Preterism-phony as a Ford Corvette

[3 Resurrections]

It is not "period" because there are two resurrection events to take place relative to the millennium in the text.

That's not two resurrections mentioned in that Rev. 20:4-6 text, Douggg. It's only one event there being spoken of twice.

 

[parousia70]

If one is going to take this literally, then the earth will be leveled, no more mountains and no more ocean, but flat and level.

If one is going to take this literally, then one must conclude this has already happened several times, as testified in 2 Samuel 22 and In Judges 5, and Nahum 1, and Isaiah 34, to name a few.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

If you are insistent on it happening during “this generation”, then okay.

I thought you, as a preterist, insisted on that. Don't preterists typically believe that everything Jesus talked about before Matthew 24:34 was all fulfilled by 70 AD?

What isn’t said is that all of the elect will be gathered. Or for what purpose. The elect could have been gathered for their safety during the tribulation.

Or maybe we could just interpret scripture with scripture and recognize that He was talking about the same gathering of the elect that Paul wrote about in 1 Thess 4:14-17 which indicates that the gathering of the elect is a one time event that will occur at the future second coming of Christ. And it will occur at the time when all of the dead in Christ are resurrected. No one was resurrected in 70 AD.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

That "no one knows" statement was a present tense ignorance; true at the time Christ uttered that phrase. However, this was not an all-time-and-forever limitation on that information, since John's Revelation passed down (from the Father - to Christ - to John - to the servants of God in those days) the information telling them of the "at hand" return of Christ in their days. Peter's epistle written around AD 65 was written after John's Revelation, which was written in late AD 59 up to early AD 60. What John's Revelation had revealed earlier was then known by Peter, when 1 Peter 4:7 said "the end of all things is at hand". This was a repetition of John's Revelation, which said that the future revealed prophecies he wrote down were then "at hand" (Rev. 1:3, and Rev. 22:10).

That perspective would require believing that everything written in the book of Revelation has already been fulfilled, which is nonsense.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The first resurrection will be for the trib saints who will be saved after the rapture occurs & are killed by the antichrist's beast's forces.

I agree.

How is that the FIRST resurrection when you believe a mass resurrection of the dead in Christ will have already occurred before that?

 

[Douggg]

How is that the FIRST resurrection when you believe a mass resurrection of the dead in Christ will have already occurred before that?

Analogy: January 1, 2022 will be the first day of the year.

First resurrection in Revelation 20 is relative to the millennium.

_________________________________________________________

The First resurrection in Revelation 20 does not include a translation of the living like in the rapture/resurrection event that will have taken place earlier, if that is what you are alluding to.

 

[3 Resurrections]

That perspective would require believing that everything written in the book of Revelation has already been fulfilled, which is nonsense.

Everything that was written down and that was "AT HAND" actually WAS fulfilled, according to how God Himself defines an "at hand" prophecy in Ezekiel 12:21-28.

Those prophecies which were NOT written down (as in what the seven thunders uttered in Revelation 10:4) was "sealed up" and reserved for later times and later generations, such as ours and our future. Those reserved, unwritten prophecies were NOT included in the "AT HAND" description, and thus were NOT fulfilled at that time.

 

[Douggg]

That's not two resurrections mentioned in that Rev. 20:4-6 text, Douggg. It's only one event there being spoken of twice.

No, it is not one event spoken twice, because the first resurrection in Revelation 20:4-6 is for the martyred great tribulation saints.

The rest of the dead will be resurrected after the millennium is over in v12-13, and stand before God in the Great White Throne Judgment.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

That "remnant of the dead" coming to life again in Revelation 20:5-6 is bluntly pronounced to be "The First Resurrection". John didn't seem to think that there needed to be much more explanation that that. "This is the first resurrection", he said. Period. I can just see the original readers of Revelation slapping their forehead saying, "Oh yeah, now we get it, John. That makes sense. This "First resurrection" is that group of resurrected folks that came walking into Jerusalem that we saw on the same day that Jesus arose from the dead. We remember that for sure."

You're not recognizing that Revelation 20:5 contains a parenthetical statement. The NIV translation even puts parentheses there so that people can realize that.

Revelation 20:4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.

What John was doing in verse 5 was basically saying "By the way, the rest of the dead don't come to life until after the thousands years end". It's just a parenthetical note before he proceeds to continue talking about the ones he had mentioned in verse 4. For Bible authors to make parenthetical statements like that is nothing new. Daniel 7:12 is another example of this.

So, those who have part in the first resurrection are those who "had been given authority to judge" and "the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus". The rest of the dead are everyone else who is dead besides those mentioned in verse 4. I understand "the rest of the dead" to be referring to unbelievers since I believe the first resurrection refers to Christ's resurrection (Acts 26:23, 1 Cor 15:20, Col 1:18, Rev 1:5) and all believers have part in His resurrection.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Everything that was written down and that was "AT HAND" actually WAS fulfilled, according to how God Himself defines an "at hand" prophecy in Ezekiel 12:21-28.

