PDA

View Full Version : Their salvation and ours



Barry
06-16-2008, 09:49 AM
Extracts from some yet unpublished writings that relate to the topic of "we cannot have their salvation". That being we cannot duplicate what is done.


When Peter says;
"but the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up"... he is speaking of what is about to be snatched away from those who trusted in the law. Those who trusted in self righteousness, and desired the old age to remain forever would lose everything that they thought was precious. They were about to lose everything they thought gave them value and worth. They were about to lose their self defined "ego".

God however, does not dwell in temples made with hands and so he has given us the history of an unfolding revelation from types, figures, and shadows, to the very substance of relationship.

This is a key factor in our understanding. There is an implied "bondage" while the types and figures of things to come were still standing. The fulfillment and thus removal of the types and figures changed the very "form" of things on a cosmological scale.


So then, covenant eschatology illuminates the transition between types, figures, and shadows, and what was to be permanent in a permanent new age.

Even Adam was a figure of him (the Christ) to come. Adam did not become a figure of Christ through the so called fall. Rather he lived out this "figure" context as one "from the dust" of the earth.
With this in mind it becomes clear that whatever "restoration" was to take place, it would be a "restoration" of biblical proportions, meaning "many fold".

We have much more through the last Adam (Christ) than was lost in the first Adam in the Garden of Eden. What the "figure of him to come" had in the garden of Eden is not equivalent to what was attained through Christ. Adam was a man of the old cosmos. Adam was a man that knew not his divine identity. Nor would such be revealed to him in his self defined identity.

Even from within the garden of Eden we see things that would be taken away in the end of the age. No remaining "serpent" or "devil" and no evidence of a forbidden tree, shows a different kind of garden situation that we see in the fulfilling of the old as the New Jerusalem is coming down from heaven and "all things are being made new" [Rev. 21:5 is the present active indicative so then "I am making everything new"]. It becomes clear that God had a plan from the very beginning that would give us more than what could be lost in the first place.

So then the "last days" were not just the last days of the law as given through Moses, but the last days of types and figures from and including Adam.

However, what is often overlooked in the study of covenant eschatology is the extent to which audience relevance comes into play.


It is the self defined "ego life", the "ego identity", that is being addressed in much of the old testament, and in much of the new testament when referring to the "in Adam" context of life.
The Adamic life was a life of an independently, humanly defined "ego identity" that stood in the precedence of types and figures. Without a higher reference, man would formulate his identity through conclusions drawn from his surroundings.

Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected [the same] in hope

The disregard of the directive to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was instrumental in concluding the self defined ego.

We may think that Adam defines humanity or defines what it is to be human. And in this approach we may think that God was somewhat ashamed in having created humans. This however was never the point. The problem is not being "human" the problem was self defining identity.

What is often being addressed in scripture is the "ego" precedence of mankind within the framework of the old economy that stood in types and figures.



Man cannot accurately define himself for himself. For what then happens is people try to establish their own "worth". So then people look around themselves and make interpretations from "things which are seen".

In this limited scope and limited view they attempt to define themselves by and through their surroundings.
Now while it is very true that this mentality still prevails, we do not do it from "things which are seen", as types and figures of the things that were to come. Those special "things which are seen" in the old age, were dissolved in the end of the age.

The intent of Scripture was not to create a physical verses spiritual dichotomy. But rather the types and figures were representing and validating the "mentality" or "mindset" of a certain type of thinking. Not as a spiritual verses physical dichotomy but rather as being "visually" bound to one dimension of life only. Forming identity through that one dimension. In general terms, being referred to as "in the flesh", and "according to the flesh" as a "mind set".
Being in that identity they did "love the world". They loved that world that was passing away.

The removal of the types and figures did not cause the stones of the temple to de-molecularize but rather these stones were thrown down.
Similar in some ways to saying, "Man shall not live by bread alone".

A physical verses spiritual dichotomy is all to often a conclusion which is in the opinion of this author, mistakenly drawn from scripture.

The new age does not nullify or eradicate the physical or material. Rather it places it or incorporates it into a larger spiritual context wherein one's own limits within the temporal physical sphere is inconsequential to the larger spiritual sphere of relationship. The spiritual is able to encompass the material. What it did not encompass was the "types and figures" that presided over the dominion of one dimensional mind set.

So then the types and figures that had precedence prior to the fulfillment of all things written, served as a sort of scaffolding for the "self defined ego".

