"God's will be done.."

[Amie]

"God's will be done on earth as it is in heaven."

I can't imagine this to mean that humans were not to make simple choices. What was the will of God? (I'm talking about historically, not that His will has changed or anything) Was there an opposing will?

Thanks,

Amie

[christyG]

Good question Amie!

If I am to think that God is all in all, then my will is a part of his will. Two but connected, one a piece of a whole....as is the whole earth. It seems that our will can oppose God's will, but again as in a piece of a whole------"My right hand doesn't know what my left hand is doing" kind of thing? Just thinking out loud though.

It is taught by some that earth and heaven are used as symbols in other passages of the Bible----help me with the symbols, I'm a little rusty, but I will look through my old stuff..... So, is this same symbology used here?

Might be interesting to look at which books carry this "quote" from Jesus-------Please do not take offense to my quotation marks anyone.-------- We might be able to glean more from which authors chose to record this prayer.

Also coming to mind.....I was taught by my closet-preterist pastor that Jesus came to do God's will. He sighted the following passage as stating what God's will was...John 6:39-40 "This is the will of the one who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day."
It does seem that there was an opposing will to that------those clinging to the OC?

Christy

[Paige]

It does seem that there was an opposing will to that------those clinging to the OC?


Thats the way it seems to me also. As I read the NT, if you were walking in the light, it wasn't necessary to question whether or not your will was God's. Does that make any sense, lol? When you abide in love, it flows out from you. God is love. This is how I've always interpreted "on earth as it is in heaven". "Heavenly" realities became "earthly" practice. If the OC hadn't of passed away, this would not be so. Let me know if you see it differently...

Paige

[Barry]

Here is a portion of a book I'm still writting. Some talk on the subject of "will" and also some talk on the "temple destruction that Nancy was asking about.
"The Lost Message Of The Bible"
Quote:
The setting of the New Testament writings is one of two opposing systems in competition for the glory of God. In a changeover of this kind, conflict is inevitable. One system is striving for God’s glory and blessings though human potential and the other is manifesting God’s potential though accepting human limitations [repentance] and willing participation in God’s free gift.

Here is the point:
“Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.” (Matt. 6:10).
So then, it should not surprise us that in the changeover of the covenants there is the earthly type city, the Jerusalem that then was about to be destroyed, while at the other side of things, the heavenly city, the New Jerusalem coming down out of heaven (Rev. 21:2,10).
This is in context with the “will” of the Father. The spiritual of God’s possibility is replacing the natural of an independent human potential. Meaning that God’s sufficiency is replacing man’s insufficiency. This is why Jesus promised that some, who were standing there, that is those of his generation, would not taste death until they have seen the kingdom come in power (Mark 9:1).
The goal of fulfillment does not touch upon the subject of the end of the physical world. On the contrary it represents the end of the Old Covenant, which had attachments to natural or earthly “principles” and “elements” (which are also translated “rudiments”). The end of the temple or tabernacle that was “made with hands” (Acts 7:46-49,17:23-24, 2 Cor. 5:1, Heb. 9:8-11) is an excellent example of this point.

How easy it is to get confused between the end of the physical world as we know it, and the end of the natural or earthly elements of the Old Covenant. When reading the New Testament, they look in some ways very similar to us. When the Bible speaks of fulfillment we may start looking to the end of the physical world because we may have confused the end of the physical world with the end of the natural elements of the Old Covenant. The Old Covenant contained a lot of attachments to earthly things, which in turn exposed the limitations of human capacity and human potential.

Man’s potential does not allow him to build a house for God. In fact we might even say that it is pride that allows us to think that we can do such a thing, successfully. God is way to big for any house we can make. So in this way the Old Covenant exposed man’s limitations.

The Covenant that placed man in the position of building by his hands, a house for God, is the Covenant that exposes the limitations that we have. Those limitations needed to be exposed so that we could learn something very important about our relationship with our Creator. We are just not capable of rendering that type of service for God. Most religion around the world is focused upon trying to serve God through this type of service. But God doesn’t need it anyway. Wars are fought over earthly cities. Often in the name of God! So many have failed to notice The Lost Message Of The Bible!

