You stress the has now come, I stress the coming.
Actually, I stress both. I made the text bigger for that part to show the part that I believe you are disregarding. The text suggests an ongoing event that occurs every day and had already begun back then rather than just a one time future event. I believe you are not being honest with the text and are allowing doctrinal bias to dictate how you interpret the passage.
Please tell me what you think Jesus meant when he said the time is coming,
and has now come...". What does the "and has now come" (KJV: "and now is") part mean to you?
Admittedly, I interpret John 5 that way BECAUSE of Revelation 20.
That is the problem I have with premil's approach to interpreting scripture. Its foundation is on highly debatable, difficult to interpret passages, much of which are written in symbolic language. The amillennial doctrine's foundation, in contrast, is on much more clear, straightforward passages like John 5:28-29 (the previous verses do not talk about the bodily resurrection). Jesus's message in John 5:28-29 is very clear and can only be misunderstood because of doctrinal bias, in my opinion.
In other words, if Rev 20 didn't exist, I strongly believe there is no way you would interpret it the way you do. But, why not interpret Rev 20 according to what the more clear passage of John 5:24-29 says instead of the other way around?
Revelation gives 2 resurrections where most the bible has seemed to refer to only a single resurrection outside of isolated single people getting resurrections or Jesus. But Revelation 7 has a great multitude in heaven, not described as souls as in Revelation 6:9-11, so I take that to mean they are in bodies, combined with my interpretation of Revelation 6:12-17 matching up with Matthew 24:29-31 where the elect are gathered. I see that as the resurrection of believers, before the trumpets. With Revelation 20 giving the concept of 2 resurrections, I read John 5 and while on first reading John you read that passage and think Jesus is just being redundant, but.. one resurrection is for those who hear His voice, that is believers... and then a second resurrection where ALL who are in the grave are resurrected.
In the first resurrection Jesus says they're given life, and no threat of condemnation is given with that first grouping. Similarly in Revelation 20, those who take part in the first resurrection, are not under threat of the 2nd death. They're redeemed.
Here is something you have probably not considered before. In my view, the text implies that the only way one can avoid the second death is by having part in the first resurrection. I believe Christ's resurrection is the first resurrection unto a glorified, immortal body (1 Cor 15:20-23, Acts 26:23) and that all believers from all-time spiritually have part in His resurrection.
So, again going back to the idea that having part in the first resurrection is the only way to avoid the second death, how would that work in your view when only some believers are part of the first resurrection and not all of them? What about the rest of the dead believers who you think would be resurrected at other times? How do they avoid the second death, which occurs upon being cast into the lake of fire (Rev 20:14-15)?
The second resurrection, there is a judgement that Jesus warns about, some to life, some to damnation.
So.. where I fall on this, is the rapture, happens, nobody who's raptured is judged with those who stand before the white throne of Judgement, they've already been declared not guilty, forgiven by the Lord Jesus Christ. The second death has no power over them, it's not an threat hanging over their head.
Of course they are not judged in the same way as unbelievers since they will be cast into the lake of fire after giving account of themselves. But, that doesn't mean doesn't believers can't be there as well. Look at what it says here:
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened.
Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.
Why would the book of life be opened there if believers were not there since only believer's names are written in the book of life? It talks about the dead being judged according to what they had done. Is that not the same as what Paul indicates regarding believers as well?
2 Cor 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so
that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.
The judgment described in Rev 20:11-15 is according to what people have done. That is exactly what Paul said regarding believers as well. What is the difference? Both believers and unbelievers will be judged according to what they had done, so what basis is there for thinking believers would not be present there? None.
Don't you know that we all will stand before the judgment seat to give account of ourselves for what we've done? When do you believe the following will take place:
Romans 14:10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt?
For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11 It is written:“‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord, ‘every knee will bow before me; every tongue will acknowledge God.’". 12
So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.
All people from all-time will stand before the throne that day to give an account of themselves. Is that not exactly what Rev 20:11-15 portrays? And Matthew 25:31-46 as well? I believe so.
The idea of there being more than one judgment day is simply not taught in scripture.
Matthew 12:36 But I tell you that
everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken. 37 For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.
