The Concordant Publishng Concern

[fullarmor2]

I'm not a Greek or Hebrew scholar, and I don't claim to be an authority. But I prefer the Concordant Version, and I think their teachings are "concordant" with the scriptures.

      Glad to hear it.  :iagree:   

[joeteekay]

Just a question. Was not A.E. Knock an initiator of the Concordant Version? I wonder about that.
One of the first books that led me to where I am today was his thesis of "All in All".
As I said before I really like the CLV. In fact isn't the web site "Interlinear Scripture Analyzer 2.1 basic - Help (www.scripture4all.org)

" based on the CLV.

:cloud9:

[Seth]

Yes, knoch was an initiator, and I agree with him about his stance on universal salvation.

[eaglesway]

"and now that he is past, some, it seems desire to muddle and assume.

Not sure what you are saying here. Would you elaberate?

[micah7:9]

No thanks. Ill just remove my comment. :Peace2:

[eaglesway]

Wasnt making an issue- just didnt kno what you meant  :Peace2:

[fullarmor2]

Just a question. Was not A.E. Knock an initiator of the Concordant Version? I wonder about that.
One of the first books that led me to where I am today was his thesis of "All in All".
As I said before I really like the CLV. In fact isn't the web site "Interlinear Scripture Analyzer 2.1 basic - Help (www.scripture4all.org)

" based on the CLV.

:cloud9:

     Also, one of the people who helped to get Gary going was a man by the name of Louis Abbott who was also Concordant I believe. And speaking of that,   I wonder if Gary fell out of favor with the Concordant beliefs also? Anyone know?

[fullarmor2]

I make the issue because many who seperate the gospel into two gospels use that distinction(false distinction imo) to invalidate scriptural challenges to their systematic theology and dispensationalist rigamaroll

    I can understand that since you don't think there's this difference between Paul and the others. I don't understand your problem with dispensationalism though. Its about how that GOD does different things at different times. Surely you don't disagree with that?

I think it is important at a foundational level

   I depends on how you define what is foundational I suppose. I guess that's what you're doing in the next part here. 

because there is one body, one Lord, one new man,

    I agree generally speaking.  Its just that there are different callings among believers.

and one olive tree into which the Gentiles are being grafted,

      This is referring to the salvation of the gentiles. But, that process will not be completed in the present eon. Universal Salvation is going to happen gradually over the course of this, and the next two eons! In the mean time, there will continue to be division, and GOD'S eonian process of dealing with both the saved and unsaved. 

off of which a partial hardening of    Israel has been pruned,

  Sure, in the general sense of us all being GOD'S believers, and yes Israel is temporarily blinded. But again, there are different callings. During these times when not everyone is saved yet.  I do believe that this universal oneness stuff, I'll call it, will happen by the time we reach the Consumation, when GOD will have finished becoming "All in All".  Its just that between now and then, there is still A LOT of eonian drama that has to happen first.

and into which they will be re-grafted as "fellow-heirs" with those who have gone before in "the gospel" which they share, Jew, Gentile, male, female, Greek, barbarian, etc. etc. :o)

   Yes I agree that "all Israel shall be saved"!   Amen to that.

[eaglesway]

My problem with dispensationalism is a matter of degrees. Some dispensationalists are just using there particular dispensational system to invalidate verses of the scripture that don't fit their systematic theology. I believe there are dispensations, I just believe that there is only one dispensation involved in this eon, between the first and second advents of Christ.

As far as the salvation of the Gentiles, I agree that all(Jew , Gentile, or whatever) will not be gathered into the all in all until the consumation. What i am speaking of in terms of the grafting in of the wild olive branches tho, is not the salvation of the Gentiles only, but rather the creation of the priesthood, sonship inhertance, and Lamstand/CitySetOnAHill. Israel was born to serve as a priesthood. The Levites were set apart to teach Israel how to "come before me and not die"(offer acceptable sacrfices). God called Israel out of Egypt "Let my people go to worship/serve me". Zechariah's vision of a Lampstand mammered out of one piece of gold tried in the fire seven times by a skilled craftsman was a prophecy that is(imo) fulfilled in the "one new man" made up of Jews and Gentiles in this dispensation, the "calling out" of a kingdom of priest that will "gather with Crist in the ages to come- as you stated, in the next two or three ages until the "anakephalaomai"(gathering of all things into one in Christ) is complete(in my view).