And in this context, scripture consistency holds to a definitive time restraint as relates to the old cosmos, and so a definitive time restraint to the dominion of the "self defined ego". The passing away of the types and figures is inseparable from the passing away of the authorization of the self conceived identity.

2Cr 4:14 Knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by Jesus, and shall present with you.
2Cr 4:15 For all things [are] for your sakes, that the abundant grace might through the thanksgiving of many redound to the glory of God.
2Cr 4:16 For which cause we faint not; but though our outward man perish, yet the inward [man] is renewed day by day.
2Cr 4:17 For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding [and] eternal weight of glory;
2Cr 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen [are] temporal; but the things which are not seen [are] eternal.

The "outward man" that was perishing was none other than the old creature framed in the old covenant types and figures of things to come.

2Cr 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.

So then Paul was seeing himself as still attached in part to the old cosmos mode of relationship, while the tabernacle "made with hands", was still standing (see Heb. 9:8).
The (first) tabernacle being that which was "made with hands". [Note: The physicality of the human body is not the context here. "Physically" the human body is not made with human hands. Rather the Bible is clear that "God formed" in "the womb".]
Paul saw the passing away of this tabernacle as the ending of that identity.

The "temple" construction parallelled and depicted the dominion, of the "ego" construct. The temple made with hands materialized and the ego construct of the old economy. It depicted the corporate body of the "old man". And so the body of Christ becomes the corporate body of the new man. The body of Christ in the New Testament scriptures is to be seen as a transitional body from old to new.

Paul was seeing an end to the "self defined ego" as that which was held up in types and figures of things to come. Paul was looking to a time when that "cosmos" would be no more. So Paul walked by faith and not by the "form" of the old cosmos.

2Cr 5:7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:) {"form" or "appearance", see the Greek. Used in connection with his thoughts in 5:12.}
2Cr 5:8 We are confident, , and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
2Cr 5:9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him. {IE Labor as a Jew from a heritage perspective of the old body or labor as a Gentile without that heritage perspective.}
2Cr 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things [done] in [his] body, according to that he hath done, whether [it be] good or bad.
2Cr 5:11 Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.
2Cr 5:12 For we commend not ourselves again unto you, but give you occasion to glory on our behalf, that ye may have somewhat to [answer] them which glory in appearance, and [U]not in heart.

The time restraint is that of the end of the age which is when they did appear before the judgment seat of Christ. This time restraint is both constant and consistent. Never is it given as a ongoing post mortem judgment, but rather an end of age judgment.

Those who by faith were preparing for the new cosmos were putting off the old cosmos mode of "commending" ones self through appearance, which was framed in types and figures.


There is also the common "full-preterist" version of biblical futurism which I call "biblical post mortem futurism" or "partial preterist post mortem idealism". In this the problem only really gets fixed when one dies and so the human nature is shed.

One can repent and be saved and go to heaven as long as one does it before they die. Before the human nature is shed.

In such a scenario, at each one's passing from this life, judgment takes place "according to each mans works". This creating of course the obvious problem of those who lived through from the old age to the new, needing to be judged [I]twice according to their works. Once in the end of the age as promised and foretold, and then again when they died.

After all if we are to be judged according to our works when we die then so to, those who lived through from old to new must give a new accounting for their "works" from the time of the end of the age to the time of their end in this sphere of existence. Not only a mess, but impossible to understand. More than a stretch, as it is completely incompatible with the end of the age teachings in scripture.

You may also notice the grave problem that this creates for those who believe in post mortem eternal punishment.
In such a scenario, those who were disobedient until the end of the age and still lived on for a time were then already judged unworthy in the end of the age prior to their post mortem.

They were then already in the state of eternal punishment from the end of the age having been judged "according to their works". For the time of judgment according to their works was the end of the age not necessarily one of post mortem.

But such a scenario of eternal punishment cannot be extrapolated toward any subsequent generation. Unless each generation has an end of the age. And then no one of either the saved or the condemned can repent or fall short or make any changes to their position of eternal security from the point of the end of the age to their post mortem.

But if we try and go forward with this type scenario trying to combine both end of age judgement and ongoing judgment we might then conclude that such is then the very nature of the new age. And in concluding that, since the end of the old age, one is already in eternal punishment until one believes.

This however would mean that the unbelieving that live through, had a second chance from the end of the age to the point in which they died. For this would then be the nature of eternal punishment since end of the age took place. For whatever is applicable for us in this life was also applicable to they who lived through.

