The kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven

a reply to: DISRAELI

Another excellent post my brother!!! I favored it LOL

Thx for posting this, confirms what I've read before. Shalom! (he heh...that should bake their noodle *Grin*)

I so deeply appreciate your teachings, please do not stop. It is a work that God sees and appreciates. You are favored and anointed for this. God is with you. Joshua 1:9

a reply to: DISRAELI

I used to think that, but after studying it out and the origin of that teaching, I found it was rooted in Roman Catholicism. and brought out during the reformation and used in Protestant churches after their separation from Rome, but Rome was still in their blood.

So I used just scriptures and compared them and it and found they are different, and when John wrote his Gospel knowing the revelation of scripture by inspiration given him and given to Paul and his teaching, the Kingdom of God (the spiritual Kingdom) was all that was available in 90AD.

The physical Kingdom is postponed for now but soon coming back when Jesus sets it up at the end of the Great Tribulation.

a reply to: whereislogic

the kingdom of men is a physical kingdom and the kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom. How could you miss that?

This is one of the JW's greatest confusion of scripture to prove they have the keys to the Kingdom of heaven. This is why they have Kingdom halls. And they knock Jesus off the throne and make him a created god and not God int he fulness bodily. They change and remove and scripture that speaks of Jesus Deity, this removes him from the throne.

One kingdom is physical created call the kingdom of heaven, the other is spirit and not created called the kingdom of God.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Do I need to post a mountain of Bible verse that say differently?

To say God does not care about sin is disastrous to mans only way of salvation and a false doctrine.

And I agree not related to the thread.

a reply to: DISRAELI

But you leave out all of John's use of the word Kingdom and Kingdom of God, and all of Paul's use of the Kingdom of God.

Neither John or Paul used the kingdom of heaven AT ALL.

You are being disingenuous in not including John and Paul into the Kingdom of God proof texts for your OP and only using verses that you want to support the Kingdoms being the same. Just like everyone from Rome to Westcott and Hort to Liberty University NKJV Committee and the English Standard Version Committee, not to mention Moody, TTB, BJU et al.

Try doing a truly an non objective study as I did, I studied the words out as individual words without preconceived bias as you have. Because your study seems to be the same as all the others since 1780- to date, no new light since they gave up on a preserved word of God and believe no Bible is without error, leaving it to man to preserved Gods words and not God who spoke , wrote and inspired men to speak and write His words.

a reply to: ChesterJohn
Well, the OP was about just using scriptures and comparing them.

a reply to: DISRAELI


But you didn't use all the scriptures you left out John's and Paul's usage of the Kingdom of God. You also left our the Kingdom of God in Matthew 7 but that is because you do not use a King James Bible.

And if you are not using a KJV then you left out all the verses that just said Kingdom in relation to Christ teachings.

If you limit your study to just specific verse you will be creating a disingenuous doctrine but the same rule as ever major Christian cult like RC, JW's, Moonies (they use the Bible too), Unity, Lutheran et al.

You wont see that taught a Bible Believing Church.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
But you leave out all of John's use of the word Kingdom and Kingdom of God, and all of Paul's use of the Kingdom of God.

I was making it my business to look at the direct gospel teaching, but the references in John and Paul just support the suggestion made in the second post, that "kingdom of God" was the original usage of Jesus.
It is very diffficult to look through the parables of the kingdom, identical except for the use of one word, and not conclude that they are talking about the same kingdom under different names.

Try doing a truly an non objective study as I did

Did you mean to insert that "non"? Was it a Freudian slip?

a reply to: DISRAELI

1) John is a Gospel teaching

2) Paul's is a gospel teaching as well seeing he is preaching the Gospel of the Grace of God.

So who are you kidding. You did sloppy study of the Bible and looks as if you read commentaries by others and Greek dictionaries that have No Koine Greek meanings by Classical Greek attached to the supposed, unseen Greek NT.