"He that overcomes will inherit all things and sit with me on My Father's throne". Paul says we are "seated in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus where all spiritual blessings" abide(Eph 2).

[Tony N]

I think prior to me giving my point of view on this matter of dispensationalism, or rather administrationalism, you should know I have worked for Concordant Publishing Concern for many many year and still do.

It is the Concern's understanding that the 12 apostles, according to Christ, will judge the 12 tribes of Israel on 12 thrones. They are earth-bound.
At the same time this is going on, the believers of the nations will be revealing God's love and grace and wisdom to the celestials. We of the nations are heaven-bound.

This in and of itself shows a distinct difference between the Circumcision believer and Uncircumcision believer. Even the naming of the two different believers is a major hint of difference.
P.S., I like to post in larger type because it is easier for me to read.

[Seth]

Circumcision is used in two ways in the Bible:

To describe the differences according to the flesh, and those according to the Spirit. This is why Paul mentioned his brothers, and would add "according to the flesh." But other times, he referred to the church as "brothers" and did not use the added term. The question is, what is God using to identify Israel?

Does the flesh matter within the church? I believe not. The gospel of the uncircumcision is the same message as the gospel of the circumcision. The only difference being that different people preached it to other different people.

There's no indication, though, that there is any differences between them with respect to their writings at all.

Gentiles (according to the flesh) have become members of the 12 tribes of Israel because Gentiles (according to the flesh) have had their uncircumcision regarded as circumcision by God.

God considers the Spirit filled Gentile according to the flesh to be a Jew.

And yet....

Galatians
21Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? 22For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. 23His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise.

24These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27For it is written:

"Be glad, barren woman, you who never bore a child; shout for joy and cry aloud, you who were never in labor; because more are the children of the desolate woman than of her who has a husband."e

28Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29At that time the son born according to the flesh persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30But what does Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son." 31Therefore, brothers and sisters, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

The identity of Israel is not a matter of the flesh but of TWO COVENANTS. We have TWO WOMEN who represent TWO COVENANTS. However only ONE WOMAN gave birth to Isaac, and therefore only ONE COVENANT contains the the seed of Isaac.

Who, then, is the seed of Hagar? The answer has to do with who is under what covenant. The Jews always traced their heritage through Isaac to Abraham. Paul is saying something revolutionary here that could NOT BE ACCEPTED by the Jews of his day. He was telling them, that unless they are under the new covenant, they are of a DIFFERENT SEED. Why? Because a Jew is not outward and according to he flesh, but is only a matter of circumcision of the heart by the Spirit. ANYONE not under the new covenant is not the seed of Isaac.

I believe Christians know that scripture well, but what about the wide reaching ramifications of it?

Romans 2
27 And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

If that is what a Jew is, then what constitutes a Gentile? No wonder Paul endured such beatings. Jesus Christ was a Jew according to the flesh. Anyone who believes in him his part of his body and therefore a Jew. Yet WITHIN that body there is no distinction between them.

What I understand from this is that God has chosen not to regard the flesh with respect to who is a member of the 12 tribes of Israel. Israel according to the flesh is beloved for the Father's sake, but in the sense that they will be saved eventually, not because the flesh has anything to do with the identity of Israel under the new covenant. And I see no reason to believe that God is going to go back and redefine the identity of Israel along flesh lines once again when a new eon comes.

[ed]

I think prior to me giving my point of view on this matter of dispensationalism, or rather administrationalism, you should know I have worked for Concordant Publishing Concern for many many year and still do.

It is the Concern's understanding that the 12 apostles, according to Christ, will judge the 12 tribes of Israel on 12 thrones. They are earth-bound.
At the same time this is going on, the believers of the nations will be revealing God's love and grace and wisdom to the celestials. We of the nations are heaven-bound.

