? Or again: “I will be His Father, and He will be My Son” ?


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Then the Kingdom was delivered up to the Father where Jesus and the saints would reign in the spiritual realm forever.. Under the Father.



When you say saints do you mean all of them or the 144,000 that "inherited" the kingdom?


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> When you say saints do you mean all of them or the 144,000 that "inherited" the kingdom?



all of them.


----------



## hobbs27

Art what do you make of this in 1Corinthians 15:28 ? 
When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

 All in all... What does that mean to you?  I'm thinking about digging in to that.


----------



## Artfuldodger

hobbs27 said:


> Art what do you make of this in 1Corinthians 15:28 ?
> When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.
> 
> All in all... What does that mean to you?  I'm thinking about digging in to that.



Interesting path of discussion. I remember another discussion where talked about Jesus being re-absorbed by the Godhead once he ascended spiritually back to Heaven. That Jesus being seated at the right hand of God was not literal. 
This was not just your views but that of others as to how we'll see God in Heaven through Jesus, etc. Unity, Oneness, or all in All.

Knowing your views on this it kinda made me question your response of;

"Then the Kingdom was delivered up to the Father where Jesus and the saints would reign in the spiritual realm forever.. Under the Father."

Now if "all in All" includes more than the Trinity as it relates to inheritance, co-heirs, reigning with Jesus in the kingdom, becoming "like" Jesus but not Jesus, children of God like Jesus is a Son, and having the unity Jesus has with his Father, sure. Jesus hoped the disciples would have the unity he had with his Father. Was that possible? I don't think so.

Can we have the unity Jesus has with is Father and still be separate and not inheriting any type of divinity?
Perhaps becoming like Jesus doesn't mean this. Perhaps becoming an adopted child of God doesn't give us the same privileges or inheritance that Jesus has with his Father. When we see Jesus as he is and become like him. 
Maybe unity can only go so far. Maybe "all in All" can only go so far. Maybe "I in them and God in all can only go so far." So I'm thinking perhaps "Unity with separation."


----------



## Artfuldodger

I still wonder if Jesus has or had a greater inheritance as the "Son of God" that we will have as "adopted sons."
Do adopted sons ever equal actual begotten Sons?

Even if it was just Paul and the others, did their inheritance equal that of Jesus if they were co-heirs or joint heirs?

Do we or them actually reign with the equality of the Son? Does adoption offer that power and prestige?

Does having the Holy Spirit give us equal rights with Jesus as heirs?

Does anyone ever acquire what the firstborn inherits? Yet if we are part of Christ or if Christ is in us does this make our inheritance equal to the firstborn's inheritance? Can we be a co-heir but not equal heir?

Do we receive a "full pedigree?"


----------



## Artfuldodger

Galatians 2:20
I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

Colossians 3:3-4
For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God. 4When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory.

2 Peter 1:4
Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

Romans 8:16-17
The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children. 17And if we are children, then we are heirs: heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ—if indeed we suffer with Him, so that we may also be glorified with Him.


----------



## hobbs27

What if we read John 14   in the context of Kingdom and not as an afterlife abode? 
Jesus said " I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself that where I am, there you may be also. "
Where was Jesus that He wanted us to be? 

"10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?"

Jesus was not going to heaven to build mansions.  He was going to the cross to atone our sins that separated us from the Father,  that we may be in the Father.


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> From Pentecost to 70ad was a 40 year period of wandering.  Pentecost or the cross would have been the beginning of Christ's reign but it was not fully given to Him until death was destroyed.. Resurrection.
> So at the resurrection which we know from Daniel 12:7 and Luke 21 was at the temple destruction in 70 ad.
> Then the Kingdom was delivered up to the Father where Jesus and the saints would reign in the spiritual realm forever.. Under the Father.



Death was destroyed at Christ's death, according to Heb.2.
The Father signified it by raising Him on the third day. This is the resurrection you need to consider, not ours.

Hebrews 2:14-15
14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> Death was destroyed at Christ's death, according to Heb.2.
> The Father signified it by raising Him on the third day. This is the resurrection you need to consider, not ours.
> 
> Hebrews 2:14-15
> 14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
> 15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.




