Discussion on the 5th Seal

Bob_1000

Well-Known Member
Jul 30, 2021
613
129
53
Mid-West
✟20,776.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How can believers ("slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held") not already have put on the righteousness of Christ (hadn't received their white robes until the event in Rev 6), but had already been slain for their belief? Maybe we're saying the same thing--that the robes represent the righteousness of Christ, or the purity of Christ's sinless life applied to the believer's life. But why after they were dead, and not before?

Maybe the white robes/garments are for a coming judgment, where they will be seen to be guiltless because of the robes given to them, and passed over (not subject to the condemnation), similar to those that painted their door posts and lintels with blood in Egypt.
The only people of God that have ever died without the righteousness of Christ are the Old Testament believers that died before Christ came and paid for their sins. That's actually the point I'm trying to make in this thread, the 5th seal isn't future it's the day Christ died and paid for everyone's sins which allowed the OT believers to put on the righteousness of Christ.
 
Upvote 0

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,420.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
And it doesn't make sense that a bunch of resurrected people are stuffed under the altar and told to stay there, if they are already enjoying the resurrected state

Those resurrected Matthew 27:52-53 saints we are told went into the city of Jerusalem - where the Temple's altar was - and were seen of many there. These resurrected Matthew 27 saints of Revelation 6:11 who were given the "white robes" of perfected, resurrected righteousness were the ones given as gifts to men, acting as evangelists, apostles, prophets, pastors, and teachers beginning from the location of Jerusalem's temple in Mount Zion. These were the 144,000 First-fruits who literally stood with the Lamb on Mount Zion (the Temple site) in Jerusalem that resurrection day.
 
Upvote 0

Bob_1000

Well-Known Member
Jul 30, 2021
613
129
53
Mid-West
✟20,776.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Our salvation is a process, which is not completely finished until we are standing before God face-to-face in a body made incorruptible and immortal. Any believer in this life has Christ's righteousness imputed to them, which covers us and makes us vicariously holy in God's eyes. But the physical body itself also will be given redemption in the final stage of our salvation process. This is what the martyred souls under the altar did not have yet, and is what the gift of the white robes represented.

I agree they didn't have their new bodies and they also weren't covered in the righteousness of Christ yet because Christ hadn't died at that point. When Christ died those martyrs immediately put on the righteousness of Christ. Do you agree with this?

Jerusalem's religious leadership who had charge of the Temple's altar had killed these saints over the centuries, and they were continuing to beg God for vengeance of their shed blood. These "Days of Vengeance" were coming "speedily" in the AD 70 era (as in Christ's unjust-judge parable). In the meantime, however, these martyred souls were each given their resurrected body (in Matthew 27:52-53) and told to "rest" for a "little season" on earth in those resurrected bodies, just until the rest of the martyred saints in the first century had also died under persecution. Then all of them would "meet the Lord together in the air". This event at Christ's second coming would include those in AD 70 who had just been resurrected, and those like the Matthew 27:52-53 saints who had already been made "alive" by resurrection, but who had "remained" on earth until then (as 1 Thess. 4:15 & 17 described them).

I agree that the martyred souls were given their resurrection bodies in Matthew 27 but the bible says that they went up with Christ at his ascension.

White robes in Revelation 6:11 represented a resurrected condition for the saints having their perfected righteousness of spirit, soul, and body. Only Christ has this immortality inherently, and He gives resurrected immortality of the body to those who are IN CHRIST, in order to finish their salvation process.

I just don't see how white robes can represent anything other than the righteousness of Christ.
 
Upvote 0

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,420.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I just don't see how white robes can represent anything other than the righteousness of Christ

Here is where I get the sense that the white robes given to these souls under the altar was the perfected bodily resurrection of the Matthew 27 saints. We read in Revelation 19:7-8 about the marriage of the Lamb to his wife who had made herself ready. "And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints." This "marriage of the Lamb" represents the bodily-resurrected saints in fellowship with Christ in heaven, would you agree? Then the white linen garments given to her would represent the bodily-resurrected state of perfected righteousness given to her by Christ.

Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 5:1-5 of the believers' longing to be "further clothed" with immortality after death with the "house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens". Yes, we currently are covered with Christ's righteousness while in this life, but we are to be "further clothed" when we are given our incorruptible, immortal bodies in the resurrection.

