who are the people

[kenrch]

Rev 7:4 And I heard the number of them that were sealed, a hundred and forty and four thousand, sealed out of every “tribe” of the children of Israel:

Sounds like Israelites to me. Every “TRIBE” as far as I know My tribes (LOL) were not of any “tribe” of Israel. How about yours?

[NickHassan]

Hi kenrch,
I agree. And the same group are shown in Rev 14, the Israelite firstfruits.

“1And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

2And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:

3And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.

4These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

5And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God. “

psv1 differs in different translations from KJV shown.

NASB
” 1Then I looked, and behold, the Lamb was standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having HIS NAME AND the name of His Father written on their foreheads.”

NIV
” 1Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads.”

ESV
“1Then I looked, and behold, on Mount Zion stood the Lamb, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads.”

? manuscript differences?

[kenrch]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 31 2006,01:52)

Hi kenrch, I agree. And the same group are shown in Rev 14, the Israelite firstfruits. “1And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. 2And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: 3And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. 4These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. 5And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God. “ psv1 differs in different translations from KJV shown. NASB ” 1Then I looked, and behold, the Lamb was standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having HIS NAME AND the name of His Father written on their foreheads.” NIV ” 1Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads.” ESV “1Then I looked, and behold, on Mount Zion stood the Lamb, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads.” ? manuscript differences?

Hi Nick,

So aren't these people sort of special say …saints?

[david]

Quote

Are not all invited? Does not God want all to be saved?

–Nick

Yes, Nick, God does want all to be saved. But what does that have to do with the “many” (not “all”) whom he invited to be rulers in the kingdom of God?

As you say:
Hi David,
“MATTHEW 22:14
““For there are MANY invited, but few chosen.””

Chosen for what I guess would be the question. “Many” were not invited to experience salvation, but rather, as you say “All,” have that opportunity available to them. So who does the “many” refer to?

I believe it refers to the many who will rule with Christ–the chosen ones.

david

[NickHassan]

Hi david,
I do not see “rulers” written in the scripture quoted. Do we need to read between the lines again?
You say
“Yes, Nick, God does want all to be saved.  But what does that have to do with the “many” (not “all”)  whom he invited to be rulers in the kingdom of God?

“MATTHEW 22:14
““For there are MANY invited, but few chosen.””

[david]

Quote

I do not see “rulers” written in the scripture quoted. Do we need to read between the lines again?

And nor do I see that it says “all” were invited as you claim.

How odd.

You'll notice in the scripture proceeding that verse:

Quote

22 In further reply Jesus again spoke to them with illustrations, saying: 2 “The kingdom of the heavens has become like a man, a king, that made a marriage feast for his son. 3 And he sent forth his slaves to call those invited to the marriage feast, but they were unwilling to come. 4 Again he sent forth other slaves, saying, ‘Tell those invited: “Look! I have prepared my dinner, my bulls and fattened animals are slaughtered, and all things are ready. Come to the marriage feast.”’ 5 But unconcerned they went off, one to his own field, another to his commercial business; 6 but the rest, laying hold of his slaves, treated them insolently and killed them. 7 “But the king grew wrathful, and sent his armies and destroyed those murderers and burned their city. 8 Then he said to his slaves, ‘The marriage feast indeed is ready, but those invited were not worthy. 9 Therefore go to the roads leading out of the city, and anyone YOU find invite to the marriage feast.’ 10 Accordingly those slaves went out to the roads and gathered together all they found, both wicked and good; and the room for the wedding ceremonies was filled with those reclining at the table. 11 “When the king came in to inspect the guests he caught sight there of a man not clothed with a marriage garment. 12 So he said to him, ‘Fellow, how did you get in here not having on a marriage garment?’ He was rendered speechless. 13 Then the king said to his servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot and throw him out into the darkness outside. There is where [his] weeping and the gnashing of [his] teeth will be.’

that it speaks of certain ones invited. But they were unwilling to come, it says. So, Nick, not everyone was actually invited. Some were invited. They were unwilling to come. Infact, they were “unworthy.” So they went and invited different people.
The first group was fleshly Israel. But they were found unworthy, and as the scripture says, the kingdom would be taken from them and given to a nation producing it's fruit.
MATTHEW 21:43
“This is why I say to YOU, The kingdom of God will be taken from YOU and be given to a nation producing its fruits.”

That second nation, the “Israel of God” are the second group invited.