And herein is one of the many insurmountable problems with both the theories of eternal conscious punishment and annihilation. Making sense of both a definitive judgment at the end of the age where many lived through, and trying to make such applicable in a continuing post mortem judgment.

The problem is plain and simple. Not everyone died in the end of the age! We have both believers and non believers living through.

Whatever is the nature of our judgment when we die was the nature of their judgment when they died. As such then, it is then no longer a preterist belief. For the scriptural thrust of the end of the age would then be seen as a post mortem application instead of a end of age application. Concluding that the scriptural, foretold end of age judgment "according to every one's works", is still an ongoing postmortem judgment, makes it impossible to conclude anything about the historical "fulfillment of all things written". The two become completely incompatible.

The problem with such views is of course that scripture is very clear in making the end of the age the time in which everyone was judged according to their works. This cannot be overstressed.

Barry
06-16-2008, 09:58 AM
Continued:


The Gentile was declared a Gentile by and through Israel's having been "called out" or separated from all the other peoples. There was however a geographical "limit" of "effective influence". Israel's covenantal rule had geographical limits of "effective influence". People in distant lands would not know they were Gentiles and would not relate to Israel's calling, as they were outside of that geographical sphere of influence.

The Gospel that was preached to the "whole world" and "all nations", was preached within this effectual sphere of influence. Sufficient was this to show historically what had happened.
For the nature of what had happened can be summed up as pertains to "revelation". It is therefore a historically fulfilled revelation. Such was sufficient for all of humanity in the new age of ongoing transformation, in the new age without end, in God's new age. Thus revealing to all at large that "we are all in this together". That God loves all His offspring.
Unless of course we wish to limit the meaning of "offspring" to that first century world of Israel's influence to which the gospel was preached. Such would be untenable.

Act 17:28 For in him WE LIVE, and move, and have OUR BEING; as certain also of YOUR OWN POETS have said, For WE ARE ALSO HIS OFFSPRING.
Act 17:29 Forasmuch then as WE ARE THE OFFSPRING OF GOD, WE OUGHT NOT to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and MAN'S DEVICE.
Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth ALL MEN EVERY WHERE TO REPENT:
Act 17:31 Because he hath APPOINTED A DAY, in the which he will JUDGE THE WORLD IN RIGHTEOUSNESS by [that] man whom he hath ordained; [whereof] he hath given assurance UNTO ALL [men], in that he hath raised him from the dead.

The point of which is not to deny that those outside of this "influence" are God's offspring. But to see that in the Hebrew mind of Paul such a fulfilled revelation of end of age judgment was sufficient to all for all time, even toward those who were then outside of that sphere of influence.

A real problem for those who focus on eternal destiny but very sensible to those who see such in terms of a fulfilled revelation of God's love without condition.

Thus the perpetual efficacy of that fulfilled revelation becomes a new topic of discussion. And the subject of perpetual efficacy is then itself seen as a pivotal importance in scripture. The end of the age judgment did on some levels decide issues of perpetual efficacy.

Here is just a sampling of the many scriptures that deal with the finality of this end of age judgment:
1Cr 1:8 Who shall also confirm you unto THE END, [that ye may be] blameless in the DAY OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST.
1Cr 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: FOR THE DAY SHALL DECLARE IT, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
1Cr 5:5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the DESTRUCTION OF THE FLESH, that the spirit may be saved IN THE DAY OF THE LORD JESUS.

The end in 1 Cor. 1:8 is the end of the age. The time of the destruction of the flesh (dominion) is the end of the age.

Phl 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform [it] until THE DAY OF JESUS CHRIST:
Phl 1:10 That ye may approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offence TILL the DAY OF CHRIST;
Phl 2:16 Holding forth the word of life; that I may rejoice IN THE DAY OF CHRIST, that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain

Again it is clear that the end of the age is in view here and not a judgment thereafter.

2Ti 1:12 For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him AGAINST THAT DAY.
2Ti 1:18 The Lord grant unto him that he may find MERCY OF THE LORD IN THAT DAY: and in how many things he ministered unto me at Ephesus, thou knowest very well.
2Ti 4:8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me AT THAT DAY: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.
1Jo 4:17 Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness IN THE DAY OF JUDGMENT: because as he is, so are WE IN THIS WORLD.

The conscience of man to the Jew first and also to the Gentile, was about to be judged over-against the gospel as a fulfilled revelation.