Those prophecies which were NOT written down (as in what the seven thunders uttered in Revelation 10:4) was "sealed up" and reserved for later times and later generations, such as ours and our future. Those reserved, unwritten prophecies were NOT included in the "AT HAND" description, and thus were NOT fulfilled at that time.

While I don't believe that the "thousand years" is a literal thousand years, I also don't believe it can represent a short period of time. So, how could the entire time period represented by the thousand years all be "at hand" in terms of the entire thousand years happening soon? That makes no sense.

You are being far too literal here in your understanding of what "at hand" means. It does not mean that everything written was "at hand" and was going to happen soon as you believe. To be "at hand" means those things were continually approaching and certain to occur regardless of how long it might take. Christ has clearly not yet returned, no one besides Christ has yet been resurrected unto bodily immortality, and the day of judgment and the ushering in of the new heavens and new earth have all clearly not yet happened.

 

[3 Resurrections]

No, it is not one event spoken twice, because the first resurrection in Revelation 20:4-6 is for the martyred great tribulation saints.

John said "THIS is the First resurrection", pointing in direct reference to the "remnant of the dead" he had just mentioned, who came to life again when the millennium had ended. In AD 33 with Christ's "First-fruits" resurrection.

There is no "Great Tribulation" mentioned in Revelation 20:4-6.

And not all those "souls" mentioned in that Rev. 20:4-6 text were of martyred saints. According to the language he used, John saw some martyred souls, and he also saw those who had not given homage to the Sea Beast. John makes no mention of their being "beheaded" or martyred for their stand against the Sea Beast. They could have died a natural death. Just like the prophet Daniel, who never gave homage to the Babylonian phase of the Sea Beast in Nebuchadnezzar's days. Neither did his three friends. Yet none of these were martyred.

 

[3 Resurrections]

You're not recognizing that Revelation 20:5 contains a parenthetical statement. The NIV translation even puts parentheses there so that people can realize that.

Yes, I'm well aware of that. Some people even take that parenthetical statement out completely, considering it a "variant" reading that should not have been included. Actually, it doesn't change the meaning of the text, with or without it.

And those who were "sitting on thrones" in Rev. 20:4, having been given authority to judge, were the twelve disciples who Christ promised in Matthew 19:28 would be seated on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel after His regeneration when He arose, ascended, and sat on the throne of His glory. Their "judging" the twelve tribes of Israel on those 12 thrones was the 12 apostles supervising the setup of the early church under Christ's doctrines, and settling practical matters such as the care of widows, laying hands on and sending out evangelists, deciding the circumcision question, etc.

 

[Douggg]

John said "THIS is the First resurrection", pointing in direct reference to the "remnant of the dead" he had just mentioned, who came to life again when the millennium had ended. In AD 33 with Christ's "First-fruits" resurrection.

No,the first resurrection is not referring to the rest of the dead, because they do not come back to life after the millennium is over in v12-13.

There is no "Great Tribulation" mentioned in Revelation 20:4-6.

The great tribulation begins with the abomination of desolation, the a.o.d.

The great tribulation is when worship of the beast, worship of the image of the beast (the a.o.d.), and mark must be taken. Which those things are in verse 4.

Revelation 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:

Revelaton 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

So they were martyred for the testimony of the word of God, and witness of Jesus....

And had not worshiped the beast, neither his image (the a.o.d.), not taken the mark of the beast.... all of those things to happen during the great tribulation.

 

[3 Resurrections]

While I don't believe that the "thousand years" is a literal thousand years, I also don't believe it can represent a short period of time. So, how could the entire time period represented by the thousand years all be "at hand" in terms of the entire thousand years happening soon? That makes no sense.

The literal thousand years was history at the time John was writing. As you remember, John was told to "write the things which thou HAST seen", (which would have included the ending of the millennium in AD 33) as well as the things that ARE presently taking place as John was writing, and the things which were ABOUT TO TAKE PLACE after those things.

You may think I am being "far too literal" as to when I understand an "AT HAND" prophecy to be fulfilled, but not by God's own definition of how HE defines an "at hand" prophecy in Ezekiel 12:21-28. He was very precise in explaining how "at hand" prophecies were to be interpreted. I'm just trying to follow His dictionary.

To be "at hand" means those things were continually approaching and certain to occur regardless of how long it might take.

No, not at all. "AT HAND" means the prophecy will not only be spoken by God, but in the same time frame, it will also be "performed in your days", to the ones receiving that prophecy originally. "AT HAND" prophecies are NOT "prolonged" into "times that are far off". For you to say this means "continually approaching" is to evade God's time limits that He gives you.

Christ has clearly not yet returned, no one besides Christ has yet been resurrected unto bodily immortality, and the day of judgment and the ushering in of the new heavens and new earth have all clearly not yet happened.

If Christ said in Luke 21:36 that He included His second coming return among "...ALL these things that are about to come to pass", why would you want to contradict that?

And the stipulated conditions in the New Heavens and New Earth are not quite the sinless utopia you envision, since Isaiah 65:17-25 includes some very particular things that could not possibly be present in the afterlife for believers. Namely, the birth of children, the presence of sinners, death still occurring for them, praying to God, which would not be necessary if we were face to face with Him, etc....