Jesus referred to "the day of judgment" many times. He never indicates that there would be more than one. That day is mentioned in many passages including John 5:28-29, 2 Cor 5:10, Romans 14:10-12, Acts 17:30-31, Matthew 25:31-46 and Revelation 20:11-15.
After the Millennium, second resurrection, some of those who are resurrected then will have believed, so they go to the resurrection of life.
The rest, to the resurrection of damnation.
You seem to recognize that Jesus IS describing 2 different resurrections, you just consider the first one having taken place when Jesus resurrected, so we were resurrected even before we were born or died. Which is.. sketchy to me.
That is not AT ALL what I'm saying. I don't believe anyone besides Christ has been resurrected unto bodily immortality yet. Are you with me so far? I believe the first resurrection (unto bodily immortality) itself was Christ's resurrection unto bodily immortality because scripture says so (1 Cor 15:20-23, Acts 26:23). Are you still with me?
As I've already told you multiple times at this point, I believe having part in Christ's resurrection in a spiritual sense when we become saved/born again (as indicated in John 5:24-25 and Eph 2:1-6) is the way in which people have part in the first resurrection (Christ's resurrection). Because of having part spiritually in His resurrection, believers go to be with Him in heaven when they physically die and that is where John is seeing them. Are you still with me?
I believe that all believers from all-time will be bodily resurrected when Christ returns. You probably already figured that out since I have said I believe John 5:28-29 says that all people are resurrected at the same time/hour (on the same 24 hour day). Since Christ's resurrection is the first resurrection then the resurrection that occurs at His coming can't be the first, but is the second.
I am seeing 2 BODILY resurrections.
I am, too, but just not in the way you are. Christ's was first long ago and then those who are His at His coming, which is what Paul taught in 1 Cor 15:20-23. But the difference is how you and I understand what it means to have part in the first bodily resurrection (which I believe was Christ's resurrection).
Paul and John both talk about more rewards than just eternal life, they term them as crowns, and what they actually are whether physical jewelry or not is not important, but the Lord has gifts He wants to give us aside from just living.
When Paul talked about those rewards he was talking about a bema seat which is a platform where you hand out laurels for athletic competitions, it's all reward, all positive, not judgement. The great white throne after the 2nd resurrection, is judgement, and some people will go to life others to the 2nd death.
Of course believers will not be condemned and will instead be rewarded, but as I said earlier, the book of life implies that believers are present there and other scripture indicates that as well (Rom 14:10-12, Matt 25:31-46, etc.).
Dunno how you can't see those as being different circumstances, one is a medal ceremony and the olympics, the other is a trial with the death penalty sentence on the line.
Dunno how you can see believers getting their rewards 1000+ years before unbelievers do. The rewards are different for believers and unbelievers at the time, but all are present there. And, yes, the punishment that unbelievers receive at that time will be their "reward". The word "reward" isn't always necessarily positive.
Matthew 6: Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as
the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you,
They have their reward.
The only negative at the bema seat that Paul talked about, was that you might have been saved, but as by fire, basically getting nothing but your life, you get eternal life, but God doesn't have any rewards for you because you wasted your life. 1 Corinthians 3:9-15 goes into this. Even Jesus talked about rewards and treasures in heaven, and He doesn't just mean eternal life.
Again, there is no basis for thinking that 2 Cor 5:10 is speaking of some other judgment besides the GWT judgment.
2 Cor 5:10 For
we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.
This speaks of being judged based on the things we have done. Which is no different than this:
Romans 14:10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For
we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11 It is written: As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,‘
every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will acknowledge God.’” 12 So then,
each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.
When do you believe what is described here will happen and who exact do you believe will be part of the judgment described here? Paul indicates that it is a judgment at which he himself would be present ("each of us" includes Paul himself), so it would have to be the same judgment as 2 Cor 5:10, right? I say that because Paul indicated in 2 Cor 5:10 that he would be included ("each of us") in what is described in 2 Cor 5:10 as well.
So, with the understanding that 2 Cor 5:10 and Romans 14:10-12 are speaking of the same judgment, what can we deduce from that (besides that Paul himself will be there)? Does this judgment, which you call the bema seat judgment, only include unbelievers as you believe is the case?