There is simply no way to extrapolate eternal conscious punishment or annihilation as applicable to both them who saw the end and lived through with those of subsequent generations who see the end behind them but still (allegedly) await judgment at post mortem.

This is the mess created when we depart from audience relevance.
There is no way to extrapolate eternal conscious punishment or annihilation from within the context of "age ending" to the post mortem departure of this dimension of existence. For there were indeed unbelievers who did live through and were neither annihilated at that time or send to "eternal conscious punishment" at the time in which the old covenant ended.

What did happen is that they lost "who they were" in the precedence of types and figures of things to come.

What we could however conclude is that they were in a different sense annihilated and in a different sense lost their souls, permanently. That being within the sphere of the authority of the "self defined ego", standing in types and figures of things to come, of which, did come to an end.

And so attempting to extrapolate from age ending judgment to present day post mortem ending is impossible. Once done the audience relevance of age ending becomes completely misappropriated.

There may indeed be a working through of some sort in post mortem. [I'll let you know in a few years. :)]
But not that which would imply an incompatibility with that which the ending of the old covenant age had already accomplished historically upon all, dead or alive. Meaning that the age changing event does not take away from ongoing transformation as "God defined" offspring. One then "learns" what it means to be what only God himself can and does "define". Such is an "ego" matter. But not a matter of an ego authority held within the outworking of an historical revelation.

One might have a passing thought, as horrible and inconceivable as it may sound. Perhaps better if the children die before the age of accountability. Or maybe if we get them to Baptism, and then the Minister could just keep them under just a little too long and they can go straight to heaven. Then we wouldn't have to worry about eternal destiny.

"Calvinists" aside for a moment, this scenario seems to almost be plausible given the way so many think about the limitations of what Christ has accomplished.

We could however simply trust in a loving God and try and exemplify this trust toward our children. But we would then need just such a God that we could trust in. The god of many a Christian is a god that has a gun to their head telling them to love him with all their heart, with all their soul, and with all their might. A god that is sovereign in everything but love. Such is the logic of the self defined ego outlook. Because the self defined ego cannot see a comprehensive divine importance.



The self defined ego tends to make unity as opposed to "accepting" and or "realizing" unity. In an attempt to make unity the "us and them" mentality is perpetuated.

The above comments are in no way intended to belittle or demean anyone in their belief in either eternal punishment or annihilation. But rather simply to express my own views that there is always a part of the person, within those who preach such things, that is not fully convicted of these things.



And the self defined ego is attached to an "economy" that supports it.

And the "economy" is validated through types and figures of things to come.

And the types, anti types, figures, and shadows [one may also include allegories and parables on some level] of things to come are framed within a historical revelation.
We see the same thing here:

Mar 3:22 And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.
Mar 3:23 And he called them , and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan?
Mar 3:24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
Mar 3:25 And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.
Mar 3:26 And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.
Mar 3:27 No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house.
Mar 3:28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
Mar 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

The scribes had hit upon a truth without realizing it. They, within the standing of types and figures, framed the heading up of the authority of the self defined ego. Christ had entered the "strong man's house" and would bind him at the cross so that the "spoiling" could begin.
As such then they were about to stand against both themselves and each other. The "house" was divided and would not stand. Satan was about to stand against himself and had an "end" as a matter of "standing". They would go into a three prong civil war that was instrumental in bringing about "the end".

This end was definitive as the completion of a historical revelation, and so [U]ending the types and figures.

"All sins" would be forgiven "the sons of men". What however would never be "forgiven" [audience relevant to the "self defined ego"] as a matter of historical impact, was the blaspheming against the Holy Spirit that the "self defined ego" was doing. Why forgive everything but this?

But such was the whole point. In audience relevance to the self defined ego, the "worm" would historically "never die". That which was important to the ego is that which the ego would lose forever. The self defined ego would lose "perpetual efficacy".
In it's demise the smoke of their torments would rise forever and ever. Such was the promise of the fulfillment of an historical revelation toward the audience relevant standing of the "self defined ego".




In this audience relevant language, "the worm never dies" and "the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever". The authoritative heading up of the "self defined ego" was historically shamed in the consummation of the then present "evil age".

The "ego authority", for all that it treasured, and in all that defined it, was historically shamed in the consummation of the age.

Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Mat 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

The raised up authority and dominion of the "self defined ego" would be permanently shamed "historically" in its end. However all sins would be forgiven the sons of men when God was "pacified for all" that they "had done". Historically then, their mouth was "shut". Historically they were forgiven for "all that they had done", as also was Sodom (Ezekiel 16:63).