All Greek NT have been around only since 200 AD and five of them were created in America since 1880.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
But you didn't use all the scriptures you left out John's and Paul's usage of the Kingdom of God. You also left our the Kingdom of God in Matthew 7 but that is because you do not use a King James Bible.

For convenience, I was getting my references from Crudens, which is AV based.
In fact in the second post I remarked on the fact that Matthew sometimes "slipped back" into "kingdom of God", taking the ch12 reference as the example.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Non Objective means to do a study with no object or outcome in mind that would mean no preconceive ideas carried into your study, which by reading your OP and second post you did carry something over from what others said and did not do an impartial study for yourself.

It is obvious you did not do a through Study on the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven by leaving out the rest of the NT Bible's words about that kingdom, and non about the Kingdom in the OT as well.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
looks as if you read commentaries by others and Greek dictionaries that have No Koine Greek meanings by Classical Greek attached to the supposed, unseen Greek NT.

All Greek NT have been around only since 200 AD and five of them were created in America since 1880.

This particular obsession is irrelevant here, because | put together my own list using no tools except Crudens and the English-langauge text.

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
But you didn't use all the scriptures you left out John's and Paul's usage of the Kingdom of God. You also left our the Kingdom of God in Matthew 7 but that is because you do not use a King James Bible.

For convenience, I was getting my references from Crudens, which is AV based.
In fact in the second post I remarked on the fact that Matthew sometimes "slipped back" into "kingdom of God", taking the ch12 reference as the example.

If it was why did you miss Matthew 7's use of Kingdom of God, it was not in your OP or your second post AT ALL.

and Crudens is a denominational concordance and Dictionary So how did it come to not lead you to Matthew 7?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Non Objective means to do a study with no object or outcome in mind that would mean no preconceive ideas carried into your study,

No, that's what "Objective" means. "Objective" is the opposite of "subjective", meaning that you look at a topic impartially, instead of imposing your own subjective emotions on it.
To the rest of the English-speaking world, "non-objective" means "biased", which is why I thought you had made a slip.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
If it was why did you miss Matthew 7's use of Kingdom of God, it was not in your OP or your second post AT ALL.

and Crudens is a denominational concordance and Dictionary So how did it come to not lead you to Matthew 7?

For heaven's sake, the Matthew ch7 references were in the first draft of my second post. I decided for literary reasons that one example was enough. The point that "Matthew very occasionally says Kingdom of God" was already sufficiently made with that one example.

a reply to: DISRAELI

I used only the Bible, using anything else means I am unable to come to an understanding of what God's words mean in the context of Scriptures.

1) in the KJV will define every word by the context.

2) you will find that the KJV has a supernatural cross reference of words that are not denominational based set as you will find in other Bible versions.

3) that the KJV has ALL of God's words in it where ALL other versions remove not only words but phrases, sections and paragraphs and chapters - depending on which version or concordance dictionaries you are using.

a reply to: ChesterJohn
I can only say again; Look carefully through the lists quoted in the OP using any version you like.

a reply to: DISRAELI

just saying the rest of the Gospel use is a poor study tactic to convince others they all mean the same. It just means I am to lazy to list it out because it will prove me wrong by the uses context.

"SEEK ye fist the kingdom of God and his righteousness . . . in Matthew 6 was conveniently left out as well. Definitely a spiritual kingdom not a physical one.

Context context context. He came to bring in the Jews promised Kingdom even up until acts 1 the Apostles were still concerned about the Kingdom. You just can't limit it to certain books when it is taught in every one and in Revelation, where he brings them together.

a reply to: DISRAELI

I have read them all, you limit the usage as, you want to give the result you want that are nothing more than preconceived proof texting, the JW's use that all the time.

You have to take it as a whole from Genesis to Revelation. You did not, and only for your convenience because you would have been studying for 6 months I know I was when I studied it out, only to find we were lied to that hey are the same, and that it comes from RC Greek Documents, RC Doctrine, and perpetuated by everyone since 1880.

a reply to: DISRAELI

You had a OBJECTIVE in mind before you started and that is that the two kingdoms are the same.