Is NOSAS compatible with Amil?

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I see that as a bit different, as opposed to Revelation 20:6. As to the latter, NOSAS is compatible with it only if the first resurrection is meaning when and what Premils take it to mean, but not if the first resurrection is meaning when and what Amils take it to mean. Per the latter, per Premil, that is meaning after someone has already physically died. Verse 4 in that same chapter proves it. There is not one person being depicted in verse 4 that are still physically alive when the first resurrection takes place. They are all depicted as already dead.

Revelation 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.


Where in this verse do you see it applying the first resurrection to someone who hasn't even died yet? The first resurrection is in regards to saints that have physically died, and not to saints who haven't even died yet. If the latter were also true, then why is there not a single mention of a group like this as well in that verse?
Just because John sees their souls in heaven after they've died doesn't mean that they didn't have part in the first resurrection until then if having part in the first resurrection has to do with spiritually having part in Christ's resurrection. This conversation is boring me at this point. You go ahead and believe whatever you want. I know that NOSAS and amil are compatible no matter what you say.
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I've noticed before that some Amils seem to think there is another group of people mentioned in Revelation 20, aside from the saints who had been beheaded.

It's not totally unscientific. I think all scientists are used to the idea that theories give birth to other theories whenever a fact gets in the way of the first theory. A new theory is brought in to explain the anomaly.
You mean like you trying to say that the mass bodily resurrection of believers at Christ's second coming is the first resurrection rather than Christ's resurrection alone as Paul teaches in 1 Cor 15:20-23?
 
Upvote 0

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,602
2,107
Texas
✟196,523.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Wrong again. You are totally misrepresenting Amils. This is what Premils do when they have no solid Scripture to rebut Amil. It is actually time to furnish us with evidence to support your claims or bow out of the thread.


As to the post of mine you are replying to, the page I was on was this. I took one of the questions Fullness of the Gentiles raised, to be referring to the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4. Let's focus on that one, then. How did I misrepresent Amils, such as yourself, by concluding you all do not agree that the beast has to ascend out of the pit first, before there can even be this martyrdom recorded in Revelation 20:4? SpiritualJew, an Amil such as yourself, has made it perfectly clear that the beast does not ascend out of the pit until satan ascends out of it once the thousand years expire. The saints recorded in verse 4, when are they martyred? A time before satan is loosed after the thousand years, or a time after he is loosed after the thousand years? Is it not the former?

How many times do Amils think the beast ascends out of the pit? Is it not just 1 time? When the beast was(meaning a time prior to it getting cast into the pit), did it ever ascend out of the pit before it was? No. When the beast was(meaning a time prior to it getting cast into the pit), was there ever a time that it was working hand in hand with the false prophet? No. When the beast was(meaning a time prior to it getting cast into the pit) there was no such thing as the false prophet at the time, nor are we ever told the false prophet also ascends out of the pit. Maybe the reason for that is because the false prophet was never in the pit to begin with.

As to the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4 for refusing to worship this same beast, it is illogical, thus not possible, that they are martyred during a time when the beast and false prophet are not working hand in hand. It is illogical, thus not possible, that they are martyred during a time before the beast has ascended out of the pit, where one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed. It is illogical, thus not possible, that they are martyred during a time before a 2nd beast, the false prophet, has risen out of the earth.

This is not about trying to figure out what Amils believe or don't believe, most of us already know what Amils believe, so, this is mainly about what Amils believe and whether what they believe does agree or disagree with some of the texts involved.
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I had already stated that those who died in Christ will be resurrected when He appears in glory. I had already stated that the 2nd death will have no power over those who died in Christ.
Does the 2nd death have any power over them right now? Please answer this question. Yes or no, please.

I also mentioned that the 2nd death cannot come before the resurrection of those who died in Christ, and you asked me to state the obvious by asking me if I thought that the 2nd death would have power over those who had already died in Christ.

Note that the resurrection of those who died in Christ has not occurred yet. Note too, that the 2nd death will have no power over those who died in Christ - and because their resurrection is still future tense, the words '2nd death will have no power over those who died in Christ' is also still future tense - because the 2nd death has not become a reality yet, because the resurrection of those who died in Christ has not become a reality yet, and the 2nd death will have (future tense) no power over them.

It's the way it is now for us: We have already been raised from the dead with Christ but we will be raised from the dead.

