Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

[Noeb]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

John 5:15 “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.

Likened to not found. That is what we were discussing.

Being saved is supernatural. Being wheat is supernatural. Being a branch in Jesus (the vine) is supernatural.

Being a tare is not and there are no tares in the kingdom of God, yet we are told the tares are taken out of this kingdom. Clearly referring to a kingdom other than the kingdom of God. The two growing up together on earth is not spiritual. Separating the wheat from tares is not either, which is also not in the kingdom of God parable.

[Deade]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

Impossible. The sea still exists during the MK but NJ will not come here until there is no more sea.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
Rev 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
Rev 21:3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
Rev 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

There's also no more death or pain after NJ arrives. Any deaths or pain in the MK or just after when the nations surround old Jerusalem?

Ewq, did you ever think that the sea was still there but paved over for the NHNE? I think that "there was no more sea" points to no visible sea. I mean, where is God going to put all that water? Besides when you think about it, is God going to use any part of human's past bodies to resurrect or will He make new ones. I think He will have to make new ones for those that the old body burned up or were cremated, then why not all. I think your timing element needs adjustment.

[ewq1938]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

[FONT=Comic Sans MS][SIZE=2][COLOR="#0000CD"] Ewq, did you ever think that the sea was still there but paved over for the NHNE?

No. I prtefer to take what scripture says and not try to think of complicated things like that. IMO if it says no more sea, then there is no sea rather than a covered over sea.

I think that "there was no more sea" points to no visible sea. I mean, where is God going to put all that water?

He is God so it isn't a problem.

Besides when you think about it, is God going to use any part of human's past bodies to resurrect or will He make new ones.

New ones.


2Co 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2Co 5:2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
2Co 5:3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
2Co 5:4 For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.


If scripture interprets scripture then I submit:

2 Corinthians 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

Here our human body is likened to a "house" and our spiritual body of the resurrection as a "building of God" which originates from heaven.

[FONT=Comic Sans MS][SIZE=2][COLOR="#0000CD"] Ewq, did you ever think that the sea was still there but paved over for the NHNE?

No. I prtefer to take what scripture says and not try to think of complicated things like that. IMO if it says no more sea, then there is no sea rather than a covered over sea.

I think that "there was no more sea" points to no visible sea. I mean, where is God going to put all that water?

He is God so it isn't a problem.

Besides when you think about it, is God going to use any part of human's past bodies to resurrect or will He make new ones.

New ones.


2Co 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2Co 5:2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
2Co 5:3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
2Co 5:4 For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.


If scripture interprets scripture then I submit:

2 Corinthians 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

Here our human body is likened to a "house" and our spiritual body of the resurrection as a "building of God" which originates from heaven.

[Noeb]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

Ewq, did you ever think that the sea was still there but paved over for the NHNE? I think that "there was no more sea" points to no visible sea. I mean, where is God going to put all that water?

If it's a new earth, why are you asking where God is going to put the water from the old?

[Noeb]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

The two growing up together on earth is not spiritual.

That should be supernatural.

[Brother Mark]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

Likened to not found. That is what we were discussing.

Then Psalm 1 might be of use. Thing is, the bible is full of examples where God uses the natural to teach about the supernatural. Symbolism is all over the scriptures.

Psalm 1:3 That person is like a tree planted by streams of water,
which yields its fruit in season
and whose leaf does not wither—
whatever they do prospers.

Mark 4 sower and the seed.

And of course, the kingdom parables. The kingdon of heaven is like a mustard seed.... or like a merchant, and so on. The Merchant is Jesus Christ who sold everything for a pearl of great price or for the treasure in the field. He paid for the entire world, for the sake of the treasure (those that would believe i.e. the wheat).

[Noeb]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

Then Psalm 1 might be of use. Thing is, the bible is full of examples where God uses the natural to teach about the supernatural. Symbolism is all over the scriptures.

Psalm 1:3 That person is like a tree planted by streams of water,
which yields its fruit in season
and whose leaf does not wither—
whatever they do prospers.

Mark 4 sower and the seed.

And of course, the kingdom parables. The kingdon of heaven is like a mustard seed.... or like a merchant, and so on. The Merchant is Jesus Christ who sold everything for a pearl of great price or for the treasure in the field. He paid for the entire world, for the sake of the treasure (those that would believe i.e. the wheat).

Lets try this another way....why does God using the natural to teach supernatural, mean that every time he uses natural he is teaching supernatural? Where is this stated in scripture? That this is done demonstrates what I said earlier, the natural and supernatural are not always contrasted but often compared. They are comparable. I often say, and have heard it said by others that 'one is the reflection of the other' - 'the natural is a reflection of the spirit'. So surely, if the natural can be used to teach the supernatural, the natural can be used to describe the natural. Kind of a no-brainer, eh?