Hi Tony N

I suspected you were with CPC, always enjoy your posts.

I ignored Revelation for many years, and am just lately starting to enjoy it from an idealist interpretive method.  Can you talk about the methods of interpretation a bit and how CPC might fit in with the various methods?   Off the top of your head as you are inspired to do so would be fine.  The four or five methods interest me because they greatly effects how the whole Bible is interpreted IMO, and greatly effects the doctrinal stance of the believer.  I'm learning a little bit here and there, and ask with no motive other then naive interest.

Thanks,
ed

[eaglesway]

Circumcision is used in two ways in the Bible:

To describe the differences according to the flesh, and those according to the Spirit. This is why Paul mentioned his brothers, and would add "according to the flesh." But other times, he referred to the church as "brothers" and did not use the added term. The question is, what is God using to identify Israel?

Does the flesh matter within the church? I believe not. The gospel of the uncircumcision is the same message as the gospel of the circumcision. The only difference being that different people preached it to other different people.

There's no indication, though, that there is any differences between them with respect to their writings at all.

Gentiles (according to the flesh) have become members of the 12 tribes of Israel because Gentiles (according to the flesh) have had their uncircumcision regarded as circumcision by God.

God considers the Spirit filled Gentile according to the flesh to be a Jew.

And yet....

Galatians
21Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? 22For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. 23His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise.

24These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27For it is written:

"Be glad, barren woman, you who never bore a child; shout for joy and cry aloud, you who were never in labor; because more are the children of the desolate woman than of her who has a husband."e

28Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29At that time the son born according to the flesh persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30But what does Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son." 31Therefore, brothers and sisters, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

The identity of Israel is not a matter of the flesh but of TWO COVENANTS. We have TWO WOMEN who represent TWO COVENANTS. However only ONE WOMAN gave birth to Isaac, and therefore only ONE COVENANT contains the the seed of Isaac.

Who, then, is the seed of Hagar? The answer has to do with who is under what covenant. The Jews always traced their heritage through Isaac to Abraham. Paul is saying something revolutionary here that could NOT BE ACCEPTED by the Jews of his day. He was telling them, that unless they are under the new covenant, they are of a DIFFERENT SEED. Why? Because a Jew is not outward and according to he flesh, but is only a matter of circumcision of the heart by the Spirit. ANYONE not under the new covenant is not the seed of Isaac.

I believe Christians know that scripture well, but what about the wide reaching ramifications of it?

Romans 2
27 And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

If that is what a Jew is, then what constitutes a Gentile? No wonder Paul endured such beatings. Jesus Christ was a Jew according to the flesh. Anyone who believes in him his part of his body and therefore a Jew. Yet WITHIN that body there is no distinction between them.

What I understand from this is that God has chosen not to regard the flesh with respect to who is a member of the 12 tribes of Israel. Israel according to the flesh is beloved for the Father's sake, but in the sense that they will be saved eventually, not because the flesh has anything to do with the identity of Israel under the new covenant. And I see no reason to believe that God is going to go back and redefine the identity of Israel along flesh lines once again when a new eon comes.

I agree with your post. Paul makes it clear(imo) that "Israel according to the flesh" is Hagar (word of promise sown in the flesh). Abraham did not trust God and bore a child of bondage. He says Sarah corresponds to Jeusalem, our mother, who is free(word of promise united with the spirit of faith).  Paul says that the error of Israel was they approached the covenant as if to establish their own righteousness(word of promise sown in the flesh), but the covenant to Israel cannot annul the covenant made 400 years earlier to Abraham- by faith while he was yet uncircumsized.

16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

The covenant is ratified in Christ. "If ANYMAN be in Christ Jesus he is a NEW CREATURE, Behold, OLD THINGS PASS AWAY- ALL THINGS become new."

When Peter fell into fraternizing with believers who were trying to re-instutute the law over the church, Paul corrected him, saying, essentially, "Why would you try to rebuild what Christ died to tear down- something which we could not live up to, something that is contrary to the new covenant in Christ."