From everything I had already said, you need not have asked me to state the obvious by asking me if I believe the 2nd death will have no power over those who died in Christ, when I already made it obvious.

Your asking me to state the obvious made me realize that I need to go back to basics with you, because you obviously don't see the obvious when I state it.

Don't ask me questions when my reply is obvious from what I had already stated, if you don't want me to state the obvious or take you back to basics so that you understand the basics, if you are just going to complain about my answer - because when you do that, your complaints are even more tedious than me stating the obvious when your requirement in your questions is that I state the obvious, or take you back to basics so that you don't ask me to say what I already said.
You use a lot of words to say nothing. What isn't obvious to me yet is whether or not you are willing to acknowledge that the second death CURRENTLY has no power over the dead in Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Amils invent another group not found in the texts. Anyone reading Revelation 20:4 can see that the only group in view, in regards to the first resurrection, are saints that have already physically died, and not also saints that have yet to physically die. If Amils disagree, and I'm sure they do, then they should be able to point out this other group somewhere in verses 4-6, saints that have yet to physically die.
Amils do not invent another group found in the text. Even premils include more people as having part in the resurrection than what the text specifies because of passages like 1 Thess 4:13-17 and 1 Cor 15:50-54. You have acknowledged that before. So, that is a weak criticism to make of Amiil when Premils do the same thing.

In my view someone MUST have part in the first resurrection in order for the second death to have no power over them. There are no exceptions. If I am correct then this causes a major problem for premil.

What about those who are still alive when Christ returns? They will not be resurrected, so what will make it so that the second death doesn't have power over them? I know I asked you this before, but I believe you need to answer this question before you continue trying to criticize Amil. Amil has no such dilemma since amil believes that all believers without exception have part in the first resurrection.

It can't be meaning any of these---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. Where is there this other group, saints that have yet to physically die, found in this text? I'm not seeing this other group myself.
Where is the group mentioned that you believe have part in the first resurrection but are not beheaded or don't worship the beast?
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,684.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
As to the post of mine you are replying to, the page I was on was this. I took one of the questions Fullness of the Gentiles raised, to be referring to the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4. Let's focus on that one, then. How did I misrepresent Amils, such as yourself, by concluding you all do not agree that the beast has to ascend out of the pit first, before there can even be this martyrdom recorded in Revelation 20:4? SpiritualJew, an Amil such as yourself, has made it perfectly clear that the beast does not ascend out of the pit until satan ascends out of it once the thousand years expire. The saints recorded in verse 4, when are they martyred? A time before satan is loosed after the thousand years, or a time after he is loosed after the thousand years? Is it not the former?

How many times do Amils think the beast ascends out of the pit? Is it not just 1 time? When the beast was(meaning a time prior to it getting cast into the pit), did it ever ascend out of the pit before it was? No. When the beast was(meaning a time prior to it getting cast into the pit), was there ever a time that it was working hand in hand with the false prophet? No. When the beast was(meaning a time prior to it getting cast into the pit) there was no such thing as the false prophet at the time, nor are we ever told the false prophet also ascends out of the pit. Maybe the reason for that is because the false prophet was never in the pit to begin with.

As to the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4 for refusing to worship this same beast, it is illogical, thus not possible, that they are martyred during a time when the beast and false prophet are not working hand in hand. It is illogical, thus not possible, that they are martyred during a time before the beast has ascended out of the pit, where one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed. It is illogical, thus not possible, that they are martyred during a time before a 2nd beast, the false prophet, has risen out of the earth.

This is not about trying to figure out what Amils believe or don't believe, most of us already know what Amils believe, so, this is mainly about what Amils believe and whether what they believe does agree or disagree with some of the texts involved.

I have repeatedly informed you and you have repeatedly avoided:

Firstly, the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet's activity are not simply restricted to 42 months before Christ's Coming, as you suggest. I didn't think anyone believed that, although, nothing shocks me in end-time discussion. Moreover, to attribute what you wrongly believe on this to the Amil position is wrong. Amils believe that they continue throughout the intra-Advent period (the millennium time).

Secondly, the beast represents the ongoing reign of Satan on the earth throughout time through the world secular anti-Christ system. It is not an end-time invention as Futurist's imagine.

