I apologize for the long delays if anyone was expecting me to continue this with further explanation. My computer keeps getting attacked and I have been forced to clean and reprogram my machine every other day. I have just spent the last nearly twenty-four hours getting it back up and running. They got into my hard-drive and I had to wipe it out and reprogram the MBR.

Oh well. At least I have the tools and the expertise with which to do that, but it is forcing me to run without any remote access to my computer. The anti-virus real-time programs seem to be useless against them when someone in the Trust Network is the culprit.

If we compare Luke's version of what Matthew stated there at Matthew 22:30, we get a clearer picture of what I am speaking concerning. I have not reloaded my Bible programs as of yet, so I will be back to continue later.

Love you all.

The real import to Jesus words a Matthew 22:30 are that the command to fill this earth and subdue it was given to the first Adam.

Think about that.

Marriage of humankind was an institution of God for man to use to fulfill the obligation of Genesis 1:28 which God laid upon that first Adam and his helpmeet which God gave to him to assist in this.

But we do know that God is not about over-populating man's home.

Therefore, we must realize that commandment began and ends with Adam's flesh.

From there it is about regeneration, (being born again).

I have realized for a short time now that the glorious city shown at Revelation 21:2, 3 is the parallel for the original garden of Eden formed in this earth.

Just as it was God’s master plan that the original Eden be spread through men working in His glory, so also that glorious city called New Jerusalem which descended to us by the grace of heaven.

I only moments ago watched the Christadelphian Presentation and was pleasantly surprised that it speaks for the most part what God has mercifully shown me through and amidst my sufferings, especially during the last decade. God did not reveal this to me because of anything special about me, beyond the simple fact that I have clung to strong belief in His Word through the toughest of trials caused of my own flesh. And, being keenly aware of the potential to allow my sufferings to cause me to twist what He has said, thereby subtly placing the finding comfort from my own guilt ahead of His truth, I fought myself, in myself, diligently to keep that from happening. It was no easy task but He did not fail to reward my effort and furnish just the right kind and amount of relief to my spirit as I needed it. All I needed to do, and yet need to keep doing, was and is to gladly set aside my own flesh’s preferred ways of finding relief so that I act upon what He directs of me to do.

There is one thing in particular (though not the only thing) which I yet want to find a group that has also understood. This one thing will convince me that group is truly dedicated to God and hearing Him, letting Him do the teaching instead of their fleshly zeal.

This may or may not come as a bombshell to the average Christadelphian. I know it certainly came as a bombshell to Jehovah’s Witnesses, who though puzzled that I could believe it also shoved me aside so that I am unable to discuss the matter with them.

Before I tell you what that one thing in particular is, first I would like to comment upon scriptures like as 2 Corinthians 5:1-4.

The Hebrew word there translated in the KJV as “tabernacle”, is only ever assumed to figuratively mean our human body of flesh as a tent for God’s spirit to work in us. But that is actually false doctrine. I want that point to be sunk home so that any who wish to debate concerning that comment may do so. This is not something I am any longer guessing at.

When we adhere faithfully to the use of the plural pronouns in the New Testament, then we appreciate that they plainly reveal, not the individual human as the dwelling places of God’s spirit, rather, the collective body of Christ which forms the temple of God to be that dwelling place of God’s spirit. And it is that body of Christ which is now holy by Christ’s washing of it in the water of the word upon which the holy spirit of God promotes life-giving understanding. Only that holy body of Christ is able to qualify as the dwelling place for God’s spirit. So then, what about our individual bodies?

Our individual bodies are as sacrifices offered up in that holy temple: Romans 12:1  “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.” And as such they are not the tent Paul speaks concerning at 2 Corinthians 5:1-4. However, the body of Christ which is for the moment burdened of our corrupted flesh is. And all Paul is telling us at 2 Corinthians 5:1-4 is that when all things are lifted up and out of this present state of corruption, only then it will be the true tent which God has ordained for mankind.

And Paul is most certainly correct that we do long to put off the burden of that corruption and already have that new regenerated tent which is of heavenly holiness.

Friends, the original paradise was one of heavens many abodes before Adam brought corruption to himself through sin. That is why Adam and Eve had to be put out of that garden. And the New Jerusalem of Revelation 21:2, 3 is that garden of God returned to regenerated men for them to then spread that kingdom earth-wide.

That is why: Revelation 22:15  “Outside are the dogs, the sorcerers, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.” (WEB)

Revelation 22:15  “The unclean are shut out, and so are all who practice magic, all fornicators, all murderers, and those who worship idols, and every one who loves falsehood and tells lies.” (WEY)

Has anyone grasped what this means as regards the idea that any of mankind going to live with spirit bodies like the angels in heaven?