Isaiah 45:22 “
Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other. 23 By myself I have sworn, my mouth has uttered in all integrity a word that will not be revoked:
Before me every knee will bow; by me every tongue will swear. 24 They will say of me, ‘
In the Lord alone are deliverance and strength.’” All who have raged against him will come to him and be put to shame.
Notice that when it says every knee will bow and every tongue swear (confess) that He is God, it includes unbelievers. It says "all who have raged against him will come to him and be put to shame". Even though they did not believe in Him in this lifetime, they will bow before Him on His throne on judgment day right along with us. That contradicts your idea that the judgment described in 2 Cor 5:10 and Romans 14:10-12 will be one with only believers in attendance.
All of this lines up perfectly with how amils understanding passages like Matthew 25:31-46 and Rev 20:11-15. The idea of separate judgment days is not taught in scripture.
Again, interpreting something that will probably take time, as happening instantly. There will be billions of people and a Just God is going to go through ALL the charges against you. A person doesn't go to hell just because they didn't believe on Christ. They go to Hell for their sins. So.. Judgement of people who ARE in the book of life is simple of course. They believed on Christ, their sins are not brought up. If they didn't believe on Christ, well, now they're judged by their sins, and every single one will be laid on them, over the course of a lifetime, it may take a lifetime to go through all of them. It takes time. Human judges have to tell you what you're being charged of before they just declare a sentence on you, God's more just than that, do you really think a person will not even be told exactly what they did wrong on every count before they're sentenced? God may be able to make a judgement instantly, but we're still finite, and can't process the charges and verdicts and judgements instantly.
We're talking about God here. Why are you talking about what He will do as if He was merely human? Time does not affect Him like it does us (2 Peter 3:8). To think that it would take Him the same amount of time to judge everyone as it would a human is just silly nonsense (sorry if that comes across as too harsh, but that's just how I see it).
and the bema seat Paul talked about, was not a trial for condemnation. Does 1 Corinthians 3:15 sound like they go to hell to you? Not to me, sounds like they go into eternal life with nothing but the white robe.
I showed above how everyone will be appearing before the bema seat (not just believers) and how it is no different than the Great White Throne. Just 2 different ways of referring to the same throne/seat of judgment.
How are the 7 last plagues figurative? How are they not the wrath of God when John says they are?
I don't recall saying that they're not the wrath of God. Probably because I didn't. They are the wrath of God, but I don't believe they should be taken literally. There's a lot of symbolic/figurative language in Rev 16. For example,
12 The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up to prepare the way for the kings from the East. 13 Then I saw three impure spirits that looked like frogs; they came out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14 They are demonic spirits that perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them for the battle on the great day of God Almighty.
15 “Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.”
16 Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.
For one thing the bowl (KJV: vial) itself is figurative. I'm not sure how the wrath of God could be held in a literal bowl. With that in mind I wonder how a figurative bowl can pour something out on a literal river? I don't think so. It does mention the river Euphrates, but that does not mean we should assume it's speaking of the literal Euphrates river. I'll give you a few examples of literal places being used in a figurative sense to back up my point.
Rev 11:8 Their bodies will lie in the public square of
the great city—which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt—where also their Lord was crucified.
Here, the great city where the Lord was crucified was "figuratively called Sodom and Egypt".
Rev 16:19
The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. God remembered
Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath.
Here, "the great city" is called "Babylon the Great". Another clear figurative reference since Babylon no longer exists.
Rev 20:7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive
the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—and to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore.
Here, "the nations in the four corners of the earth" are figuratively called "Gog and Magog".
With all this in mind, it should not be hard to believe that the reference to the Euphrates river and the reference to Armageddon are figurative as well.
It also talks about spirits that look like frogs coming out of the dragon, beast and false prophet. That's obviously figurative.
Since, the wrath of God is described figuratively we should interpret it accordingly. I'm not saying that it's not actually talking about the wrath of God. It is. The wrath of God is most definitely a real thing (don't confuse the words figurative and fictional like some do). But, it's described figuratively rather than literally. It's not going to come down out of a bowl as frog-like spirits coming out of a dragon, beast and false prophet's mouth and so on.