post-Trib, Pre-mill RAPTURE

[Jamdoc]

Write this line a dozen times David, then you're allowed out of school.

"All Preterists are Amil: Not all Amils are Preterist!" ​

All amills require partial preterism however.

 

[Timtofly]

Not according to scripture.

1 Cor 15
20 But the fact is, Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21 For since by a man death came, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, 24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to our God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death

35 But someone will say, “How are the dead raised? And with what kind of body do they come?” 36 You fool! That which you sow does not come to life unless it dies; 37 and that which you sow, you do not sow the body which is to be, but a bare grain, perhaps of wheat or of something else....
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; ... 49 Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly.
... 51 Behold, I am telling you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 But when this perishable puts on the imperishable, and this mortal puts on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written: “Death has been swallowed up in victory. 55 Where, O Death, is your victory? Where, O Death, is your sting?”

Christ the firstfruits. That is plural. Many firstfruits already resurrected. The living cannot prevent them from this resurrection.

 

[Timtofly]

No, the firstfruits are not the "OT saints at the cross". Christ Himself is the firstfruits. That is what you're missing.

This is from your preferred English translation, the Complete Jewish Bible:

1 Corinthians 15:20 But the fact is that the Messiah has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have died. 21 For since death came through a man, also the resurrection of the dead has come through a man. 22 For just as in connection with Adam all die, so in connection with the Messiah all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: the Messiah is the firstfruits; then those who belong to the Messiah, at the time of his coming;

Read verse 20 carefully. It says the Messiah has been raised from the dead and is the firstfruits of those who have died. It doesn't say "those who have died" are the firstfruits, it says Christ was the firstfruits of those who have died. Also, look at verse 23. It very specifically says "the Messaiah is the firstfruits". It can't be any more clear than that. So, you need to read scripture more carefully if want to interpret it correctly.

For Paul to say that Christ Himself is the firstfruits simply means that Christ was the first to rise from the dead, which is exactly what is stated in Acts 26:23. And Him being called "the firstborn of the dead" in verses like Colossians 1:18 and Revelation 1:5 means the same thing. And, by implication, we can conclude that he meant that Christ was the first to rise from the dead unto bodily immortality.

All you are saying is that the OT believers are not in Christ and thus cannot be resurrected.

I am saying they are in Christ and resurrected with Christ.

Paul claims they were led out of captivity and no longer confined to Abraham's bosom.

Paradise is the physical Garden with physical humans in permanent incorruptible physical bodies. 2 Corinthians 5.

 

[Timtofly]

We cannot progress until the future tense of "rule" is discussed because it proves a rule over people after the events of the second coming.

I agree, but those nations are resurrected in Revelation 20:4. They live because of a resurrection, not because they "survived".

 

[Timtofly]

Write this line a dozen times David, then you're allowed out of school.

"All Preterists are Amil: Not all Amils are Preterist!" ​

Does that mean all historist are amil unless they are post mill?

 

[ewq1938]

I agree, but those nations are resurrected in Revelation 20:4.

No, only the beheaded saints are the ones mentioned as resurrecting in verse 4. The unsaved dead do not resurrect until the GWTJ.

The nations ruled over by the rod of iron are the living unsaved who were spared death to be ruled over.

 

[BobRyan]

Christ the firstfruits. That is plural. Many firstfruits already resurrected. The living cannot prevent them from this resurrection.

If you want to toss in a handful of 'first fruits' - but that leaves all of 1 Cor 15 for the resurrection of all the saints at the 2nd coming as we saw here..

Not according to scripture.

1 Cor 15
20 But the fact is, Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21 For since by a man death came, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, 24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to our God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death

35 But someone will say, “How are the dead raised? And with what kind of body do they come?” 36 You fool! That which you sow does not come to life unless it dies; 37 and that which you sow, you do not sow the body which is to be, but a bare grain, perhaps of wheat or of something else....
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; ... 49 Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly.
... 51 Behold, I am telling you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 But when this perishable puts on the imperishable, and this mortal puts on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written: “Death has been swallowed up in victory. 55 Where, O Death, is your victory? Where, O Death, is your sting?”