Has anyone understood that even sin had no power to alter God’s original purpose for humankind, no, not even for one single human among them?

Jesus returned to where he was from, so that in no way alters God’s original purpose for humankind.

What do Christadelphians teach regarding this? Do they teach similarly to Jehovah’s Witnesses, of whom I was once confused to believe as regards the 144,000?

I still say the article cited speaks far above the average person's ability to understand, in that most would become quickly frustrated at having to work so hard to grasp what it's writer was getting at.

The average person does not understand either Hebrew or Greek, or the relevant lexicography, so the average person's opinion on the meaning of this word is irrelevant. They need to take the time to listen to the conclusions of people who actually know what they are talking about. I don't see what is so hard to grasp about 'Jews in Jesus' time did not use the word 'abba' to mean 'daddy''. That's not difficult to grasp.

And i do not care how right one is,

Well you should. Facts are important. If we are going to disregard facts, we might as well ignore the entire Bible.

The scriptures are simple to understand when they are pieced together in proper compliment.

That requires knowledge of the relevant linguistic and socio-historical context. Without that, the Scriptures are not simple to understand; they are easy to distort.

We need not parade ourselves to have all this intellect...

No one is doing this.

I agree with most of what you here have said. I also know that though I have taken time to study the Hebrew and the Greek and to consult with the Scholars concerning such things, if I am to help the babes to Christ I must find simpler ways to speak for their sake.

And I see no good reason to ever speak as pious Scholars would consider it proper for a scholar to speak. I would rather you all think me ignorant than to speak above the majority who are yet babes.

I Struggled with how to name this Topic so forgive me if it is not very precise.

What I am trying to ask is what are peoples opinions here about the development of Apostasy in the early Church?

Obviously by the time we get to the Council of Nicaea there were some fairly well developed Apostasies knocking about.

We know from the letters to the 7 Ecclesia's that things had reached a pretty dia state by AD96 or there abouts.

So are there any thoughts, conclusions, regarding the development of the Apostasy in-between?

When it comes to heresies, (which is what constitutes apostatizing away from truth), it is incumbent upon each of us to understand that the one who has apostatized is not so very different from our own selves,, but for the fact that he or she seeks to live in God's truth yet doing so by means of the fleshly carnal mind-set rather than having put on the mind (literally the mental attitudes and ways of reasoning) of Christ.

If we would bear that in mind then we could find compassion even for those so seriously blind, at least to the extent that we would not see ourselves as so far superior to them that we would let ourselves hate them personally, rather than hating that common bond of the corrupted flesh with it's self imprisoned mind-set, as we ought to do.

The entire theme of the scriptures from beginning to end is the battle between that flesh which lifts itself in pride and the humble contrite spirit which would keep that flesh subdued so as to actually be capable of listening to God and His written word, yes, even to what nature itself speaks concerning God.

Jude 1:23  "And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."

2 Peter 2:18  "For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error."

1 John 2:16  "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world."

I found this article which well speaks concerning this root: http://www.globalori...omparing-v1.pdf

I once a gain see something so simple being made complicated by our fallen human desire to show ourselves approved through reasoning.

There is a subtle difference between humble reasoning and reasoning based upon a format that we are qualified to know. When we trust the interpretation our reasoning so that our reasoning becomes the basis to criticize or judge each step we take as to whether it is good or bad, all we do is put tinted glasses upon ourselves which then color and change colors with each step we take.

Humble reasoning learns to gather all of the pieces necessary to understand without judging each piece prematurely.

Paul's mind-set is that Christ is the last Adam: 1 Corinthians 15:45  "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit."

Paul knew that: Acts 17:26  "And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.." Indeed, that is the blood of the one man, Adam.

Paul had faithfully followed the scripture rather than losing sight of what was first said: Genesis 3:14-15  "And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."

Now there is the interesting paradox. At Genesis 3:15 it becomes clear that the serpent's seed is many, even as the serpent is one but his seed many. But it was one singular seed that the serpent fell all mankind through: Romans 5:12  "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.."

Romans 5:15  "But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many."

1 Corinthians 15:21-22  "For since by [one] man came death, by [one] man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

*** *** *** *** *** *** ***

I have given but a small example there above as to how to connect the scriptures so that the scriptures themselves give us the answers we seek.

But now I wish to address the real reason why so many prefer to judge and thus unwittingly color the picture of each piece before they get to the full picture:

Pride in the flesh.

The flesh desires to be special by fleshly inheritance rather than to accept that spiritual inheritance in no way is dependent upon the flesh. That way the flesh can imagine it is OK due to being treasured as something peculiarly special to God and so the flesh can ignore it's decrepit true situation due to it being responsible for carrying on sin and thus keeping sin alive in this world.