Thirdly, Revelation is not chronological. It is a number of recaps describing the same intra-Advent period. The end of the millennium and Satan's "little season" corresponds with the end time persecution spoke elsewhere in Revelation and in other Scripture. The millennium does not follow Revelation 17-19 in time, but rather parallels it. Revelation 20 is the last of 7 recapitulations.


Fourthly, martyrdom was/is never limited to 42 months at the end as you claim. Every informed Bible student knows that. Martyrdom has occurred since the stoning of Stephen. Millions have been butchered by the beast system for their faith in the OT and NT, in the early Church, under the jackboot of Romanism, and right up until today. To limit martyrdom to 42 months at the end exposes your theological bias, your ignorance of history and your lack of objectivity.


Fifthly, there is good reason to connect Satan’s little season with the last 3.5 years (42 months/1260 days), found in Scripture. This does not demand a literal meaning in this most symbolic of books. This describes the final conflict between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of darkness. Satan and the beast will be loosed at the end to resist the people of God. That is when the restraint is simply removed. Right at the end, the kingdom of darkness is overthrew.
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
As to the post of mine you are replying to, the page I was on was this. I took one of the questions Fullness of the Gentiles raised, to be referring to the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4. Let's focus on that one, then. How did I misrepresent Amils, such as yourself, by concluding you all do not agree that the beast has to ascend out of the pit first, before there can even be this martyrdom recorded in Revelation 20:4? SpiritualJew, an Amil such as yourself, has made it perfectly clear that the beast does not ascend out of the pit until satan ascends out of it once the thousand years expire. The saints recorded in verse 4, when are they martyred? A time before satan is loosed after the thousand years, or a time after he is loosed after the thousand years? Is it not the former?
I have told you multiple times already that I don't believe that the people who died and didn't worship the beast are only those who didn't worship the beast after it ascends from the pit. Did you somehow miss that when I've told you this before?

You try to claim that the beast ascending out of the sea (Rev 13:1) is the same thing as the beast ascending out of the pit (Rev 11:7, 17:8), but I don't believe that. I see Revelation 13 as being parallel to Revelation 12:7-17. Satan was kicked out of heaven when Christ ascended there and then he went to make war with the saints. That is what is depicted in Revelation 13. So, I see the timing of Revelation 13 as beginning when Satan was kicked out of heaven.

Remember, Satan (and the beast, IMO) is bound from "deceiving the nations". Amils and premils obviously disagree on what that means, but my point is that it doesn't say that he is bound from persecuting Christians.

How many times do Amils think the beast ascends out of the pit? Is it not just 1 time? When the beast was(meaning a time prior to it getting cast into the pit), did it ever ascend out of the pit before it was? No. When the beast was(meaning a time prior to it getting cast into the pit), was there ever a time that it was working hand in hand with the false prophet? No.
That is your assumption based on your understanding that the beast coming out of the sea is the same as the beast coming out of the pit. But, why would John mention the beast coming out of the pit (abyss) in 2 places (Rev 11:7 and Rev 17:8) but then call it "the sea" instead of "the abyss" or "the bottomless pit" in Rev 13:1? Clearly, coming out of the sea is something different than coming out of the pit.

When the beast was(meaning a time prior to it getting cast into the pit) there was no such thing as the false prophet at the time, nor are we ever told the false prophet also ascends out of the pit. Maybe the reason for that is because the false prophet was never in the pit to begin with.
It does say that the false prophet is said to come up out of the earth, not the pit. Why is it that you can discern that Revelation 13 is not talking about the second beast/false prophet rising out of the pit but you can't discern that regarding the beast? Neither one are said to come up out of the pit in Revelation 13. You are a futurist and that is why you interpret Revelation the way you do. I am not. My view is kind of a combination of things, but more idealist than anything.

The book of Revelation is not just a book about the future. It was about things that happened before the book was written, during the time that book was written and things that would happen after the book was written.

Revelation 1:19 Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later.

As to the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4 for refusing to worship this same beast, it is illogical, thus not possible, that they are martyred during a time when the beast and false prophet are not working hand in hand.
I agree.

It is illogical, thus not possible, that they are martyred during a time before the beast has ascended out of the pit, where one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed. It is illogical, thus not possible, that they are martyred during a time before a 2nd beast, the false prophet, has risen out of the earth.
Revelation 13 says nothing about the beast ascending out of the pit. Your view is based on nothing more than an assumption.