To me, this is the gospel, one new man, one body, over which He is Head- the fulness of Him who fills all in all(Eph 1)

When you build an arch, you construct it from two sides upon frameworks and supports. When to reach the top, you set the capstone and all the frameworks and supports are torn down. The arch is supported by the capstone, which binds the two legs into one. Christ is our capstone, jew and Gentile. There is no need for further support.


22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman. 23 But the son by the bondwoman [r]was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise. 24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar. 25 Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother. 27 For it is written,

"Rejoice, barren woman who does not bear;
Break forth and shout, you who are not in labor;
For more numerous are the children of the desolate
Than of the one who has a husband."
28 And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29 But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. 30 But what does the Scripture say?

"Cast out the bondwoman and her son,
For the son of the bondwoman shall not be an heir with the son of the free woman."
31 So then, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman, but of the free woman.

[Tony N]

I think prior to me giving my point of view on this matter of dispensationalism, or rather administrationalism, you should know I have worked for Concordant Publishing Concern for many many year and still do.

It is the Concern's understanding that the 12 apostles, according to Christ, will judge the 12 tribes of Israel on 12 thrones. They are earth-bound.
At the same time this is going on, the believers of the nations will be revealing God's love and grace and wisdom to the celestials. We of the nations are heaven-bound.

Hi Tony N

I suspected you were with CPC, always enjoy your posts.

I ignored Revelation for many years, and am just lately starting to enjoy it from an idealist interpretive method.  Can you talk about the methods of interpretation a bit and how CPC might fit in with the various methods?   Off the top of your head as you are inspired to do so would be fine.  The four or five methods interest me because they greatly effects how the whole Bible is interpreted IMO, and greatly effects the doctrinal stance of the believer.  I'm learning a little bit here and there, and ask with no motive other then naive interest.

Thanks,
ed

Hi Ed,
Could  you tell me what you believe the four or five methods of interpretation are?

Jesus spoke quite a bit in warning His followers that they must be ready for His return or they would find themselves on the outside looking in. They had to remain faithful to the end or else. With us of the nations, who are under pure grace, not mixed with threats, it is quite a bit different:

1Th_5:10 Who died for our sakes, that, whether we may be watching or drowsing, we should be living at the same time together with Him."

The Circumcision believers must maintain a high degree of righteousness or else.
With us of the nations we are sealed till the day of deliverance:

"Eph 4:30 And do not be causing sorrow to the holy spirit of God by which you are sealed for the day of deliverance."

None of the 12 apostles nor the Jewish believers under them ever meet the Lord in the air. They are simply resurrected and stand on the land and go into the kingdom Christ will set up on earth.
With us of the nations, the dead in Christ (of the nations) rise first and then we, the living, together meet the Lord in the air.

Christ sets foot down on Mt. Zion on the earth to meet Israel.
Christ does not set foot on the earth to meet the believers of the nations. We meet Him in their air.

[ed]

Hi Ed,
Could  you tell me what you believe the four or five methods of interpretation are?

Short quotes from:
http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.5110361/k.5D09/Four_Views_of_Revelation.htm

The Idealist View

The first view of Revelation is the idealist view, or the spiritual view. This view uses the allegorical method to interpret the Book of Revelation. The allegorical approach to Revelation was introduced by ancient church father Origen (AD 185-254) and made prominent by Augustine (AD 354-420). According to this view, the events of Revelation are not tied to specific historical events.

The Preterist View

The second view is called the preterist view. Preter, which means "past," is derived from the Latin. There are two major views among preterists: full preterism and partial preterism. Both views believe that the prophecies of the Olivet discourse of Matthew 24 and Revelation were fulfilled in the first century with the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. Chapters 1-3 describe the conditions in the seven churches of Asia Minor prior to the Jewish war (AD 66-70). The remaining chapters of Revelation and Jesus' Olivet Discourse describe the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans.