In view of audience relevance, the "self defined ego" that stood in types and figures would be deprived of the very recognition that it so desperately sought after. And it would be denied perpetual efficacy in the new age.
In the wisdom of that age, they were "coming to nothing". And so by token of the passing away of that age, historically speaking, "the worm never dies".

Audience relevance could then distinguish between "grain" and "chaff". The man of "appearance" would "perish" as a matter of that reference. Perish as a matter of the "flesh" ego standing.

1Cr 2:6 (ASV) We speak wisdom, however, among them that are fullgrown: yet a wisdom not of this world, nor of the rulers of this world, who are coming to nought:

The self defined ego is no longer "framed". "His" house is already crushed and destroyed by the wind, the rain and the waves. The sand is already given way and great was it's fall.

But "he" had to be told from "his" perspective what the eternal consequences were going to be for "him". And "he" the "man of sin" had to first, be fully revealed and then the head would be crushed.

Barry
06-16-2008, 10:05 AM
Continued:

2Cr 10:4 (For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the PULLING DOWN OF STRONG HOLDS;)
2Cr 10:5 CASTING DOWN IMAGINATIONS, and every high thing that exalteth itself AGAINST the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
2Cr 10:6 And having in a readiness to revenge ALL DISOBEDIENCE, when YOUR OBEDIENCE IS FULFILLED.
2Cr 10:7 Do ye look on things after the OUTWARD APPEARANCE? If any man trust to himself that he is Christ's, let him of himself think this again, that, as he Christ's, even so [are] we Christ's.

One can "between the ears" still perceive of one's "self" as Jew or Greek in an egocentric kind of way. That being in a dualistic kind of way that would suppose an "identity" superiority one over another as opposed to seeing everyone first and foremost in the oneness of divine identity and comprehensive divine importance. This would be done however in the ignorance of divine unity where God is "all and in all". Unless of course one would like to try and prove that "the law" is still valid after being fulfilled, and after passing away.


Since the scriptures clearly claim that the law was to pass away, even for those who had desired for it to remain, we must then conclude that the passing away of the law had inclusive results even over those who would try and come back to it "between their ears".

The types and figures were historically fulfilled. And this we cannot get out of. The types and figures had a precedence toward a self defined ego related status. And this is very prevalent in the scriptures. The ending of the types and figures is constantly associated with the ending of this status.

Furthermore the law declared to the Gentile that they were Gentiles. Israel was a priestly nation. Set apart not from within itself but from the rest. They were not a "people" set apart from themselves, but from other "peoples". As such, called to be a priestly nation. The other peoples were thus declared "Gentiles" by the law and through this process of being set apart. While there was a spiritual connotation to this it is clear that such did stand as a matter of sectarianism and ethnicity within the status of the types and figures. Otherwise we deny, "first the natural and then the spiritual".

The law did not come in to make sectarianism. The law came in because of sectarianism. "Why the law?" "Because of transgressions." The law was never given for a rightous man but for sinners.

In relation to these points, we can ask some questions about the nature or impact, of the ending of the law:

Does the fulfillment of the levitical sacrifice (Heb. 7:27) replace only the levitical sacrifice? Or is it that the levitical sacrifice headed up the larger economy of sacrifice from both before the livitical precedent (Gen. 4:4), and even that which touched the Gentiles (Jonah 1:16)?

Imagine trying to conclude from the epistle of Hebrews that Christ fulfilled only the levitical precedent of animal sacrifice!

Did the taking down of the temple "made with hands" touch only those who had been entrusted with the oracles of God?
Was the "world" that was "judged in righteousness", a "world" headed up in Israel as a priestly connotation, or a was it a world defined as Israel only?

Did the "world" that was about to be "judged in righteousness" somehow touch also, those who thought of the "Divine Nature" in terms of "gold, silver and stone" and who shaped such things after "man's devising" (Act 17:29)?
Were these Gentiles equally defined as the offspring of God?

If Israel was a priestly nation having been separated from among other peoples, how then could the ending of the law be of only an Israel consequence?

Was not the "temple made with hands" that which headed up and so reflected a comprehensive "ego" problem (see again Acts 17:24-31) that existed among the Greek culture that Paul reached out to?
The whole point of scripture was to bring things to a distinctive head and then crush that head. So then, while the types and figures of things to come where entrusted to Israel, they were the heading up of things that reflected upon what one man had brought "into the world".