 

[Timtofly]

No, only the beheaded saints are the ones mentioned as resurrecting in verse 4. The unsaved dead do not resurrect until the GWTJ.

The nations ruled over by the rod of iron are the living unsaved who were spared death to be ruled over.

You think all the beheaded are from just one nation? Those beheaded will represent many nations. Not sure why you think only one nation would be willing to reject Satan?

 

[Timtofly]

If you want to toss in a handful of 'first fruits' - but that leaves all of 1 Cor 15 for the resurrection of all the saints at the 2nd coming as we saw here..

Only a handful of OT believers? You have some criteria to separate the saved into different types of people able to be resurrected?

So to be absent from the body and present with the Lord means to wait for 1900 years?

 

[ewq1938]

You think all the beheaded are from just one nation?

No, nor did I say anything of the sort.

Those beheaded will represent many nations.

The text does not address their nationalities.

Not sure why you think only one nation would be willing to reject Satan?

Again, I said nothing of the sort.

 

[Timtofly]

No, nor did I say anything of the sort.



The text does not address their nationalities.



Again, I said nothing of the sort.

Then some from every nation will be resurrected. The nations will be populated on earth with resurrected physical bodies.

 

[ewq1938]

Then some from every nation will be resurrected.

It does not say what nations the beheaded saints come from.

The nations will be populated on earth with resurrected physical bodies.

No. The nations of the thousand years are unsaved mortals who had not died and thus had no resurrection.

The first resurrection is when all the dead in Christ resurrect. They will rule over unsaved mortal people of various nations. The people of those nations during the thousand years did not yet experience a death so no resurrection is related to them during that time. They have to die first before they can have a resurrection.

The only other resurrection is at the GWTJ when all the unsaved dead are resurrected.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Only after you deal with the part of my post you failed to comment on:

All mankind is not killed. Revelation 19 actually contains the evidence that some are left alive to be ruled over:

Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite (Aorist tense verb with PRESENT tense meaning) the nations: and he shall rule (FUTURE tense verb) them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth (PRESENT tense verb) the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.


Here rule/poimaino is in the FUTURE tense meaning it will happen at some point AFTER the second coming and battle of Armageddon while treadeth/pateo is written in the PRESENT tense meaning it is happening during this second coming. The treading and smiting are happening at Armageddon but not the ruling which proves mortals will be alive after Armageddon is over. This proves the Premill position because indeed there is a future rule of people who were not slain during the second coming that Christ and his saints will rule over.


We cannot progress until the future tense of "rule" is discussed because it proves a rule over people after the events of the second coming.

Yes, it's future tense as of the time the book of Revelation was written. All of Revelation 19:15 is future tense to the time that the book was written. How can you say that Him smiting the nations and treading them in the winepress of God's wrath is present tense? That's nonsense. He clearly has not yet struck down the nations or tread them in the winepress of God's wrath.

You could have made it easy on yourself by looking at the Old Testament passage that it's based on in order to understand what "ruling" with a rod of iron means.

Psalm 2:8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. 9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

Whether you want to accept it or not, ruling in this case has to do with Him breaking/destroying His enemies. How can you think that Him breaking them with a rod of iron has anything to do with Him ruling over them the way an earthly king rules over an earthly kingdom? The heathen will be given to Him as His possession to do with as He pleases and it couldn't be more clear that He will destroy them which is what Revelation 19:15 very clearly portrays Him doing.

Why would He even want to rule over those who have rejected Him, anyway? If he's going to rule over them then why is there no hint of that in any second coming passages? Instead, they talk about Him taking vengeance on all of His enemies when He returns.