The Historicist View

The third view is called the historicist approach. This view teaches that Revelation is a symbolic representation that presents the course of history from the apostle's life through the end of the age. The symbols in the apocalypse correspond to events in the history of Western Europe, including various popes, the Protestant Reformation, the French Revolution, and rulers such as Charlemagne. Most interpreters place the events of their day in the later chapters of Revelation.

The Futurist View

The fourth view is the futurist view. This view teaches that the events of the Olivet Discourse and Revelation chapters 4-22 will occur in the future. Futurist divide the book of Revelation into three sections as indicated in 1:19: "what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later." Chapter 1 describes the past ("what you have seen"), chapters 2-3 describe the present ("what is now"), and the rest of the book describes future events ("what will take place later").

Futurists apply a literal approach to interpreting Revelation. Chapters 4-19 refer to a period known as the seven-year tribulation (Dan. 9:27). During this time, God's judgments are actually poured out upon mankind as they are revealed in the seals, trumpets, and bowls. Chapter 13 describes a literal future world empire headed by a political and religious leader represented by the two beasts. Chapter 17 pictures a harlot who represents the church in apostasy. Chapter 19 refers to Christ's second coming and the battle of Armageddon followed by a literal thousand-year rule of Christ upon the earth in chapter 20. Chapters 21-22 are events that follow the millennium: the creation of a new heaven and a new earth and the arrival of the heavenly city upon the earth.

[Tony N]

Thank you Ed,
We take the view that John was caught away in spirit IN the Lord's day which is still future. Some translations improperly have it that John was in spirit ON the Lord's day causing one to think he was in spirit on a Sunday or Jewish Sabbath (Saturday).
Revelation is, as you know, filled with symbolism. We hold that those symbols represent real things, i.e., the lamb represents Christ etc. We don't believe all of Revelation is symbolic.

[ed]

Thank you Tony,

Like I said, I'm pretty new to the book of Revelation.  I've had dispensations in my mind for a long time, but really did not relate it to the book of Revelation.

Enjoying this thread.

ed

[Seth]

I agree with your post. Paul makes it clear(imo) that "Israel according to the flesh" is Hagar (word of promise sown in the flesh). Abraham did not trust God and bore a child of bondage. He says Sarah corresponds to Jeusalem, our mother, who is free(word of promise united with the spirit of faith).  Paul says that the error of Israel was they approached the covenant as if to establish their own righteousness(word of promise sown in the flesh), but the covenant to Israel cannot annul the covenant made 400 years earlier to Abraham- by faith while he was yet uncircumsized.

16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

:2thumbs:

Yes, the Spiritual reality reverses the physical reality. Gentiles (based on belief) become Jews that their uncircumcision is regarded as circumcision and Jews (based on unbelief) become Gentiles, as their circumcision is regarded as uncircumcision by God. Some people would see that sentence and wince at it, I suppose because the flesh is supposed to have some authority over who God himself reckons for Israel and reckons not.

Genesis 22:2
Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, whom you love--Isaac"

Your only son? What about Ishmael? There is no Ishmael. He literally existed, but he was not the son of the Promise, and therefore, it was as though he didn't. The lesson here - at least for me - is not that Ishmael did not literally exist. Not that God didn't love him, for he so loved the world. But with respect to the kingdom, the flesh is NOT CONSIDERED. The whole world, including most Christians still insist that it does. The flesh holds no weight. It does not factor in to who God counts as Israel, 12 tribes and all. There is only one lineage to Abraham, and that is through Christ.

The promise is unto the whole world though. It's not that God has abandoned Israel according to the flesh, for they were elected, and therefore they are beloved and will be saved. But the first shall be last and the last shall be first.

The manner by which they will be saved is through the true Israel, the true seed of Abraham, the true twelve tribes, which proceed forth from "thine only son." Because there is only ONE SON, there are NO divisions between Jewish believers and Gentile believers.

Paul gave up all identification as a Jew according to the flesh, and all the perceived benefits of that, in order to win Christ and become a Jew according to the circumcision by the heart by the spirit. If Paul was an unbeliever, he would be a Gentile according to the Spirit, which is the only reality that matters, not the flesh.