Before you asked: “Are not all invited?”
What does the scripture say?

dave

[NickHassan]

Hi david,
1Tim 2
“3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”

God is not the obstacle for salvation for anyone but men refuse to hear.

[david]

Quote

Hi david, 1Tim 2 “3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”

Where Oh where did I say that God doesn't want all men to be saved? WHERE? Didn't I in fact say:

Quote

Yes, Nick, God does want all to be saved. But what does that have to do with the “many” (not “all”) whom he invited to be rulers in the kingdom of God?

I did.
It seems you like to shift the conversation when things go badly for you and try to misrepresent what the other person is saying. This isn't a holy tactic. It's deceptive.

And you are clearly guilty of doing what you accuse me of: “Reading between the lines.” How shameful for you to accuse me of what you yourself are doing at the same time.

Do people actually fall for these things?

david

(This post may seem harsh, but you are not playing fair. I feel you often do this.)

[kenrch]

Everyone can't be kings and priests. A king has to have subjects thus “People of the saints”. Does that mean that the subjects are not part of the kingdom? Are the people of the saints in the New Kingdom saved? They would have to be; wouldn't they?

[kenrch]

Everyone can't be kings and priests. A king has to have subjects thus “People of the saints”. Does that mean that the subjects are not part of the kingdom? Are the people of the saints in the New Kingdom saved? They would have to be; wouldn't they?

[kenrch]

Everyone can't be kings and priests. A king has to have subjects thus “People of the saints”. Does that mean that the subjects are not part of the kingdom? Are the people of the saints in the New Kingdom saved? They would have to be; wouldn't they?

[david]

Quote

Everyone can't be kings and priests. A king has to have subjects thus “People of the saints”. Does that mean that the subjects are not part of the kingdom? Are the people of the saints in the New Kingdom saved? They would have to be; wouldn't they?

–Kenrch.

Right. Everyone isn't kings or priests. That would make no sense at all. Are the subjects part of the kingdom? If the kingdom is a government, they aren't really in that government. All the others will benefit by the governemnt and are under the kingdom rule, but not really a part of it, not in it. They aren't the ones who inherit it, or are “given” it.

[kenrch]

Quote (david @ Oct. 31 2006,19:45)

Quote Everyone can't be kings and priests.  A king has to have subjects thus “People of the saints”.  Does that mean that the subjects are not part of the kingdom?  Are the people of the saints in the New Kingdom saved?  They would have to be; wouldn't they? –Kenrch. Right.  Everyone isn't kings or priests.  That would make no sense at all.  Are the subjects part of the kingdom?  If the kingdom is a government, they aren't really in that government.  All the others will benefit by the governemnt and are under the kingdom rule, but not really a part of it, not in it.  They aren't the ones who inherit it, or are “given” it.

David,

So I'm an American but not of America?  Won't we all be God's “New Creation” children of God?  Aren't we waiting for our adoption.

Rom 8:15  For ye received not the spirit of bondage again unto fear; but ye received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
Rom 8:16  The Spirit himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God:
Rom 8:23  And not only so, but ourselves also, who have the first-fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for our adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.

That's me one of God's children.  Body soul and the Spirit.  How else is God going to BE ALL IN ALL?

[david]

Quote

So I'm an American but not of America?

Kenrch. You are an american. But America isn't a government. It has a government, just as the earth will have a new government (2 pet 3:13)
And we're speaking of your countries government, those who rule, and not of just your country.

U.S.A–has a government, made up of those who rule for the benefit of the rest.
God's kingdom is a government that rules over the earth for the benefit of it's subjects. Not everyone need make up that kingdom, as not everyone is a member of your government in Washington.

Quote

Everyone can't be kings and priests. A king has to have subjects thus “People of the saints”. Does that mean that the subjects are not part of the kingdom?

Kenrch, are you part of your government?

[kenrch]

Quote (david @ Nov. 03 2006,06:49)

Quote So I'm an American but not of America?   Kenrch. You are an american.  But America isn't a government.  It has a government, just as the earth will have a new government (2 pet 3:13) And we're speaking of your countries government, those who rule, and not of just your country. U.S.A–has a government, made up of those who rule for the benefit of the rest. God's kingdom is a government that rules over the earth for the benefit of it's subjects.  Not everyone need make up that kingdom, as not everyone is a member of your government in Washington. Quote Everyone can't be kings and priests.  A king has to have subjects thus “People of the saints”.  Does that mean that the subjects are not part of the kingdom? Kenrch, are you part of your government?