Through death He destroyed Satan.  Death was the last enemy,  its demise was well after the Cross. 

1Corinthians 15:26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death.


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> Through death He destroyed Satan.  Death was the last enemy,  its demise was well after the Cross.
> 
> 1Corinthians 15:26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death.



No, it's demise was at the cross. We just don't SEE it yet, because we are still in the temporal. The writer of Hebrews explains:

Hebrews 2:8
8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.


----------



## hobbs27

Welder. 
 Hebrews 2:5  It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking.

 What world to come were they speaking?


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> Welder.
> Hebrews 2:5  It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking.
> 
> What world to come were they speaking?



heaven


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> heaven



Thanks. I see our divide more clearly now. It didn't happen all of the sudden. In Hebrews 2:5 you will notice that word again when it refers to the world coming.. (Mello) So it is better said (about to come) 

Hebrews 8 below shows as the New Covenant was growing the old was vanishing.  As we looked at Galatians 4 earlier.  Ishmael and Issac lived with one another for a spell,  and Issac had the promise,  but it wasn't made real until Ishmael lost sonship... Galatians 4 makes it clear this represents the two covenants.  70ad was the casting out of Ishmael... When the old covenant lost sonship.

Hebrews 8: When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.

The Old was ready to disappear just prior to 70ad.


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> Thanks. I see our divide more clearly now. It didn't happen all of the sudden. In Hebrews 2:5 you will notice that word again when it refers to the world coming.. (Mello) So it is better said (about to come)
> 
> Hebrews 8 below shows as the New Covenant was growing the old was vanishing.  As we looked at Galatians 4 earlier.  Ishmael and Issac lived with one another for a spell,  and Issac had the promise,  but it wasn't made real until Ishmael lost sonship... Galatians 4 makes it clear this represents the two covenants.  70ad was the casting out of Ishmael... When the old covenant lost sonship.
> 
> Hebrews 8: When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.
> 
> The Old was ready to disappear just prior to 70ad.



Serious question:
Are there any scriptures that you read that you 100% believe are about heaven exclusively and not 70AD?

I don't have much time today, but would love to hear it and respond later.


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> Serious question:
> Are there any scriptures that you read that you 100% believe are about heaven exclusively and not 70AD?
> 
> I don't have much time today, but would love to hear it and respond later.



No. The only thing I can find in scripture about our permanent spiritual abode is that we will be with Him.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Do we have any verses written after the cross that shows us the old covenant and new covenants overlapped? Something to show more clearly when the old vanished and new started? 

It is interesting bringing Ishmael and Issac as a mirror of the future.

Something along the lines of Paul or James showing they were still living under the old or in between.

Is this just a Preterist belief or is it accepted by others as well?


----------



## Artfuldodger

welderguy said:


> Serious question:
> Are there any scriptures that you read that you 100% believe are about heaven exclusively and not 70AD?
> 
> I don't have much time today, but would love to hear it and respond later.



One thing to realize is Hobbs hasn't always been a Preterist. He's like an ex-smoker.

I must say that when I read the gospel accounts of the 2nd coming, it sounds imminent and local to the area around Israel. It appears to be the soon to come destruction of Jerusalem. Now if this is a mirror of another event, I'm not sure.

Preterism explains some things better but also makes others harder to explain  just as Futurism does.
It's the same with Oneness vs the Trinity or Predestination vs Freewill.

I guess most folks just eventually accept one thing over the other and move on or just stick with what their parents believe. (indoctrination)


----------



## hobbs27

Artfuldodger said:


> Do we have any verses written after the cross that shows us the old covenant and new covenants overlapped?




Hebrews 9:8-10New King James Version (NKJV)

8 the Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way into the Holiest of All was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was still standing. 9 It was symbolic for the present time in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make him who performed the service perfect in regard to the conscience— 10 concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> No. The only thing I can find in scripture about our permanent spiritual abode is that we will be with Him.



And which text/texts would that be?


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> And which text/texts would that be?



Enjoy this when you get a chance. It answers probably 80% of what you are questioning me about now.