This is not about trying to figure out what Amils believe or don't believe, most of us already know what Amils believe, so, this is mainly about what Amils believe and whether what they believe does agree or disagree with some of the texts involved.
It does. You try to force your futurist understanding onto Amil, but that isn't reasonable.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I have repeatedly informed you and you have repeatedly avoided:

Firstly, the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet's activity are not simply restricted to 42 months before Christ's Coming, as you suggest. I didn't think anyone believed that, although, nothing shocks me in end-time discussion.
I think most premils believe that, if I'm not mistaken, since most of them are futurists.

Moreover, to attribute what you wrongly believe on this to the Amil position is wrong. Amils believe that they continue throughout the intra-Advent period (the millennium time).
I have made this same point to him several times as well, but he just doesn't get it. He is 100% futurist, so he is not able to comprehend seeing things any other way.

Secondly, the beast represents the ongoing reign of Satan on the earth throughout time through the world secular anti-Christ system. It is not an end-time invention as Futurist's imagine.
Agree.

Thirdly, Revelation is not chronological. It is a number of recaps describing the same intra-Advent period. The end of the millennium and Satan's "little season" corresponds with the end time persecution spoke elsewhere in Revelation and in other Scripture. The millennium does not follow Revelation 17-19 in time, but rather parallels it. Revelation 20 is the last of 7 recapitulations.
Again, I agree.

Fourthly, martyrdom was/is never limited to 42 months at the end as you claim. Every informed Bible student knows that. Martyrdom has occurred since the stoning of Stephen. Millions have been butchered by the beast system for their faith in the OT and NT, in the early Church, under the jackboot of Romanism, and right up until today. To limit martyrdom to 42 months at the end exposes your theological bias, your ignorance of history and your lack of objectivity.
Exactly.

2 Timothy 3:12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

Fifthly, there is good reason to connect Satan’s little season with the last 3.5 years (42 months/1260 days), found in Scripture. This does not demand a literal meaning in this most symbolic of books. This describes the final conflict between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of darkness. Satan and the beast will be loosed at the end to resist the people of God. That is when the restraint is simply removed. Right at the end, the kingdom of darkness is overthrew.
I'm personally leaning towards seeing the 42 months/1260 days references as being references to the whole New Testament era up until Satan's little season. For example, in Revelation 11 the two witnesses prophesy for 1,260 days while the Gentiles (heathen) trample on the holy city for 42 months (same time period as the 1,260 days in my view). It is after the 1,260 days of the testimony of the two witnesses that the beast ascends out of the pit to kill them and their dead bodies lie in the great city for 3.5 days. This is all figurative, of course. But, I would equate the 3.5 days to Satan's little season rather than the 1,260 days/42 months. This is something I'm still looking at, though. This belief is not set in stone.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,684.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think most premils believe that, if I'm not mistaken, since most of them are futurists.

I have made this same point to him several times as well, but he just doesn't get it. He is 100% futurist, so he is not able to comprehend seeing things any other way.

Agree.

Again, I agree.

Exactly.

2 Timothy 3:12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

I'm personally leaning towards seeing the 42 months/1260 days references as being references to the whole New Testament era up until Satan's little season. For example, in Revelation 11 the two witnesses prophesy for 1,260 days while the Gentiles (heathen) trample on the holy city for 42 months (same time period as the 1,260 days in my view). It is after the 1,260 days of the testimony of the two witnesses that the beast ascends out of the pit to kill them and their dead bodies lie in the great city for 3.5 days. This is all figurative, of course. But, I would equate the 3.5 days to Satan's little season rather than the 1,260 days/42 months. This is something I'm still looking at, though. This belief is not set in stone.

Always appreciate your input.
 
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,318
568
56
Mount Morris
✟125,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
The habitation of that passage is found below, and also in Revelation 3:12.


Heb 11:15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.
Heb 11:16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

----------------------------------------------

We see below that the "souls" of believers are found in heaven.


Rev_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:


Rev_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 your proof is we will no longer have bodies at all but we will all be the New Jerusalem? Sounds like science fiction. This permanent body that replaced our tent body on earth is not a body but the city as a whole? You make no sense.

