What becomes of 4-D spacetime after...

Originally posted by Paul Dirac II

Christianity has become degraded and the vision of the church and the New Jerusalem has been lost. But in these last days the Holy Spirit is recovering the vision which has been robbed from degraded Christianity.

If we are not enlightened to the goal of God's ultimate building of Himself into man we will think many other things are the most important things in the Christian life, ie. personal blessing, personal victory, personal ministry, good-doing to make the world a better place, many things which are good but not the end goal of God.

Creation and salvation are not ends in themselves. Creation and salvation are for the New Jerusalem. God's living eternal habitation. Whatever blessings God has bestowed upon us are for this purpose.

Many Christians have made other things the final goal of God, like salvation, spirituality, holiness, and victory. These are like individual personal houses. We need to be recovered from the individual houses along the way to the purpose of all these things - the New Jerusalem.

Spirituality, is an individualistic personal house. If a Christian does not care for the building of God even this fine individualistic personal house will become somewhat detached and vain. If we have a vision of what all blessing, spirituality, and salvation are for we would feel sorrowful for the situation today among Christians.

These days the Lord is recovering the center lane of His move. We see Christ and the church and their consummation New Jerusalem. All the little houses must go for the building of this ultimate goal of God.

Originally posted by Rajk999
That's what I like about the Bible. It gives redundant info that makes twisting difficult. The L, B, H are equal, so normally most would say its a cube. But then it also says 'the city lieth four square'.

Well then, that settles that question and there is no doubt that is the definition of a cube shape except it says four square instead of six squares. Upon looking at the Greek, it actually says TETRAGON, not four square. So that just refers to the square base, which would not eliminate a pyramid like shape, maybe even with a dome top.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Well then, that settles that question and there is no doubt that is the definition of a cube shape except it says four square instead of six squares. Upon looking at the Greek, it actually says TETRAGON, not four square. So that just refers to the square base, which would not eliminate a pyramid like shape, maybe even with a dome top.

It took you 5 edits to eliminate everything except a cube and a dome. Keep going.

By the way the Bible said 'four square'. That is not the same as 'four squares', so dont compare it with 'six squares'

Originally posted by Rajk999
It took you 5 edits to eliminate everything except a cube and a dome. Keep going.

By the way the Bible said 'four square'. That is not the same as 'four squares', so dont compare it with 'six squares'

Those edits meant I did not stop thinking like you did by jumping to conclusions. The New Jerusalem could be in the shape of a cube, but it is possible that another shape could fit as well. Perhaps you can come up with more information to pin it down for us.

Google - images of a tetragon to see what I meant by the dome top.

I would like to draw attention to the New Jerusalem being the Bride and Wife of the Lamb.

"And I saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."

Question: Is there any reason to thing God would "marry" a physical city ?

The book of Ephesians emphatically teaches that the Wife of Christ is the church. And the church is PEOPLE -

"Husbands, love your wives even as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her.

That He might sanctify her, cleaning her by the washing of the water in the word [RHEMA].

That He might present the church to Himself glorious, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thins, but that she would be holy and without blemish." (Ephesians 5:25-27)

The repeated use of the word "she" points to the Lord's church. And the church is a group of PEOPLE.

Question: Is there ANY good reason to believe that God would REVERT back from regarding a group of people as being the Wife of Christ to regarding a physical city as the Wife of Christ? That would be a step backward from the New Testament.

So we should not entertain misconceptions that New Jerusalem "prepared as a bride adorned for her husband" is a physical mountain or a physical cube or physical city of buildings no matter how materially splendid.

What the Lord's church is is what the New Jerusalem is in consummation. God would not CHANGE from regarding His people from being a wife for Christ the Redeemer to a physical cube or physical city being His wife.

"And one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls of the seven last plagues came and spoke with me, saying, Come here; I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.

And he carried me away in spirit onto a great and high mountain and showed me the holy city; Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, ..." (Rev. 22:9,10)

This vision is a continuation of the teaching of Ephesians. God's redeemed, regenerated, transformed, conformed, resurrected, glorified and raptured people are the BRIDE of Christ and the WIFE of Christ.

The Bible is giving revelation about a corporate group of PEOPLE as the Bride and the Wife of Christ. We should dismiss the idea that a physical cube no matter how splendid can take the place of being the saved PEOPLE as Christ's spouse.

Originally posted by sonship
I would like to draw attention to the New Jerusalem being the [b]Bride and Wife of the Lamb.

"And I saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."

Question: Is there any reason to thing God would "marry" a physical city ?

The book of Ephesians emph ...[text shortened]... cal cube no matter how splendid can take the place of being the saved PEOPLE as Christ's spouse.[/b]

I disagree with that, as it just makes no sense.

The Revelation account often refers to the New Jerusalem as separate and distinct from the saints or the church.

Originally posted by Rajk999
I disagree with that, as it just makes no sense.

The Revelation account often refers to the New Jerusalem as separate and distinct from the saints or the church.

Would you please give me an example ?

The issue - The New Jerusalem as "separate" from the saints or the church.

1.) What do you think it means for Christ to write the name of His city New Jerusalem upon the overcoming saints? Do you think this means that they will receive fancy tattoos on their bodies ?

It signifies ownership. They are owned by the New Jerusalem -

" ... and I will write upon him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which descends out of heaven from My God." (Rev. 3:12)

You should not be so carnal minded in your understanding. This is speaking of an "organic" writing of God's life and nature INTO the believers. Of course they ARE not separate from the New Jerusalem. They become the New Jerusalem.

Do you imagine that the saints receive tattoos on their arms which spell out "New Jerusalem" ?