----------



## gordon 2

Artfuldodger said:


> I still wonder if Jesus has or had a greater inheritance as the "Son of God" that we will have as "adopted sons."
> Do adopted sons ever equal actual begotten Sons?
> 
> Even if it was just Paul and the others, did their inheritance equal that of Jesus if they were co-heirs or joint heirs?
> 
> Do we or them actually reign with the equality of the Son? Does adoption offer that power and prestige?
> 
> Does having the Holy Spirit give us equal rights with Jesus as heirs?
> 
> Does anyone ever acquire what the firstborn inherits? Yet if we are part of Christ or if Christ is in us does this make our inheritance equal to the firstborn's inheritance? Can we be a co-heir but not equal heir?
> 
> Do we receive a "full pedigree?"



Art,why do you torture yourself with your over-reaching questions?

Every time Paul mentions inheritance it is in regards to the resurrection of the dead--only.

 We will be like Jesus resurrected  from the dead and we will see Him as He is--resurrected-- because we will be resurrected. As adopted sons this is our inheritance.


----------



## Artfuldodger

gordon 2 said:


> Art,why do you torture yourself with your over-reaching questions?
> 
> Every time Paul mentions inheritance it is in regards to the resurrection of the dead--only.
> 
> We will be like Jesus resurrected  from the dead and we will see Him as He is--resurrected-- because we will be resurrected. As adopted sons this is our inheritance.



That would mean the only thing Jesus inherited was a resurrection. That he inherited everlasting life. Is that even possible considering he came from Heaven?

I think Jesus already had an inheritance before he left Heaven but I'm not sure it was the resurrection.


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> No. The only thing I can find in scripture about our permanent spiritual abode is that we will be with Him.



Here are three that come to my mind, among others, that I just don't see how you would dismiss as not pertaining to our eternal habitation.

Philippians 3:20–21“For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.”

Hebrews 11:16"But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city."

1 Peter 1:3–5"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."


BTW, I tried to listen to your video but could only bear about a third of it. sorry.


----------



## Artfuldodger

"To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."

Is this the inheritance we are co-heirs with Jesus? We don't inherit it yet? It's reserved in Heaven, revealed in the "last time."

Salvation is a promise reserved in Heaven? Only revealed to us in the "last time?"

When will our inheritance be revealed or realized?


----------



## Artfuldodger

"To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away,"

I would think that Christ's inheritance never was "incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away," 
I'm trying to see how we came about through adoption were able to grasp this inheritance. If through election we were adopted before time, then would not our inheritance have always been eternal?
I guess it still had to happen in time to make it possible for us but what about Jesus? Did he have to die to gain eternal life? Perhaps just his man soul/spirit or body. 

The 100% man part of Jesus had to die in order to inherit everlasting life. This is what we become co-heirs of. Eternal life for a man.

Even though Christ already had eternal life and we as the elect already had eternal life. It had to happen in time or the physical for Christ's inheritance and our inheritance to actually happen.

Jesus had to be born a man, and we had to be born again as a spirit. He had to become what we were and we had to become what he was.


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> Here are three that come to my mind, among others, that I just don't see how you would dismiss as not pertaining to our eternal habitation.
> 
> Philippians 3:20–21“For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.”
> 
> Hebrews 11:16"But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city."
> 
> 1 Peter 1:3–5"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."
> 
> 
> BTW, I tried to listen to your video but could only bear about a third of it. sorry.




Hebrews 11:16 is an obvious kingdom text so no need to discuss it. God had made a better country for those He was not ashamed to call His own. 

1Peter...also kingdom unless you are saying heaven is reserved in heaven.  We know from Hebrews that they were receiving the kingdom and we know from Luke 21 the kingdom was near from 66-70 ad .

31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near.
 So at the time of writing Peter the kingdom which is not of this world and is of another realm was still reserved in heaven. 

Phillipians 3... Nothing about the nature of heaven there.

Have a great Easter!


----------



## welderguy

hobbs27 said:


> Hebrews 11:16 is an obvious kingdom text so no need to discuss it. God had made a better country for those He was not ashamed to call His own.
> 
> 1Peter...also kingdom unless you are saying heaven is reserved in heaven.  We know from Hebrews that they were receiving the kingdom and we know from Luke 21 the kingdom was near from 66-70 ad .
> 
> 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near.
> So at the time of writing Peter the kingdom which is not of this world and is of another realm was still reserved in heaven.
> 
> Phillipians 3... Nothing about the nature of heaven there.
> 
> Have a great Easter!



