It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
NIV(for clarity.)
"Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; he who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere youth; he who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed
Is there a conspiracy here in the Christian clergy? Why would the churches not want to tell the people all about the new heaven and new earth that is promised in their scriptures? Would it be because those who are in power do not understand or is it that they do not want you to know the truth? What do you think?
reply to post by Klassified
TextThis is of course, after the millennial reign, and it is commonly accepted that these people are they who have been thrown into the lake of fire. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, just what is commonly believed among Christians.
Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
The New Jerusalem does not come down upon this present earth. It comes down upon the new earth after the millennial reign.
The Millennial reign only applies to our present earth.
Therefore verses 17-25 must be a complete thought subject. It can't be the millennial reign. The entire thought must start with verse 17 which is the new heaven and earth. Do you Agree?
TextHow would I explain this verse in relation to what? I'm not following your logic, I guess. The above verse refers to those who will live in the New Jerusalem on the new Earth. They will be able to enter the city at will, and eat from the tree of life.
Originally posted by Seede
He is not referencing this present Jerusalem on this present earth and clearly states that it is the new Jerusalem. The New Jerusalem is not shown on this present day earth and is not shown in the millennium. God shows that the new Jerusalem is given only after this earth and all of this creation is destroyed. Am I wrong?
reply to post by Deetermined
TextI think the keyword in these verses is the word, BUT, in verse 18.
Does that tell the reader that God is going to create a new Jerusalem and that He is in the process of creating this New Jerusalem on a new world with New heaven? What do you think?
reply to post by Deetermined
TextThe only thing is, we know that there will be no more death once the New Jerusalem is sent down from Heaven. Death will have been done away with based on the verses below, so any time we see verses pertaining to death, we know it can't be related to the New Jerusalem.
Originally posted by Seede
Whatever the truth is, why is Christianity so divided and how can people get on the same page (so to speak)?
Isaiah tells us that there are people outside the city who will build and plant and live and die but he does not say that this is in the gated and guarded city. The difference here is that you believe that this pertains to our present Jerusalem while I believe it pertains to the celestial New Jerusalem.
I could very well be wrong and that is why I am confused. Why couldn't God restore people to their former state and put them on the new world? He did it to Lazarus. If people have perished and are not as yet judged, then why could they not be restored such as Lazarus was restored? This leads me into the direction of the mentally challenged or infants that are murdered and unaccountable or perhaps even the aborted etc-- Could these be restored and given the chance the same as you and I have? These are just some thoughts I have from talking to you. What do you think? Could Isaiah and John both be telling us the same thing?