No, scripture is very clear that He will destroy all of His enemies at His second coming as passages like Matthew 24:37-39, 2 Thess 1:7-10 and 2 Peter 3:3-13 indicate. It's not surprising that you don't want to deal with these other passages since you know you have no way of reconciling them with your Premil belief.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Write this line a dozen times David, then you're allowed out of school.

"All Preterists are Amil: Not all Amils are Preterist!" ​

You don't have to be a preterist to believe that Matthew 24:21-22 applies to what occurred in 70 AD. I believe many make the mistake of believing the Olivet Discourse either has to all be already fulfilled or all be fulfilled in the future. Neither is true.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

by heavily allegorized I mean he calls Jesus' resurrection as "the first resurrection" and claims we're already resurrected before we were even born, so yes, he does not believe the first resurrection was a physical resurrection except of Christ Himself.

Where did he say that "we're already resurrected before we were even born"?

That is their belief.
whenever something challenges their view they just see it as allegory.

Do you not believe that we share in Christ's resurrection in a spiritual sense?

Colossians 2:11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

We identify with His death in baptism, right? And we identify with His resurrection when we're saved after putting our faith in Him and we go from being spiritually dead in our sins to spiritually alive in Him (Eph 2:1-6). We are then "raised with Him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead". What is so terrible about believing that having part in the first resurrection has to do with spiritually identifying with His resurrection when we are "raised with him" spiritually through faith which allows us to pass from being spiritually dead in our sins to being spiritually alive in Him?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I mean the level of allegory you might as well say "heaven is a state of mind" rather than a place. Cause I've seen some Amills take it that far, citing Luke 17 to defend it.

Are you referring to any Amills that have posted in this thread who take it that far? If not, then why are you saying this here?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

No matter how you look at it, the first resurrection still precedes satan's little season. Are Amils going to claim that the first resurrection is not a resurrection? If the first resurrection is not a resurrection, why is it called that then, the first resurrection?

David, are you being purposely obtuse here? How many times have Amils like SG and myself told you that we believe the first resurrection itself is Christ's resurrection? Many times. And, obviously, His resurrection was a real bodily resurrection. So, why would you ask that ridiculous question when we've already explained this to you many times? Is there something too hard about this for you to understand?

I don't know why you'd even ask that question of any Amil. Do you actually think that any Amil would say that the first resurrection is not actually a resurrection of any kind? Of course not. So, why do you waste your time asking ridiculous questions like that?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

All amills require partial preterism however.

How do you figure? How do you define partial preterism?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

All you are saying is that the OT believers are not in Christ and thus cannot be resurrected.

That is not at all what I'm saying. You clearly don't read my posts carefully. You constantly misrepresent what I believe.

I am saying they are in Christ and resurrected with Christ.

I am saying they are in Christ along with NT believers and they will all together be resurrected at His second coming. That is what Paul is saying in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23.

I made the point that your preferred translation, the CJB, says "the Messiah is the firstfruits" in 1 Cor 15:23, which means that Jesus Himself is the firstfruits. Why did you not respond at all to that? I've shown you several times now where your beliefs contradict what is said in your preferred translation. It makes me wonder why you use that translation when you often don't even agree with the translators of that version.

Paul claims they were led out of captivity and no longer confined to Abraham's bosom.

That's their souls, not their bodies.

Paradise is the physical Garden with physical humans in permanent incorruptible physical bodies. 2 Corinthians 5.

As I've told you multiple times before, you don't care that your interpretation of 2 Corinthians 5 contradicts what Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 15. You should come up with an interpretation of 2 Corinthians 5 that doesn't contradict any other scripture, but you just ignore 1 Corinthians 15, which teaches that all of the dead in Christ will be resurrected and changed at Christ's future coming at the last trumpet.

 

[Jamdoc]

Are you referring to any Amills that have posted in this thread who take it that far? If not, then why are you saying this here?

Not particular in this thread but there is one that posts here that I won't name that goes to that extent, they are basically a full preterist though.