 

[Timtofly]

True that. I have argued that point myself more than once. But the context is that this "gathering" was going to be not only from all points of the compass, but "from one end of the heavens to the other" as well.

"And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens." (Mark 13:27). "
"And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other." (Matthew 24:31).

No ordinary earthly messengers are capable of that range of operation. No earthly messenger could have gathered Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the long-dead prophets included in this "gathering". This must have been done by celestial messengers, and they collected the physical matter that once composed the bodies of all those saints; re-uniting them with their spirits, and gathering them all together to Christ, who presented them faultless before the presence of God's glory with exceeding joy. "Behold! I and the children whom thou hast given me!" Christ triumphantly proclaimed on that occasion.

One day in the future, we too will have the same kind of joyous presentation before God's presence at the last resurrection.

What prophecy declares Israel will stop being a nation in 70AD?

 

[Timtofly]

There cannot be two "First" resurrection events. According to II Cor. 15:23, in consecutive order, those would be the first resurrection of Christ and the Matthew 27 saints raised by Him in AD 33, and "afterward" the second resurrection that took place at His coming. You know, the resurrection that Paul told Felix, Timothy, and those on Mars Hill was "about to" take place.

"And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there is about to be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust...And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgement about to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee." (Acts 24:15,25).

"I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is about to judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;" (II Timothy 4:1).

"And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he is about to 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." (Acts 17:30-31).

All three of these texts refer to the second resurrection event that was soon going to take place in that first-century generation.

Of course there can be billions of first resurrections. First is a physical resurrection. Christ was not the only physical resurrection. Paradise is currently full of souls in physical permanent incorruptible bodies.

You only acknowledge 3 resurrections. Must be a lucky two other humans.

 

[Timtofly]

Okay, the Matthew 24:31 text about the angels "gathering" the elect from one end of the heavens to the other is a repetition of the "wheat and tares" parable event in Matthew 13:24-31, as explained to the disciples by Christ in Matthew 13:37-43. The celestial angels were going to have a two-fold task on that occasion in AD 70. First, to gather the tares into bundles to be burned, and then to gather the wheat into God's "barn".

If you are certain that this is earthly messengers "gathering" the saints together in some sense other than the physical resurrection of the saints' dead bodies, then I would pose the following question to you: How did those earthly messengers also gather together the "tares" first into bundles to be burned, even before they gathered the "wheat"? Have you a symbolic meaning attached to the earthly messengers being able to gather the unrighteous "tares" together?

Those physical bodies were called out of the 4 corners of Paradise. There were tares in Paradise?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Analogy: January 1, 2022 will be the first day of the year.

First resurrection in Revelation 20 is relative to the millennium.

A first resurrection implies a second. When would the second resurrection of the millennium occur?

The First resurrection in Revelation 20 does not include a translation of the living like in the rapture/resurrection event that will have taken place earlier, if that is what you are alluding to.

That explanation makes no sense at all. Why are you bringing the living into this when we're talking about the resurrection of the dead? Obviously, only the dead would be bodily resurrected. I'm referring to passages like 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17.

You have the first resurrection occurring AFTER the resurrection of the dead in Christ described in passages like 1 Thess 4:13-17 and 1 Corinthians 15:22-23, which makes no sense. In that case the first resurrection would actually be the second resurrection if the first resurrection was meant to refer to a mass bodily resurrection of the dead.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The great tribulation begins with the abomination of desolation, the a.o.d

Yes, indeed it did. Luke 21:20 interpreted that "abomination of desolation" as being "Jerusalem surrounded by armies", which happened in AD 66 with the Zealot armies aligned against Gallus' Roman army.

But the imposed "mark of the Beast" was not being required once the "Great Tribulation" had begun in AD 66. Because the revived Judean Scarlet Beast arose to power in Israel at that time - the independent kingdom of Israel launched by the Zealot rebellion - the "apostasia", which can also be a civil revolt. The Zealots did not enforce that mark of the Beast upon their people, giving homage to the Roman phase of the Sea Beast. They wanted nothing to do with Rome at all, and sought to murder those who were Roman sympathizers.

The great tribulation is when worship of the beast, worship of the image of the beast (the a.o.d.), and mark must be taken. Which those things are in verse 4.

No, scripture never connects the "Great Tribulation" with the requirement of homage given to the Sea Beast, nor to the time period when the mark was required. The "Great Tribulation" is equated with the "Days of Vengeance" which came upon Israel in judgment for their betrayal and murder of Christ.

The inclusive years when the "mark of the Beast" was required of those dwelling in the land of Israel was from 19 BC until AD 66. No sooner, and no later than that, although the Sea Beast character itself had existed long before then (beginning in 607 BC).

 

[3 Resurrections]

Those physical bodies were called out of the 4 corners of Paradise. There were tares in Paradise?

Of course not. Scripture was speaking of the atmospheric heavens. Wherever the molecules of the disintegrated dead bodies of any believer were scattered, even if the dust of their dead bodies were spread throughout the skies, the bodies of the believers were to be gathered and together made immortal and incorruptible in the bodily resurrection to life. Not so for the bodies of the wicked dead who were to perish.