Now you've really got me curious. So, if you don't think any scripture speaks about our eternal dwelling place, where exactly then do you believe we will reside after physical death?

When Stephen saw Jesus standing at the right hand of the Father, what was he really seeing? What was the third heaven that Paul saw that was unlawful for him to talk about? Where is this place where angels shout "Holy,Holy,Holy" without ceasing? Where is a place that has no need of the sun or moon for light, and that nothing enters in which defileth?

Ive got so many questions now.


----------



## Artfuldodger

Could it be a spiritual place? Perhaps it's everywhere and not tangible. The trees, the sky, the universe.
Maybe a giant mass of spirituality tethered in the universe or even beyond the universe. The place God has always been before he made the universe. Since God is a spirit, he never needed a physical dwelling. Maybe after he had a Son, he needed one.

Now when I tried on other threads to make it a physical place, I asked will we see Jesus at the right hand of God? Some tried to convince me we would only see Jesus as God. That Jesus is no longer separate from God. That the right hand of God is figurative because God is a spirit. 

I don't think we can grasp the full meaning of unity and Oneness.


----------



## welderguy

Artfuldodger said:


> Could it be a spiritual place? Perhaps it's everywhere and not tangible. The trees, the sky, the universe.
> Maybe a giant mass of spirituality tethered in the universe or even beyond the universe. The place God has always been before he made the universe. Since God is a spirit, he never needed a physical dwelling. Maybe after he had a Son, he needed one.
> 
> Now when I tried on other threads to make it a physical place, I asked will we see Jesus at the right hand of God? Some tried to convince me we would only see Jesus as God. That Jesus is no longer separate from God. That the right hand of God is figurative because God is a spirit.
> 
> I don't think we can grasp the full meaning of unity and Oneness.



It's definitely not in this earthly place because it's cursed. Jesus left this place and went to the Father. He prayed that we would be where They were in His High Priestly prayer.


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> It's definitely not in this earthly place because it's cursed. Jesus left this place and went to the Father. He prayed that we would be where They were in His High Priestly prayer.



John 17:15“I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one.

I guess we are reading a different Bible again.


----------



## hobbs27

welderguy said:


> Now you've really got me curious. So, if you don't think any scripture speaks about our eternal dwelling place, where exactly then do you believe we will reside after physical death?
> 
> When Stephen saw Jesus standing at the right hand of the Father, what was he really seeing? What was the third heaven that Paul saw that was unlawful for him to talk about? Where is this place where angels shout "Holy,Holy,Holy" without ceasing? Where is a place that has no need of the sun or moon for light, and that nothing enters in which defileth?
> 
> Ive got so many questions now.



Welder.  There is a heaven,  a place we will live with the father forever and ever.  I know there's a place.  I don't know what it's like because the book doesn't tell us.


----------



## Artfuldodger

welderguy said:


> It's definitely not in this earthly place because it's cursed. Jesus left this place and went to the Father. He prayed that we would be where They were in His High Priestly prayer.



"To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."

This inheritance of life with God and Jesus, that is reserved for us in Heaven, when will or was it revealed to us? "revealed in the last time"

Many scriptures make me think we must wait for this revealing until the "last time" or "end time" or the "last days." Perhaps that has already happened and our inheritance through our resurrection will happen when we die a physical death.

If not then we will have to wait for our inheritance to be revealed.


----------



## welderguy

Artfuldodger said:


> "To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."
> 
> This inheritance of life with God and Jesus, that is reserved for us in Heaven, when will or was it revealed to us? "revealed in the last time"
> 
> Many scriptures make me think we must wait for this revealing until the "last time" or "end time" or the "last days." Perhaps that has already happened and our inheritance through our resurrection will happen when we die a physical death.
> 
> If not then we will have to wait for our inheritance to be revealed.



Yes , we only have the earnest of that inheritance now(the Spirit), but when the whole family of God is finally gathered, Jesus will present us to His Father. It is then that we will receive the full inheritance.

Matthew 25:34
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:


----------