I agree that the martyred souls were given their resurrection bodies in Matthew 27 but the bible says that they went up with Christ at his ascension.

No, I'm afraid that never happened. Christ's first resurrection-day ascension was Himself alone ascending into heaven to be ordained as our high priest, and to sprinkle heaven's mercy seat with His blood sacrifice. According to OT patterns in Leviticus 16:17, the high priest went alone once a year into the most holy place. "There shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation" when the high priest went into that inner sanctuary. And it was absolutely necessary that Christ be the FIRSTBORN from among the dead to appear in heaven. No resurrected Matthew 27 saints ascended with Him to heaven that day, and we don't have them ascending with Him later in Acts 1:9 either. Those resurrected souls under the altar waited patiently on earth until the AD 70 rapture which took them to heaven at that time with the rest of the newly-resurrected saints.
 
Upvote 0

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,420.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I agree they didn't have their new bodies and they also weren't covered in the righteousness of Christ yet because Christ hadn't died at that point. When Christ died those martyrs immediately put on the righteousness of Christ. Do you agree with this?

This question centers around the subject as to just when Christ's righteousness was imputed to the children of faith. We have so many verses that speak of "just men" who were considered righteous even before Christ's crucifixion death had happened in real time. "RIGHTEOUS Abel", "JUST Lot", Enoch who "PLEASED GOD", "FAITHFUL Abraham", "BLAMELESS Zechariah and Elizabeth", etc., etc.. So, I think from the time of creation, God looked forward in time to those whom He knew Christ would give eternal life to, and thereby could regard the pre-crucifixion "children of faith" as being vicariously holy.

In real time, however, there was a distinct point on the calendar in which "from henceforth", those who died in the Lord would be blessed by their works following them after death (Revelation 14:13). This I believe was after Christ's ascension when legally Christ's righteousness was imputed to those of faith, giving them full credit for their "works" which followed their spirits to heaven. It was from the ascension onward that Paul could say "absent from the body, present with the Lord". The spirit of believers, which would depart the body, would go to be with Christ which was "far better" than either staying alive on earth or being a righteous spirit reserved in Paradise.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Derf

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2021
1,463
361
61
Colorado Springs
✟98,682.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The only people of God that have ever died without the righteousness of Christ are the Old Testament believers that died before Christ came and paid for their sins. That's actually the point I'm trying to make in this thread, the 5th seal isn't future it's the day Christ died and paid for everyone's sins which allowed the OT believers to put on the righteousness of Christ.
I guess that could be the case, but what does that make of the previous 4 seals? why are they talked about at all, if they were past when John wrote about them?
 
Upvote 0

Bob_1000

Well-Known Member
Jul 30, 2021
613
129
53
Mid-West
✟20,776.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I guess that could be the case, but what does that make of the previous 4 seals? why are they talked about at all, if they were past when John wrote about them?
The first part of Revelation chapter 5 is the scene in heaven just prior to Jesus dying on the cross. The last part of chapter 5 is after he was crucified and what happened to believers on earth and the resurrection of the OT believers.

The 1st seal is Jesus making the triumphal entry and conquering sin and death on the cross.

The 2nd seal is Jesus taking peace from the earth. “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

The 3rd seal is purchasing the wheat and the barley for a days work. “And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:”.

I won’t go any further but all of the seals are tied to Jesus as far as I can tell. They say Revelation was written around 90 AD but the text doesn’t support that and I go with the text over history.
 
Upvote 0

jamiec

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2020
474
215
Scotland
✟42,255.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
I agree that the earthly altar was a foreshadow of the heavenly altar but I think the Heavenly altar is the place where the Heavenly Lamb's blood was slain which would be the cross. I know there are some that believe Jesus shed his blood in heaven also but I don't see it that way.
I think that any Blood-shedding in Heaven is out of the question. The closest Rev comes to that, is the vision of the Lamb "standing as though it had been slain" in Rev 5. Since the Lamb has overcome death, death has no place there.

A notable feature of the first beast in Rev 13, is that it does not in fact die. "One of his heads as if it had been wounded to death, and his deadly wound was healed" - but he does not "taste death". I think that is an infallible tell-tale that this is not the real Messiah, the Lamb, but a fake.

I don't think the heavenly altar has anything to do with events on Earth, such as the crucifixion. I think the thinking behind the heavenly altar is more like that in Hebrews. There is also a rather interesting passage in Exodus: Exodus 25:40 See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.
 