Acts 7:
44) “Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as he had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen.”
45) “Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Joshua into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drove out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David;”
46) “Who found favor before God, and desired to find a tabernacle for the God of Jacob.”
47) “But Solomon built him a house.”
48) “Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,”
49) “Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest?”

What the temple that was attached to human potential meant or infered, is that we were trying to render a service for God, which would allow God to be close to us. The will of God, being done on earth as it is in heaven means that God is close to us in spite of all our limitations. Our relationship is not based upon our human potential. So in this way then, the natural is replaced by the spiritual and God dwells in us because of his will having been done on earth. Not that the spiritual has replaced the physical. But rather that the spiritual has replaced the insufficiency of an independent human potential that finds its limitations in the physical. God’s glory has replaced human glory. Human glory was found to be always lacking.
We wanted to build a temple, a house for God that would make it possible for God to be close to us. Human will, desired that human and natural means could bring about our intimacy. We wanted to bring God to us. However, God being close to us is in his potential and not in our own.

In a similar way, animal scarifies performed by an earthly High Priest could not take sin away. That was a task for the Man from heaven. Only the heavenly Man, only Christ could accomplish the will of the Father (Heb. 10:7-11). The 1st century Christians participated in that will in a very special way during the changeover of the covenants.

In Matt. 19:25-26 the disciples asked Jesus “who then can be saved?” “But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.” This sets the tone for the changeover of covenants.
End Quote.
Barry

[Paige]

Awesome Barry!

I can't wait for that book to come out... I think it would go a long way toward clearing up some confusion on this earth :)

Paige

[Amie]

Human will, desired that human and natural means could bring about our intimacy. We wanted to bring God to us. However, God being close to us is in his potential and not in our own.

Human will desires it today, yet for some reason back then humanity was "dead" and it is not now. Humanity basically desires to put God in a box, for whatever reason, and then to control the box.

Christy said:


It does seem that there was an opposing will to that------those clinging to the OC?

Paige said:


Thats the way it seems to me also. As I read the NT, if you were walking in the light, it wasn't necessary to question whether or not your will was God's. Does that make any sense, lol? When you abide in love, it flows out from you. God is love. This is how I've always interpreted "on earth as it is in heaven". "Heavenly" realities became "earthly" practice. If the OC hadn't of passed away, this would not be so. Let me know if you see it differently...

In the Old Testament, there were those who were "adverse", yet I wonder if they ever went against the very will of God. Consider that God said to Pharaoh "And for this reason I have made you stand, in order to cause you to see My power, and in order to declare My name in all the land." (Exodus 9:16) Look at the detailed explanation:

Romans 9
14 ¶ What then shall we say? Is there not unrighteousness with God? Let it not be!
15 For He said to Moses, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will pity whomever I will pity." Ex. 33:19
16 So, then, it is not of the one willing, nor of the one running, but of the One showing mercy, of God.
17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very thing I raised you up, so that I might display My power in you, and so that My name might be publicized in all the earth." Ex. 9:16
18 So, then, to whom He desires, He shows mercy. And to whom He desires, He hardens.
19 You will then say to me, Why does He yet find fault? For who has resisted His will?
20 Yes, rather, O man, who are you answering against God? Shall the thing formed say to the One forming it, Why did You make me like this? Isa. 29:16
21 Or does not the potter have authority over the clay, out of the one lump to make one vessel to honor, and one to dishonor? Jer. 18:6
22 But if God, desiring to demonstrate His wrath, and to make His power known, endured in much long-suffering vessels of wrath having been fitted out for destruction,
23 and that He make known the riches of His glory on vessels of mercy which He before prepared for glory,
24 whom He also called, not only us, of Jews, but also out of nations.