But in the one seed the flesh would not be allowed to due that, even as John points out: 1 John 3:6-10  "Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
7  Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
8  He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
9  Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
10  In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother."

The crux of the matter is that if we cannot come to life in that one seed then we have no life. Out side of being born again through the last Adam we remain dead with the first Adam.

I am not that familiar as of yet with the Christadelphian teachings. I plan to do more looking into what they believe.

As I stated in my comments 'About Me', I was a rather serious minded Jehovah's Witness from 1973 - 1996 when I allowed Satan and life's circumstances to land me into an emotional crisis, whereupon they were compelled to ask that i either disassociate myself from them or threatened that they would dis-fellowship me.

It is specifically some of the elders in the congregation I attended with them, who used to tell me that personal relationship does not exist. Of course they are not now able to defend what they told me with further explanation, and I will admit that may have been as much or more the way I perceived what they said, as opposed to what they may have actually meant. The principal elders involved have since past away, yet their decision remains in tact even more so by virtue of their passing, honored by those they left behind. I have also had many people tell me that same thing during the course of my frequenting Bible discussion sites and so it is perhaps the clinging memory of those things that I am really speaking to.

I still say the article cited speaks far above the average person's ability to understand, in that most would become quickly frustrated at having to work so hard to grasp what it's writer was getting at. And i do not care how right one is, it is of little value to anyone but the writer if few others can relate to his or her way of explaining things.

The scriptures are simple to understand when they are pieced together in proper compliment. We need not parade ourselves to have all this intellect which goes dangerously into risky territory that we could deceive ourselves or others with eloquence of speech, words that flatter one' ego which desires to appear intelligent. In effect, when we do that, we place ourselves in the middle attracting unnecessary attention toward our own intelligence when we ought to be speaking in a way that shows how Christ is the wisdom and the righteousness of God in a way that the listener sees through and beyond us to Christ unhindered by any temptation to look at us. The wisdom of Christ is especially shown in that he has made God's righteousness simple for us to understand, if we can but get ourselves out of the way so that we can hear him.

I should add one more example of that cry of 'Abba': Psalms 27:10  "When my father and my mother forsake me, then the LORD will take me up."

A tough life teaches us that one if we let it.

Via Michael Heiser:

Scholars have actually addressed this issue in academic journals several times, most famously James Barr’s essay in the Journal of Theological Studies (“Abba Isn’t ‘Daddy’,” vol 39, 1988). Barr’s essay isn’t available online, but the one below is, and I recommend it to readers:
Sigve Tonstad, “The Revisionary Potential of ‘Abba! Father!’ in the Letters of Paul,” Andrews University Seminary Studies, Vol. 45, No. 1 (2007): 5-18.
Basically, scholars have demonstrated that (a) the Aramaic term abba was not exclusively used by children, but frequently by adults in adult discourse, and (b) reducing the term to childish (though affectionate) prattle guts it of important

Paper cited above is here.

I took the time to read and consider the publication you cited and I have to be honest with you that to my impression it wreaks of too much faith in one's own human intelligence and intellectual reasoning capabilities.

Matter not what any one claims, the truth remains that the expression "abba" is a whole heart felt recognition of the very same thing James also spoke concerning, only in different words:

James 1:5-7, 16-18 "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. ..... Do not err, my beloved brethren, every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures."

Paul himself describes it that way, here:

Hebrews 11:6  "But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him."

And Jesus was first of those in the NT to describe it that way:

Matthew 6:26-33  "Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?
27  Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?
28  And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:
29  And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
30  Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?
31  Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?
32  (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.
33  But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you."

Matthew 10:28-32  "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
29  Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.
30  But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.
31  Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.
32  Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven."


*** *** *** *** *** *** ***

It has been the overly high opinion by men in their own intellectual reasoning which has served as the greatest tool for the development of much false interpretation of scripture.

You do realize that the tendency to refute the claim of others who say that they know this personal relationship with Yahweh as a dear and intimate Father, can be rooted more in a subtly hidden jealousy toward those claiming to know that relationship?

At the very least, it is easy to see it as jealousy.

And I for one tell anyone who denies that personal relationship with the Father is possible, they will never then ever really know a true and complete love and trust in God. It is bound to lead to the surfacing of instabilities in their life which proves that.

Now, of course one could argue that they see many who claim that relationship but instabilities in their life are yet rampant.

That is but the difference between an emotional claim to that relationship and the genuine claim learned of having been disciplined as a son to learn obedience.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Watch out for either extreme. That is true of most things in life.