Paul said there is a change from a tent to a permanent body. From corruptible to incorruptible. Not to a city.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,318
568
56
Mount Morris
✟125,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Are you saying you think Paul was mistaken in 1 Cor 15:50-54 when he said we would all be changed at the same time (at the last trumpet) and have incorruptible, immortal bodies at that time and then he later corrected himself in 2 Cor 5? I hope you don't think that because there are no mistakes and no contradictions in the Bible.

You need to make 1 Cor 15:50-54 and 2 Cor 5 agree with each other rather than interpret 2 Cor 5 in such a way that contradicts 1 Cor 15:50-54. You don't seem to understand that people's souls go to heaven when they die and their bodies go in the grave.

This was already pointed out by BABerean2, but I'm going to point out it again:

Rev 6:9 When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained.

Rev 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.

Can you see that these passages clearly indicate that John saw the souls of the dead in Christ? He did not see them with immortal bodies, he only saw their souls. That is why Paul said "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord". When we physically die, our souls separate from our bodies and go to heaven to be with the Lord there.
He made NO mistake. They misunderstood him. He corrected their misunderstanding.

The soul leaves this body on earth and enters the body in heaven. How much more clearer does Paul have to be?
 
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,318
568
56
Mount Morris
✟125,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Something happened 2000 years ago that you seem to overlook: Jesus defeated sin, death, Hades and Satan. Hell had no more hold upon the redeemed. Revelation 20 shows the dead in Christ now populating heaven instead of Hades. Hades (Abraham's bosom) has been emptied of God's elect since Christ conquered it. The dead were raised from Hades in spirit and are now reigning with Jesus. But the physical resurrection does not occur until Jesus comes to raise the living and the dead at His one final future climactic coming.

Christ was the first to defeat sin, death, the grave and Hades. He is the first resurrection. After His glorious resurrection, He testified in Revelation 1:18: "I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death."

Death and Hades are now defeated. The grave has been conquered. God's people who die go now to be with Jesus. Hades was emptied after the first resurrection. Jesus defeated sin, death, Hades and Satan through his first Advent. The dead in Christ now reign in heaven with Christ.

This spiritual resurrection occurs to all those who identify with Christ in His first resurrection when He conquered sin, death, Hades and Satan. His sinless life, His atoning death and His glorious resurrection secured the full and eternal freedom of all His elect. This union with Christ raises us from the grave of our sin and allows us to be currently seated in heavenly places in Christ. Through this majesty work, Christ emptied Hades and led captivity captive taking them to heaven to reign with Him until the physical resurrection at His coming.
The Cross also gave those in Paradise an incorruptible body. NOT IMMORTAL. Immortality comes at the Second Coming. The church complete both living and in Paradise are presented as one whole body complete and glorified. Immortality is glorification. We are the complete image of God. The image Adam lost when he disobeyed God and literally died physically and spiritually. He lost the incorruptible body and recieve a corruptible one. His spirit was separated from the soul, spiritual death. His image was passed on to all of us in Seth. Genesis 5:1-3


1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created Adam, in the likeness of God made he him,

2 Male and female created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam in the day that they were created.

3 Now Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a child in his own likeness after his image, and called his name Seth.

God created Adam in God's image. Seth was born in Adam's sinful, corruptible, WITHOUT a God spirit (robe of white, immortal body).

John says only at the 5th seal will the soul recieve the robe of white, the God spirit part of the image of God. Soul is used in the term of Adam's dead image. The souls under the altar were still not glorified. The spirit, with God, re-joined to the body as the robe of white.

The view of a soul is a son of God incomplete. In Revelation 6, the soul was incomplete because it needed to join with the spirit. That has not happened to most of Adam's descendants. Enoch, Elijah, Moses, and John being caught up in the spirit, may be the only exceptions besides Jesus Christ, who had all 3 parts of God's image as a human without sin. Now Jesus's physical body could die and decay. IMO, that body returned to dust and was changed in the tomb. The resurrected body was incorruptible, but only after He ascended, because Mary could not touch a soul that was just a ghost or shell. That is sticking to the point the incorruptible body is in Paradise. Jesus came back with that permanent body and that was what Thomas touched.