It sounds like God hardened their hearts, so I'm not sure that they would qualify as truly resisting His will. Maybe I'm looking at this from the wrong angle though. These are just thoughts swimming through my head.
IF though (with a capital "if") no one and nothing could oppose God's will, then maybe the way we've been defining "will" itself is worthy of examination. Otherwise, it would even be accurate to say that pedophiles are doing God's will - and I don't think that is right.

My thought right now is that "God's will" in the prayer may have been something specific. Let's say for example, God's will was "let there be light". When was that accomplished ("done")? What about "Let Us make humanity in our image"?

So is God's will even something people can choose to "do"? Is it done/completed? What then did the prayer mean as a matter of fact, by "as it is in heaven"?

Thanks for walking with me on this one. I hope I'm making sense enough to keep learning from y'all.

Amie

[Paige]

Amie,

I'm still chewing on this and will continue to do so.


So is God's will even something people can choose to "do"? Is it done/completed? What then did the prayer mean as a matter of fact, by "as it is in heaven"?

I wonder if it is more accurate to say that God's will is something in which we can participate. I think that His will is done, and continues to be done. Does that make sense? If God's will is for me to love my neighbor and enemy, that is something I can be a part of today.

Paige

[Barry]

Amie,
Here is my view:
Human will serves only as a vehicle to develop humanity.
Human will was allowed to position humankind so that humankind could learn something.
God did not have to put a tree of knowledge of good and evil available. He did not have to give Israel kings.

God can crush human will anytime he sees fit as in the conversion of Paul. Human will is God giving us freedom to learn.

And he did so when he took away the status of what human will had desired. The will is still present to allow for the learning of the fact that God's will cannot ultimately be thwarted.
As you have inferred, it is not concerned with every detail but the overall development and relationship.
We are given enough rope to climb or get tangled up. Then we learn something about climbing and getting tangled.
It is God's will that we learn by and through our will as a father allows freedom and risks to his children so they can learn important lessons. The greater framework of life is still framed by the Father.
JMO Barry

[Amie]

If God's will is for me to love my neighbor and enemy, that is something I can be a part of today.

I hope you don't get frustrated with me in pressing this issue. What does it mean then, when we don't love our neighbor and enemy? I don't do it every time that I should.

I realize that there is a great deal to learn from the bible story, and I think that you know that - as well as know that I live by those principles. There was a purpose for the C1 church's loving their enemy as the purpose for everything they were supposed to do. That purpose seemed to be redemption. Though loving our enemy is still the right thing to do, God's will ultimately (redemption) was accomplished. That accomplishment would work itself out imo, in that the world has to continue on its present course (of improvement) because God's will was done.

Of course, I'm inserting that the will of God = redemption. IF we were being specific, would you agree with that?


The will is still present to allow for the learning of the fact that God's will cannot ultimately be thwarted.

Are you suggesting that once God's will was accomplished and established, that it is further maintained? It would seem that after His accomplishment, all that would be left for us would be liberty.

Thanks again,

Amie

[Barry]

Amie,
you said,
"Are you suggesting that once God's will was accomplished and established, that it is further maintained? It would seem that after His accomplishment, all that would be left for us would be liberty."

The will of God was redemption. That being the case then our will can not change that now. There is therefore perfect liberty in that our will cannot change that reality. Un-redemption is not a choice.

Beyond redemption there must be a continuing agenda.
I do not think that God would allow us to completely destroy ourselves.
Perfect liberty with a new set of limits?
I do not know what those limits are. They are not the same as before.

Still, good point and more thought for sure! Yes, more thought. LOL
JMO Barry

[christyG]

I've been looking at this outside of a covenental framework and it looks a little different. I like your thoughts Amie (and others) that God's will equals redemption. Outside of the covenental framework redemption seems to be ongoing. Redemption equalling a relationship with the divine. A conscious experience of the divine, of God. God is all in all but not all are conscious of that.

Redemption covenentally is redemption from the OC? And how does that play out for humanity?

