xjwsforChrist

Only those who take part in the SECOND resurrection will have to worry about that, though, dear Kassad (peace to you, dear one!). Those who have a part on the first one... and those who are changed with them... those who are constituted as "sheep"... AND those considered to be "goats"... are not subjected to or take part in the Judgment.

The first two, having already washed THEIR robes in the blood of the Lamb are granted life when Christ returns and so "have no condemnation." The third are granted life due to having done good to Christ. The fourth are destroyed by fire from heaven BEFORE the Judgment.

That only leaves those who died but did not take part in the first resurrection. Some of THESE are resurrected to life; some... are resurrected to judgement.

I hope this helps!

Again, peace to you!

Your servant and a slave of Christ,

Shellamar

I don't worry about the Day of Judgement. The best we can do is do our best each moment, and let the Day of Judgement take care of itself, because not a single one of us, not one, can give definitive answers as to how things will work.

God sees all and knows all.

Shelby, and justmom, your commitment to truth is not in dispute. However, you overlook the fact that you don't have a monopoly on truth.

You completely fail to see that others, including myself, also have that commitment, and you do yourselves, and Christ, a disservice by the tendency to assume that your own perceptions and understandings are right, and any variation is wrong.

Really and truly, saying that the spirit within you bears witness that something is true adds no weight or credence to anything. It's entirely subjective.

It is a disappointing state of affairs.

See, here is where I see the problem for you Chariklo. I honestly think you perhaps still don't understand. Rather than us philosophising on what Jah or Christ say/mean/intend as so many do, who are then open to finding common ground or compromise: the ANOINTING results in our being filled with spirit which forever after resides within us. We become joined to Christ, and the spirit he shares has an overwhelming effect upon us. It TEACHES us, just as the scripture promises. Consequently when we are asked to accept anything that that spirit rejects or rebels against, because of it not being TRUTH, we are unable to do so. Similarly, when that same spirit bears witness with TRUTH as you mention above, it does indeed add CREDENCE, if we are sharers of the body of Christ.

This is much more that any kind of meditative acceptance, more than just cognitive agreement. For me it can even be described as a physiological rejection or recognition. It's undeniable, absolutely. I am not trying to appear superior or condescending in any way here Char, please don't think that. I am trying to explain what I think you perhaps may not be able to 'see', that may help you to understand our stance with regards to TRUTH.

Loz x

_________________
"This is my son. LISTEN to Him!"

It's not a problem for me, Loz. It's what I expected to hear from you, more or less. Does that sound condescending, something that was said of me on here a few months back? I don't mean it like that. I mean that I am familiar with some of your ways of thinking and expressing your thoughts, just as I am sure you are with mine.

I understand physiological experience of Christ, of God's presence. I've experienced that all my life.

But here's the difference between us. I know many others who also experience it. I do not consider myself part of a favoured few because I know, know, fully and in truth, that Christ came to save the world, that God's mercy is infinite, his love is infinite.

On this forum very often one sees a phrase something like "we who are of the Body" etc. Some of this clash in terminology comes from the difference in our spiritual traditions, so that I am sometimes very uncomfortable with some of the phraseology used, yet I know that it is merely an extension of the tradition from which the majority here come.

Here's the enigma for you to ponder. You know truth. I know truth. Yet your version of truth comes from a standpoint so vastly different from mine that it takes me back to the posts that were on here back in the spring/early summer, when I was perceived as hostile when I was merely trying to explain something. I am not being hostile here.

You say that you are trying to explain what I "may not see" to help me to understand your " stance in regard to truth". But Loz, Shelby, justmom, do you not see that you are implying that others don't have the regard for truth that you do? Do you not understand that your understandings and beliefs are filtered through your own backgrounds, experience and personalities? And that the same is inevitably true for every person, until they realise that fact and try to think objectively?

I feel at times as if I am talking to a brick wall. We seem at one point to believe in the same thing and then suddenly there's a succession of posts like this that put us a million miles apart.

Jesus Christ prayed to the Father that his followers might be one.