We have a lot of koh parables, which are about where God decided to have his kingdom in heaven (earth), so naturally they would be describing the natural. Many things have been listed throughout this thread explaining these, showing how they are not and cannot be describing the koG, and no one has challenged them. All I have gotten is, "they're the same". To repeatedly just blab this mantra after being shown difference, after difference, and give no explanation for the mantra is disrespectful to the text and the discussion.

-The koh is for the poor in spirit-relief from oppression and persecution. The koG is for the poor-supernatural provision.
-No one pressed into or entered the koh, it never came under Messiah's rule. They did the koG, and it did come in a greater degree than the OT, but not fully.
-The koh (under Messiah's rule) describes when the Son of man returns, and sets up his earthly reign. The koG does not come with observation/it is within you, and when it comes in full is not described in the gospels.
-koh is not said to have come upon or near anyone. The koG did, devils cast out, healing, preaching, faith. None of these are said for the koh.
-Entrance to or staying in the koh is by works. Not so for the koG.

These are just off the top of my head, I don't remember what all I have mentioned in this thread, but there's more, and each contrast natural and supernatural.

[Trivalee]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

This is why I asked you if any Living people are Judged during the GWTJ. Nowhere in the passage are the living wicked or living righteous judged the GWTJ is just about the dead.

But it doesn't prove that the holy city will not come down at the start of the MK, does it?

[Trivalee]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

Could it be that the MK is not finished yet awaking the sleeping world?

Since the Gospel has been unleashed, has it not for all purposes, already changed the world? What could another 2,000 years bring? Time will tell I suppose.

I won’t be dogmatic when the MK begins either, but I have read enough at this point that I feel we are in it now. The new covenant is clearly in effect right now as well.

The new covenant started on the cross and ratified at Pentecost. But the MK won't start until the Messiah returns.

[Trivalee]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

No, I don’t believe that Jesus will reign on earth for a 1000 years or anything like that. When Jesus returns it’s the end of the world, the grand roll-up, judgement, sentencing and then glorified bodies and what we call Heaven. Are you talking about dispensations? That is not dispensationalism but they are connected.

When Jesus returns and defeats the AC, he will reign for 1000 years with his saints. During this period, Satan will be locked up in chains (Rev 20:1-3). And the GWTJ comes after the end of the 1000 years is over. After that, Jesus will deliver the Kingdom to the Godhead.

1 Cor 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

[Trivalee]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

Of course He will rule, He rules now. Do you mean the literal throne of David that existed thousands of years ago or the spiritual throne of David that exists today? If you mean in a literal sense, as the dispensationalists do, ( Jesus actually living in the holy land for a thousand years as a ruler) no, I don’t think scripture teaches this.

The Scriptures actually teach that. There's nothing about dispensationalism here.

[Trivalee]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

Why do you think they must be outside the city in/on the new earth? Why can they not be outside in the pool of fire?

My timeline for the wicked outside the holy city is BEFORE the GWTJ.

[Kalahari]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

My timeline for the wicked outside the holy city is BEFORE the GWTJ.

Understood, according to my timeline it is after the GWTJ.

[Jesuslovesus]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

But it doesn't prove that the holy city will not come down at the start of the MK, does it?

I didn't proffer a proof at all. Your personal "proof" was based on assuming that Every human and nation was destroyed prior to/or during the GWTJ. But there is no evidence of Either therefore there is no need to change the timeline to what your personally suggest since there are clear alternative reasons to explain who the people left out of the NJ could be.

[Trivalee]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

Trivalee, the "saints" who ENTER the MK time period will be mortals (having endured unto the end of the trib) capable of bearing children. Their children will not be "born automatically righteous/saved" (and over the course of that 1000 years, I should think many children and grandchildren will be "born" to them). So this in Zechariah 14 is supplying the "rule" for the entire time period. Verse 16 says "every one who is left of all the nations" (meaning, like the Sheep of the nations who will enter that time period [i.e. "the righteous"/"saints"]), but verse 16 is covering all who will ever come to exist within that time period (meaning, all those born to them, throughout). ALL "Son of man cometh/coming/shall come [etc]" passages refer to His Second Coming to the earth FOR the promised and prophesied earthly MK age [not our Rapture, per context], so in even just those passages we can see what will take place at that point in the chronology (Matthew 25:31-34, for example; Matthew 13:30,39,40,49-50 for another example [which passage takes place in the EXACT OPPOSITE SEQUENCE as that of our Rapture, by the way]… many more, like Lk12:36-37,38,40,42-44 "when he will RETURN FROM the wedding" THEN the meal; and Lk19:12,15,17,19 "RETURN" etc...)

1. If this is true, when will these "mortals" receive immortality, surely some of them will live to the end of the MK?
2. The GWTJ is for the resurrected dead, no living will be judged there, so when?