2.) The names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, the Redeemer Christ, are written on her twelve foundations (Rev. 21:14). As representatives of the entire new covenant church how then can the new covenant saints be separate from the city ?

3.) The names of the twelve tribes of Israel are on the gates also (Rev. 21:12). So the consummate city contains ALL of the old testament saved and ALL of the new testament saved.

The saved Jews and the Christians make up the totality of the city.

"For He Himself is our peace, He who has made both one and has broken down the middle wall of partition, the enmity, Abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and ordinances, that He might created the two in Himself into one new man." (Ephesians 2:14,15)

The New Jerusalem is the final actualization of the "one new man" . That is the saved Israelites and the saved Gentiles united in one divinized new humanity. So she is called "NEW" - New Jerusalem.

Now I am interested in seeing your passage saying the saints are separate from the city. I think you must be misunderstanding the symbolism.

Originally posted by sonship
Would you please give me an example ?

The issue - The New Jerusalem as [b]"separate" from the saints or the church.

1.) What do you think it means for Christ to write the name of His city New Jerusalem upon the overcoming saints? Do you think this means that they will receive fancy tattoos on their bodies ?

It signifies ownership. The ...[text shortened]... ying the saints are separate from the city. I think you must be misunderstanding the symbolism.[/b]

A man took his dog for a walk on the street.

Do you need a another statement which says :

The man is separate from his dog, which is separate from the street?

Look pal you continue preaching the Council of Whatever Doctrine. It makes no sense to anyone but yourself .. good luck. Continue on ...

I think I know what verses Rajk999 may refer to. I am ready.

To reiterate the main point - the whole Bible constantly refers to God's people as the spouse of God. There is no reason why at the end of the ages He would overlook this and call a physical city His spouse.

Now here are other passages where the SPOUSE of God is in reference to His PEOPLE and not physical things like cubes, buildings, and mountains:

Isaiah 54:6
Jeremiah 3:1
Ezekiel 16:8
Hosea 2:19
Second Corinthians 11:2
Ephesians 5:31-32

These are all passages in which God likens His chosen people to a spouse. Why would He suddenly change at the end of the Bible ?

Originally posted by Rajk999

A man took his dog for a walk on the street.

Do you need a another statement which says :

The man is separate from his dog, which is separate from the street?

Look pal you continue preaching the Council of Whatever Doctrine. It makes no sense to anyone but yourself .. good luck. Continue on ...

I don't think I should dignify your crap with a reply.

===========================================
RJHinds, would you like, for explorations sake, to propose an objection to the New Jerusalem being deified human beings in God's salvation?

We all here are learning.

I don't feel to dignify Rajk999's failure to provide any substantiating passage to his complaint with a reply.

Originally posted by sonship

A man took his dog for a walk on the street.

Do you need a another statement which says :

The man is separate from his dog, which is separate from the street?

Look pal you continue preaching the Council of Whatever Doctrine. It makes no sense to anyone but yourself .. good luck. Continue on ...

I don't think I should dignify you ...[text shortened]... o dignify Rajk999's failure to provide any substantiating passage to his complaint with a reply.

Here is one but I know your brain is full of this Council of God BS that you will twist the Bible.\

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. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 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.
(Revelation 21:1-3 KJV)


The tabernacle of God is with men.

Here the tabernacle = New Jerusalem
Men. = the saints or the church

There are not the same thing.

This reply is not for Rakj999. It is for those who are curious about the nations surrounding the New Jerusalam in the new heaven and new earth.

And there are some unknown things to me about this. But here is a general understanding I think readers should adopt about the holy city being the tabernacle of God among the nations on earth.

The men among whom the tabernacle is there are the nations surrounding the city.

Surprise! Some peoples will have an everlasting life who are not part of the New Jerusalem. They are not born again. They are restored to be as Adam was before he fell.

If the saints are to reign forever and ever it is logical that there be someone/s for them to reign over. It doesn't make sense that they reign over each other.

So Revelation speaks of the New Jerusalem AND the nations which come out of the millennial kingdom and are reigned over by the sons of God who are New Jerusalem.

And that is all I want to converse with Rajk999 anymore.
I am going to stop reading his thoughts completely.

Originally posted by sonship

Yep, consult withe COG Handbook. See if they can twist that.

Footnote 2(3) of the Recovery Version on Revelation 21:2

The New Jerusalem is a bride, indicating that she is not a material city but a corporate person. To Christ she is a bride for His satisfaction; to God she is a tabernacle in which He can rest and through which He can express Himself.

Footnote 3(1) of the same chapter:

As God's habitation, the New Jerusalem will be the tabernacle of God with men for eternity. The tabernacle made by Moses was a type of this tabernacle (Exo. 25:8-9; Lev. 26:11). That type was first fulfilled in Christ as God's tabernacle among men (John 1:14) and will eventually be fulfilled in the fullest way in New Jerusalem, which will be the enlargement of Christ as God's dwelling place. This tabernacle will also be the eternal dwelling place of God's redeemed people. God will overshadow us with Christ ... Hence, the New Jerusalem will be a mutual habitation for both God and us.

Originally posted by sonship
Footnote 2(3) of the Recovery Version on Revelation 21:2

The New Jerusalem is a bride, indicating that she is not a material city but a corporate person. To Christ she is a bride for His satisfaction; to God she is a tabernacle in which He can rest and through which He can express Himself.

Footnote 3(1) of the same chapter:

[quote ...[text shortened]... th Christ ... Hence, the New Jerusalem will be a mutual habitation for both God and us. [/quote]

WHAT ??!! The Footnotes is saying the same thing I am.