This is not philosophising, Loz. My beliefs are every bit as strong as yours, every bit as real, every bit as consciously held in the light of knowledge of God. You don't have a monopoly of truth, or of the Holy Spirit, or of Christ. Truly, in all truth, you do not. You just seem to think you do. Many,many, many people all over the world live every minute in the knowledge and presence of God. Many. And they don't think themselves special.

What a great explanation, Loz; thanks for sharing it.

On this forum very often one sees a phrase something like "we who are of the Body" etc. Some of this clash in terminology comes from the difference in our spiritual traditions, so that I am sometimes very uncomfortable with some of the phraseology used, yet I know that it is merely an extension of the tradition from which the majority here come.

Good morning Char...

I understand you feel our phraseology used may come from our backgrounds. And while it may be terms you are not comfortable with, what I personally do not understand is that even if you are not familiar or comfortable with such terms, if they ARE in the bible and used by CHRIST personally himself...then how can it be said that they are unique and exclusive?

Now, for me, teachings and phraseology that YOU use that are not used by my Lord personally, but are taught and followed as truth by your form of worship that you use is where I think the real confusion can come in. You follow and trust in things that our Lords says NOT to trust in.

If our Lord didn't say it, do it, teach it, then how can we think its truth? If our Lord does use certain terminology and explains it, then how can we think that it is OUR understanding and not HIS?

Just something that again I see that I don't understand.
Professing to be part of Christs body and belonging to him is not a profession of being better.
He said the invitation is for ANYONE. Just because not EVERYONE would CHOOSE to want it doesn't mean those that have accepted it think in anyway they are better than others.

Honestly, is it favored? I would actually say yes! I'm sure anyone with faith would admit that if they had the choice and COULD be in union with CHRIST and his body, verses NOT in union and NOT belonging to him, what would you choose?


Enjoy your day,
Love Justmom

Sublime, dear, dear Loz (mornin' and peace to you, dear, dear sister!). Probably the most truthful and CLEAR explanation I'VE ever read beyond what those of the early Body wrote. THANK you, for that!

Dear, dear Char... peace to you, truly, and... what more can I say? You are receiving NOTHING new from me; it is the same that I have been sharing for close to two decades now... and certainly the same since we've become acquainted. Not that that makes it true, but it should help you see that it is pretty "strongly entrenched" in ME. I perceive, however, that somehow, for some reason... you are expecting something different from me. Different, perhaps based on your sharing of YOUR perceptions. But I have also shared that that would not be the case, either, if what you (or others) shared was not TRUE.

You take issue with my sharing/stating what is true; yet, you do the SAME thing. If I were to say the Pope is NOT a "Vicar of Peter," or even a member of Christ's Body... YOU would take issue with that. But wouldn't that mean that YOUR position is that YOU have/know the truth about such a thing? Or are you willing to admit that YOUR perceptions... perhaps in relation to your view of the Holy See, the RCC, and its entire institution being truth... is subjective? If not, then I don't think you can take the issues you have been with ME, as you have. Because, as dear 'Mom (peace to you, girl!) has stated above... I can at least give support for what I share... from the words of Christ, certain Apostles, Paul, the Prophets, Moses, David, etc. You, however, do not do that, nor can you. Because your position is based on "catechisms" developed and pushed by men, NOT on the words of the WORD of God, Christ. Who YOU claim to belong to and follow. If so, then why is it not HIS words that you base your beliefs on... versus that of an institution and "form of worship" created by man?

And your constant reference to how MANY believe it does not make it TRUTH, dear one. Indeed, it is indication that it might NOT be, even probably ISN'T.

To be HONEST, other than having me agree with you... simply for agreement's sake... I don't otherwise get what you "want". Other than for me/us to say what you want to HEAR... which is agreement with your position, rather than what we are and have been saying, I see not other point. But dear one... having BOTH experienced, by our respective associations with the WTBTS... which institution the members of which would VEHEMENTLY and ADAMANTLY DISAGREE with you... YOU say does not have truth... WE should know that there are those out there who do not have the truth, regardless of what they SAY or believe. Indeed, those who still have their faith in that harlot would say to YOU that YOU are wrong with reference to THEM, yes?