Dave,

Are you one of God's children? Are you one of His sons? Are you part of the new creation? Will God be all in all?

ALL IN ALL! The government of the United States is NOT IN me. We are all God's children some will be greater than others but we are still His children, part of the new creation of God. God calls His created angels sons, doesn't He?

There is the difference between the JWs and Christianity. I'm not part of a “slave class” as the JWs teach. I may not be a king or priest but I'm still His child! How about you?

[david]

[/QUOTE] The government of the United States is NOT IN me.

And neither is the kingdom of God.

It's a government.

And I never said it was “in” you. And when Jesus said the the kingdom was in the midst or “in” as some translators render it, the pharisees and scribes, he meant that the king of that kingdom was in their midst, as he was that king. He was speaking to ones he condemned to Gehenna Kenrch. The kingodm wasn't in their hearts, if that's what you're saying.

Kenrch, you never answered my question: are you part of your government?

[kenrch]

Quote (david @ Nov. 04 2006,03:30)

[/QUOTE] The government of the United States is NOT IN me. And neither is the kingdom of God. It's a government. And I never said it was “in” you.  And when Jesus said the the kingdom was in the midst or “in” as some translators render it, the pharisees and scribes, he meant that the king of that kingdom was in their midst, as he was that king.  He was speaking to ones he condemned to Gehenna Kenrch.  The kingodm wasn't in their hearts, if that's what you're saying. Kenrch, you never answered my question: are you part of your government?

I'm not part of a wordly government.

But what about God's government? When scripture says God will be all in all. Does that mean in just the saints? God will be in everyone, All in All!

God will be all in all David. This worldly government is not in me but God's government already is.

Do you understand what I'm saying? There is a extreme difference between God's government and a worldly government. Jesus said that the meek will inherit the earth. Do you think that only the saints are meek? We have to be meek or humble just to accept Christ.

The 144 thousand will RUN the government. We are the government. We are the kingdom. Without subjects what would a king be over?

You should not let anyone make light of your salvation. Jesus died for us as well as the saints.

[942767]

Hi everyone:

The KJV translates Daniel 7:27, “And the Kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the Kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the PEOPLE OF THE SAINTS OF THE MOST HIGH, whose Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him”.

YLT translates this same verse, “And the Kingdom, and the dominion, even the greatness of the Kingdom under the whole heavens, is given to the people–the saints of the Most High, His Kingdom (is)a Kingdom age-during, and all dominions do serve and obey Him”.

The NIV translates the verse, “Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be handed over to the saints, the people of the Most High.  His kingdom will be and everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him”.

I believe that the latter two translations are correct.  The Kingdom will be delivered to all of the saints at the event that is commonly called the rapture and not the people of the saints. (1 Thes. 4:15-17) Herein lies the confusion.

Also, the latter two translations of verse 7:27 is consistent with verses 7:18 and 7:22.

[kenrch]

Quote (942767 @ Nov. 05 2006,14:53)

Hi everyone: The KJV translates Daniel 7:27, “And the Kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the Kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the PEOPLE OF THE SAINTS OF THE MOST HIGH, whose Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him”. YLT translates this same verse, “And the Kingdom, and the dominion, even the greatness of the Kingdom under the whole heavens, is given to the people–the saints of the Most High, His Kingdom (is)a Kingdom age-during, and all dominions do serve and obey Him”. The NIV translates the verse, “Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be handed over to the saints, the people of the Most High.  His kingdom will be and everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him”. I believe that the latter two translations are correct.  The Kingdom will be delivered to all of the saints at the event that is commonly called the rapture and not the people of the saints. (1 Thes. 4:15-17) Herein lies the confusion. Also, the latter two translations of verse 7:27 is consistent with verses 7:18 and 7:22.

Ok so back to the question who are the “people of the saints”?
As far as translation it's time like these when I stick with the KJV. Would you say that the people at Corinth were people of the saints? Would you say the whole congression were saints?

[942767]

Hi Krench:

I also feel that the KJV is over-all the best translation, but on occasion such as this one, I believe that this is a mis-translation.  I am not a Greek scholar, and so, I have to rely on the english translations that those who do know Greek have given us.  The saints are the whole body of Christ.  That is my view.

I have found that Young's Literal Translation is reliable.

[Author]

Posts