I see humanity always being in the same standing with God. I see all humanity since time began in search of a relationship with the divine. A search to explain the unexplainable. In a search for God's will -- for redemption. Not that God had ever taken his relationship away, but we must come to some sort of awareness to have redemption mean anything to us. IMO understanding can come in many ways. NT writers seem to come to an understanding through the context of the OC.

Christy

[Paige]

Christy,

Your thoughts are on the same line as my own, but I don't think I'm viewing redemption as being the same thing as relationship with God.

Amie,

I do agree that the will of God is redemption. I I'm not sure that redemption is the "end" of the story though (you might not either, I'm not sure). The way I see it now, completed redemption makes relationship possible, but not all are in relationship w/God presently. God is here with us and accessible to all, yet relationship is a two way interaction. I see then, that God's will continues on because He desires relationship w/all (IMO). For me, to see it otherwise feels a lot like the idea that since God completed redemption, He went on a long vacation and left us all to ourselves.


What does it mean then, when we don't love our neighbor and enemy? I don't do it every time that I should.

When we don't do it, we experience those consequences just like those not aware of God's presence. I feel the difference then between being "in relationship" and not is that we become aware of the lesson and we learn, grow, apply, and move on in maturity (hopefully). We find meaning even in our weaknesses, and life is enriched. Hopefully, we are becoming aware also that we are not here to be served, but rather to serve. Life takes on a whole new meaning when we know we are not alone, and living just to please self. Davo points this out very well, IMO, when talking about the distinction today between redemption and salvation.


The fullness of biblical SALVATION is upon those called to minister – God's change agents in a changing world; those who are saved to serve. - From -Redemption Reconciliation-and Salvation.

Hoping I addressed your actual question :)
Paige

[christyG]

originally stated by Paige: I do agree that the will of God is redemption. I I'm not sure that redemption is the "end" of the story though (you might not either, I'm not sure). The way I see it now, completed redemption makes relationship possible, but not all are in relationship w/God presently. God is here with us and accessible to all, yet relationship is a two way interaction. I see then, that God's will continues on because He desires relationship w/all (IMO). For me, to see it otherwise feels a lot like the idea that since God completed redemption, He went on a long vacation and left us all to ourselves.
I like what you are saying here.
Also, you said:
Your thoughts are on the same line as my own, but I don't think I'm viewing redemption as being the same thing as relationship with God.
What do you see redemption as? Is it completely covenental?

Christy

[Amie]

Redemption covenentally is redemption from the OC? And how does that play out for humanity?

And here it seems, is the crux of all of this. I suspect that the old covenant was "eat from the tree of knowledge and you will surely die". "Adam" did die (and "in Adam all died"), and was reborn the "last Adam" (and "in Christ all live").


The way I see it now, completed redemption makes relationship possible, but not all are in relationship w/God presently. God is here with us and accessible to all, yet relationship is a two way interaction. I see then, that God's will continues on because He desires relationship w/all (IMO). For me, to see it otherwise feels a lot like the idea that since God completed redemption, He went on a long vacation and left us all to ourselves.

Post-redemption, how can we know the will of God? If we don't know it, that doesn't mean that he has abandoned us imo. If knowing love is knowing Him (and I think we are on the same page with this), does that also mean we know his will? It seems "God's will" becomes less a verb and more an existance.. if that makes sense.


What do you see redemption as? Is it completely covenental?

Covenant effected everything. I think this all boils down to how we define "death" and "life". That might be a good one for a new thread, lol!

Amie

[Paige]

Christy,

I think I do see redemption as completely covenantal. More and more, I'm also seeing it tied to those under the Old Covenant. Verses like, "And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance." Heb. 9:15

Again, it almost seems to tie in with another posting I made about Christ being the "ark". We are on scene approx. 2000 years after the passing away of the OC. How this changes the picture as it specifically applies to us is something I'm thinking on a lot lately. ( I think I've got off topic :o )

Paige