Revelation 20:4 is the same soul concept. There were thrones to judge and they gave out incorruptible bodies. This time only an incorruptible body was the issue. It is not the same as the church. The church is who is handing out, these soul's incorruptible bodies from Paradise. We are not told the mechanics of how it works. We are not told how these thrones were arranged but they were between heaven and earth, because these souls could not enter Paradise without these incorruptible bodies, and they remained on earth after getting incorruptible bodies. They were not glorified. They just could not die the second death. The second death being a demon spirit joined to the soul, devoid of Light and God's image. Do they need a body in the lake of fire?

Claiming I am making this up goes with the territory of Biblical interpretation. A body is a body and there is only one type after death. If you attempt to spiritualize it, that is changing the whole dynamic of the passage in your own whatever we say interpretation. That is the territory of spiritualizing God’s Word. Revelation 20:4 specifically states a resurrection of a soul, judged, and given life, a body to live in. An incorruptible body that cannot die the second death. They are NOT made immortal gods. They have billions of offspring in the same type of bodies for 1000 years. They reign because they are the millions of foreparents to all those generations of humans.

If you want to change Scripture and make it fit your theology, God will not stop you. Point to one Scripture verse I have altered to bring glory to God. I am here to honor God, not give you my private interpretations, cause I have nothing to offer, but God's Word.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,318
568
56
Mount Morris
✟125,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
You mean like you trying to say that the mass bodily resurrection of believers at Christ's second coming is the first resurrection rather than Christ's resurrection alone as Paul teaches in 1 Cor 15:20-23?
That is what you keep saying yourself. I claim that the physical body exchange happens at physical death and you keep saying it is both. The physical happened at the Cross and again at the Second Coming. How can it happen if these in Paradise already have their permanent body? We do not prevent those dead (physically) from getting a permanent body in Paradise. Why do you deny (prevent that fact from being your reality), when Paul claims it cannot be prevented? The Cross made entrance to Paradise possible, and only an incorruptible body can be in or enter into Paradise.

You cling to the word soul from so many verses, taking them out of context. That is being hyper literal about the interpretation of the word soul. Soul is a general state of being without a specific context in the text pointing out how God is dealing with a soul. Soul, being the only thing we are. We are not our body, and we are not our spirit. The only thing we are is a soul. The author in each instance may just as well use "hey you". John in Revelation 6 could have just said hey you martyrs, your robe of white is on it's way. Should he have included those who died peacefully in their sleep? Are only certain souls getting this robe of white? Being hyper literal makes a distinction in the body of Christ that need not be there.
 
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,318
568
56
Mount Morris
✟125,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Secondly, the beast represents the ongoing reign of Satan on the earth throughout time through the world secular anti-Christ system. It is not an end-time invention as Futurist's imagine.
What is this ongoing reign of Satan? Satan is not bound then? If Satan is bound, how can this reign not be bound that is supposedly driving world governments? The whole point is to have no influence at all. Limited influence is still influence. What verse specifically claims Satan is like a dog on a leash? Or symbolically using the words "dog on a leash"?
 
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,318
568
56
Mount Morris
✟125,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Revelation 13 says nothing about the beast ascending out of the pit. Your view is based on nothing more than an assumption.
Revelation 13:11

11 And I beheld, another beast coming out of the earth, which had two horns like the Lamb, but he spake like the dragon.

How can this not be symbolic of Satan coming out of the pit? John does not specify any names. We have a human coming out of mankind. We have Satan coming out of spiritual darkness represented by the earth or out of sheol.
 
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,318
568
56
Mount Morris
✟125,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Your silence is deafening. We all know biblical support does not exist. You have manifestly nothing to bring to the table.
See, you do not take any Scripture serous that proves you wrong. Since you cannot even give your thoughts on 2 Corinthians 5. Those verses are avoided because they are proof you are wrong. Paul's says absent from this body is to be present with Christ in a permanent body. Permanent being incorruptible. I guess you cannot even give me what happens to your body, but just dust in the ground. Your soul is naked and unclothed. You cannot even claim 2 Corinthians 5 for yourself, if you just toss those verses out as not relevant.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BABerean2

Newbie
Site Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So your proof is we will no longer have bodies at all but we will all be the New Jerusalem? Sounds like science fiction. This permanent body that replaced our tent body on earth is not a body but the city as a whole? You make no sense.

Paul said there is a change from a tent to a permanent body. From corruptible to incorruptible. Not to a city.


Both body and soul of believers will be reunited at the Second Coming and New Jerusalem will be our place of residence.


Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.


.
 
Upvote 0