But I have done nothing but share the truth with you, as I have received it FROM the Truth, the HOLY One of Israel and Holy Spirit, JAHESHUA, the Chosen One of JAH (MischaJah)... who is the Son of the MOST HOLY One of Israel, JAH of Armies. HIS Christ. Who I profess to belong to and follow. That TRUTH is what YOU say drew you TO me/us to being with. Now, I get that you want someone to agree with YOU; and you are not alone. Many have wanted that. And many have wanted it from me (although, I cannot fathom WHY - if they HAVE truth, then what does what I say/agree with MATTER?). But should that be the PURPOSE, dear one, merely having others agree with you... versus what you share being the TRUTH... REGARDLESS of whether others agree with you... or NOT? As dear Zoe (peace to you, too, luv!) once posted, something to the effect that "Lies are lies, even if EVERYONE agrees with them, and the truth is the truth, even if NO ONE agrees with it."

So, here we are, once again... and I think it's a shame, really. Because we're only HERE... because you're not getting what you apparently "need" from me: agreement. Again, I will absolutely agree... when it's TRUTH... but CANNOT agree for the sake of agreement/being agreeable... if it's NOT truth. If that's what you need from ME, though, dear, dear one... agreement, even when I cannot because it is not truth... whether that means it's not or even that it's not for ME... then the only person whose position you need to scrutinize is yours... and WHY you need such.

I hope this helps and, as always, peace to you!

YSSFS of Christ,

Shellamar, winking at dear Ataloa (peace, luv!)...

On the contrary Chariklo, our understandings and beliefs are not OURS.

That's the point.

It's also why we can be in union DESPITE our backgrounds, experiences, personalities, cultures, and nationalities.

Loz x

_________________
"This is my son. LISTEN to Him!"

Well, there we go.

Plus ça change plus c'est la même chose.

I think that what is stated here is what has been rejected, Char... and please forgive me if I am repeating. I cannot add to what Shelby, JM, and Loz have shared... I hear all of what they have shared.

But from the above... it seems as though you started off as stating that we all start off as God's children, and then some choose not to be his children.

Then, and to find a middle ground or compromise, even though it is opposite the statement above, you said,

"We are all potentially his children".


As Shelby stated, if we are all potentially His children (truth), then we could not have all started out as His children. A potential son... is not a son. He is not yet adopted as a son.


This is where the error lies though, in this traditional sentiment that many hold:




I don't think there is any 'to that extent' that should be applied. Phrases such as 'to that extent'... or 'in that sense'... simply confuse the issue, imo. Because not everyone is a child of God. Some have a different father. Yes, the call and invitation to come to Christ and become a son of God is open to anyone. But until one comes to Christ, and is adopted as a Son through Him, one is not a son. In fact, adoption emphasizes that one is not born a son, does it not?

As well, belonging to God also does not mean that one starts off as a son. The apostles started out as disciples, servants, calling Christ their master and teacher... until HE called THEM 'brothers'.



Peace to you all,

tammy

This is what I find so frustrating. As soon as everything is on the table, clearly expressed, openly and honestly, you end the discussion with a post like this. Thus, we never move forward...

Loz x

_________________
"This is my son. LISTEN to Him!"

There's just nowhere to go with you all, Loz. You think you feel frustrated? It doesn't occur to you that perhaps I might feel both frustrated and really very sad indeed. There is hardly any common ground between us at all.

I am actually very, very disappointed. For a short moment, against all the evidence and history, I thought that we had enough in common to be able to move forward. But it is clearly not to be.

YES Loz, agreed,

Thank you for this,
Love Justmom

Char,
As long as the common ground IS CHRIST and remains such as to what HE says and teaches and not man, the RCC or the WTBS...

There is never any reason to not be able to move forward.

Love to you
Justmom