Matthew 21
43 "Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from YOU and given to a people, producing the fruit of it.

God has not created two different kingdoms, but has transferred it. He is not preserving two sons, with two different seeds, and two different gospels, and two different kingdoms, all applicable according to the flesh.

Abraham has only one son, Isaac. Everyone who believes is Abraham's seed through Isaac. Anyone who does not IS NOT.

The Kingdom is ONE.

[Tony N]

Seth,
Why do you think God is going to change the believers of the nations bodies to celestial bodies but the believers of the Jews maintain an earthly body when they are resurrected? Do you think it has to do with where believers of the nations are going?

[Tony N]

I agree with Seth.

1Co_1:24  But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

Hi joeteekay, Yes, the above is true. It proves that there are Jews and there are Greeks. Two different groups. And to those two groups God reveals to them that Christ is the power and wisdom of God.

Eph 4:4  There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5  One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Eph 4:6  One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

I am sure other scriptures also say this.

Paul wrote Ephesians only to the uncircumcision believers of the nations. I say this because Peter, James and John agreed with Paul this:

But, on the contrary, preceiving that I have been entrusted with the evangel of the Uncircumcision,
according as Peter of the Circumcision (for He Who operates in Peter for the apostleship of the Circumcision
operates in me also for the nations), and, knowing the grace which is being given to me, James and Cephas and John,
who are supposed to be pillars, give to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we, indeed, are to be for the nations,
yet they for the Circumcision-" (Galatians 2:7-9)

So the Ephesian verses you quote above are only for us of the nations. For us there is only one baptism, in spirit. For the Circumcision there are two baptisms: in water unto repentance and in spirit. For us of the nations there is just one faith, not two. We are not to mix two faiths.

The scripture they probably use to justify their position may be:


Gal_2:7  But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

At any rate, I find their version (CLV) valuable in my studies.

:2c:

Bingo!  :thumbsup:

[Seth]

Seth,
Why do you think God is going to change the believers of the nations bodies to celestial bodies but the believers of the Jews maintain an earthly body when they are resurrected? Do you think it has to do with where believers of the nations are going?

Are you referring to 1 Corinthians 15 where Paul compares the resurrection to different glories appearing in nature?

[Tony N]

Seth:
"There are bodies celestial as well as bodies terrestrial. But a different glory, indeed, is that of the celestial, yet a different that of the terrestrial, another glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars, for star is excelling star in glory." Thus also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is roused in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor; it is roused in glory. It is sown in infirmity; it is roused in power. It is sown a soulish body; it is roused a spiritual body. If there is a soulish body, there is a spiritual also. Thus it is written also, The first man, Adam, "became a living soul:the last Adam a vivifying Spirit." But not first the spiritual, but the soulish, thereupon the spiritual." The first man was out of the earth, soilish; the second Man is the Lord out of heaven." Such as the soilish one is, such are those also who are soilish, and such as the Celestial One, such are those also who are celestials." And according as we wear the image of the soilish, we should be wearing the image also of the Celestial." Now this I am averring, brethren, that flesh and blood is not able to enjoy an allotment in the kingdom of God, neither is corruption enjoying the allotment of incorruption." Lo! a secret to you am I telling! We all, indeed, shall not be put to repose, yet we all shall be changed, in an instant, in the twinkle of an eye, at the last trump. For He will be trumpeting, and the dead will be roused incorruptible, and we shall be changed." (1 Corinthians 15:40-52)

Why do you think God is going to give believers of the nations a celestial body but not for the Uncircumcision believers?

[Seth]

Where does Paul say that Jewish believers are to be excluded from that resurrection? I know you believe that, but I don't see anything there about the exclusion of Jewish believers.

Paul was a Jew. He certainly included himself.

[Tony N]

Why not just go to Concordant.org and read our material on this? It's free.

[Seth]

Why not just go to Concordant.org and read our material on this? It's free.

You didn't answer my question.