Since that one man was a figure of him to come, then the "all [that] sinned" (Rom. 5:12) were in some sense bound to that figure. Sin did not come into the world independent of that one figure.

Paul had already clearly laid out his meaning of "all". And so the meaning of "all sinned" had been already established in early chapters.



There is then a simultaneous aspect of the law. To reflect a comprehensive problem and to head up the problem so that the solution to the problem would be solved from within the problem. And so Christ was the snake in the wilderness (John 3:14). Having come then in the likeness of sinful flesh.
And so the gospel was preached to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

The "world" that was "judged in righteousness" (Acts 17:31) was a world that was headed up in the precedence of the types and figures of things to come. That world was not exclusive to those entrusted with types and figures. Those entrusted with the oracles of God were functioning in a priestly context. The "covenantal world" was headed up in one set apart people, which did reflect the needs of all peoples.



The "world" that the gospel was preached to in the first century was the world within the geographical sphere of Israel's priestly influence. In essence what we consider the Roman world.
Sufficient was this to show forth the comprehensive nature of fulfillment, as a historical revelation.
Touching first the "Jew" and then the "Gentile". Wherein among the Gentiles was also the lost tribes of Israel who were also at times effectually referred to as "Gentiles". The term Gentile is however not used exclusively toward the dispersed ones of Israel but did embrace them.

So then we see a very clear and definitive end, that is bound to a distinctive time restraint.

1Jo 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things [that are] in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
1Jo 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.
1Jo 2:17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
1Jo 2:18 Little children, it is [I]the last time:

and here:
2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
2Pe 3:11 [Seeing] then [that] all these things shall be dissolved, what manner [of persons] ought ye to be in [all] holy conversation and godliness,
2Pe 3:12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

Clearly the old order was to pass away for both the believer and the nonbeliever. Consider also that 1 John 2:16 is in reference to what had begun in the garden of Eden (Gen. 3:6).

Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree [was] good for food, and that it [was] pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make [one] wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

Since John promised the passing away of that world, including that which was present in the Garden of Eden, in the form of the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life, then it is clear that such was changed both comprehensively and conclusively in the end of the age.

For we have not only the passing away of that world but also the lust therein. It is impossible to have the passing away of that world for believers only. Just as it is impossible for the temple to have be "thrown down" for believers only.

It also becomes evident that the fulfillment of types and figures changed even some things that preexisted from before the so called "fall".

So then it is clear that "restoration" is not back to the garden of Eden wherein types and figures , even then, had precedence in the absence of a fulfilled revelation.
Restoration toward relationship was more in Christ than that lost in Adam. Remember that Adam himself was in some way a figure of him to come.
Biblical terms such as redemption and restoration and suchlike are to be understood in the biblical precedence of "many fold" biblical proportions.

Other wise the word of Jesus cannot be understood. For he claimed quite explicitly that he and he alone revealed the Father as no one else had ever revealed him. While Adam walked with God in the garden, he did not fully see the Father as we see him through Christ's revealing.

The terms "reconciliation", "redemption", "restoration" are not and were not intended to be understood in the sense of a recreation of the original garden. Rather they are used in their "many fold" implications. Anytime God took away it was always in the promise of giving even more.


It is not that "lust" cannot exist after fulfillment. It is that lust is not framed in the precedence of types and figures. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life have no further structural framework of support. They have not authority or dominion in the kingdom of heaven.

God created a structure to support the self defined ego, giving it a precedence, in the old world, and so a temporary or corruptible identity. God however took that structure away. In doing so, a historical marker is created. One that stands in the fulfilled revealing that God is love without condition.

The "destruction", the "perishing", of the old covenant creature does not constitute a condition of love as is so often perceived. It constituted a historical marker in the evolution of human consciousness where the "chaff", the outward identity, the man of appearance, is said to have no more precedence.

The "man of sin" in his structured identity was first fully "manifested" and then destroyed in the "glory" of His coming. The illuminating glory of God's love caused the darkness to pass away. God's love can be quite imposing! However the imposing nature of God's love was never a condition of His love but rather the evidence of it.
God's hating Esau is audience relevant to the structured outward identity.

Sure that is more reading than anyone really wants to do.

Jotham
06-16-2008, 07:45 PM
...Sure that is more reading than anyone really wants to do.Ah Barry, you read my mind! I soooo was hoping you would post more on that concept. Much appreciated and I copied the above posts to my PDA and will read it over the next couple days.

Blessings,
Thom