Upvote 0

jamiec

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2020
474
215
Scotland
✟42,255.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Those resurrected Matthew 27:52-53 saints we are told went into the city of Jerusalem - where the Temple's altar was - and were seen of many there. These resurrected Matthew 27 saints of Revelation 6:11 who were given the "white robes" of perfected, resurrected righteousness were the ones given as gifts to men, acting as evangelists, apostles, prophets, pastors, and teachers beginning from the location of Jerusalem's temple in Mount Zion. These were the 144,000 First-fruits who literally stood with the Lamb on Mount Zion (the Temple site) in Jerusalem that resurrection day.
I think the passage in St Matthew 27 is a Christian development or interpretation of Ezekiel 37.
 
Upvote 0

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,420.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I think the passage in St Matthew 27 is a Christian development or interpretation of Ezekiel 37.

In certain respects, Matthew 27:52-53 was an echo of the revival of the nation of Israel in the post exilic return, which Ezekiel 37's prophecy of the dry bones symbolized. After all, those were all Jewish graves that were opened around Jerusalem in the earthquake at Christ's death. All 144,000 of those Matthew 27 resurrected saints were Jewish members of those tribes specified in Revelation 7. Children of faith - every one of them.
 
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

Derf

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2021
1,463
361
61
Colorado Springs
✟98,682.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
In certain respects, Matthew 27:52-53 was an echo of the revival of the nation of Israel in the post exilic return, which Ezekiel 37's prophecy of the dry bones symbolized. After all, those were all Jewish graves that were opened around Jerusalem in the earthquake at Christ's death. All 144,000 of those Matthew 27 resurrected saints were Jewish members of those tribes specified in Revelation 7. Children of faith - every one of them.
Except we aren’t given the number of the resurrected in Matt 27. 144,000 is likely way too high for only 3000 to believe on Pentecost.
 
Upvote 0

Bob_1000

Well-Known Member
Jul 30, 2021
613
129
53
Mid-West
✟20,776.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Here is where I get the sense that the white robes given to these souls under the altar was the perfected bodily resurrection of the Matthew 27 saints. We read in Revelation 19:7-8 about the marriage of the Lamb to his wife who had made herself ready. "And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints." This "marriage of the Lamb" represents the bodily-resurrected saints in fellowship with Christ in heaven, would you agree? Then the white linen garments given to her would represent the bodily-resurrected state of perfected righteousness given to her by Christ.

Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 5:1-5 of the believers' longing to be "further clothed" with immortality after death with the "house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens". Yes, we currently are covered with Christ's righteousness while in this life, but we are to be "further clothed" when we are given our incorruptible, immortal bodies in the resurrection.



No, I'm afraid that never happened. Christ's first resurrection-day ascension was Himself alone ascending into heaven to be ordained as our high priest, and to sprinkle heaven's mercy seat with His blood sacrifice. According to OT patterns in Leviticus 16:17, the high priest went alone once a year into the most holy place. "There shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation" when the high priest went into that inner sanctuary. And it was absolutely necessary that Christ be the FIRSTBORN from among the dead to appear in heaven. No resurrected Matthew 27 saints ascended with Him to heaven that day, and we don't have them ascending with Him later in Acts 1:9 either. Those resurrected souls under the altar waited patiently on earth until the AD 70 rapture which took them to heaven at that time with the rest of the newly-resurrected saints.
This is where I get the OT believers ascended with Jesus. The captivity has always been the OT Jews. When Jesus left he took them with him.

Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.

Per Acts, Jesus returns the way he left that day... He returns with 10,000's of his saints so he left with them.

Jud 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
 
Upvote 0

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,420.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Per Acts, Jesus returns the way he left that day... He returns with 10,000's of his saints so he left with them.

Jud 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

Those 10,000's of "holy ones" coming with Jesus from heaven were angels - not resurrected people returning to earth with Him at His second coming. As in Psalms 68:17. "The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels. The Lord is among them as in Sinai, in the holy place." We again see these "thousand thousands" of angelic hosts ministering to God in heaven in Daniel 7:10.

We are told in Revelation 15:8 that "no man was able to enter heaven's temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled", so there is no way that resurrected people were able to ascend with Christ on His resurrection-day ascension, or at His final ascension in Acts 1:9.

This is where I get the OT believers ascended with Jesus. The captivity has always been the OT Jews. When Jesus left he took them with him.

Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.

I agree with you that this "captivity" were all OT Jews, but that "multitude of captives" WERE the "gifts" given unto men. They did not leave the planet with Christ; they remained on earth to serve in the early church, acting as prophets, evangelists, apostles, pastors, and teachers to edify the body of Christ, as Ephesians 4:11-12 tells us.

"For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man (Christ) have somewhat also to offer". (Hebrews 8:3). At His resurrection-day ascension, Christ was ordained our high priest, and those "gifts" of the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints, Christ left behind and gave to men on earth, in order to build up the church.
 
Upvote 0

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,420.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Except we aren’t given the number of the resurrected in Matt 27. 144,000 is likely way too high for only 3000 to believe on Pentecost

Not sure why the 3,000 number on Pentecost who believed would be any kind of limit on the 144,000 Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints?

This group of 144,000 Old Testament Jewish tribal members was called "the FIRST-FRUITS unto God and to the Lamb" in Revelation 14:4. Christ was also called the "FIRST-FRUITS" raised from among the dead in 1 Corinthians 15:20 & 23. Both Christ and the 144,000 shared the same "FIRST-FRUITS" title, because they shared the very same "First resurrection" event in AD 33. Therefore, the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints amounted to a group numbering 144,000 First-fruits.

These "many" 144,000 resurrected saints in Matthew 27:52-53 were an astonishing number, but perhaps not so unbelievable an amount of people circulating in Jerusalem during that Passover week. After all, we have the AD 66 census of Passover attendees that amounted to 2 million, 700 thousand that Josephus tells us about. A group of 144,000 would not have been unreasonable, mixed in with this typical amount of Passover celebrants.
 
Upvote 0

Derf

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2021
1,463
361
61
Colorado Springs
✟98,682.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The first part of Revelation chapter 5 is the scene in heaven just prior to Jesus dying on the cross. The last part of chapter 5 is after he was crucified and what happened to believers on earth and the resurrection of the OT believers.

The 1st seal is Jesus making the triumphal entry and conquering sin and death on the cross.

The 2nd seal is Jesus taking peace from the earth. “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

The 3rd seal is purchasing the wheat and the barley for a days work. “And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:”.

I won’t go any further but all of the seals are tied to Jesus as far as I can tell. They say Revelation was written around 90 AD but the text doesn’t support that and I go with the text over history.
I've heard some say it was written earlier, but the text doesn't say when it was written, so you can't "go with the text over history" in that respect. The best you can do is say that if the text means what you think it means, then it suggests a date earlier than 90 AD. I'm personally not sure, and I appreciate some of the preterist arguments (which is where you seem to be coming from).

The one passage I think gives a hint at the writing date is where John is told to measure the temple in Rev 11:1. The other time a prophet talks about measuring a temple, it was Ezekiel, starting in Chapter 40, and it was a temple that didn't exist. I would think that John's measurements were also of a temple that didn't exist yet.

I could say that I go with the text over history, but you can see that "the text" is merely my interpretation and understanding of the text, not what the text actually says.
 
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

Derf

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2021
1,463
361
61
Colorado Springs
✟98,682.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Not sure why the 3,000 number on Pentecost who believed would be any kind of limit on the 144,000 Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints?
Imagine the effect of so many people walking around Jerusalem, telling others about Christ's resurrection, being seen day after day by people that knew they had been dead. This must have included a large number of relatives or friends of even the most ardent Sadducee, who didn't believe in the resurrection of the dead. And that number would have to have included people that had died some time before, so it might have included some famous people, like Samuel or the Maccabee brothers--or at least many whose dead bodies had already turned to dust, and they had gathered their bones into ossuaries.
This group of 144,000 Old Testament Jewish tribal members was called "the FIRST-FRUITS unto God and to the Lamb" in Revelation 14:4. Christ was also called the "FIRST-FRUITS" raised from among the dead in 1 Corinthians 15:20 & 23. Both Christ and the 144,000 shared the same "FIRST-FRUITS" title, because they shared the very same "First resurrection" event in AD 33. Therefore, the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints amounted to a group numbering 144,000 First-fruits.

These "many" 144,000 resurrected saints in Matthew 27:52-53 were an astonishing number, but perhaps not so unbelievable an amount of people circulating in Jerusalem during that Passover week. After all, we have the AD 66 census of Passover attendees that amounted to 2 million, 700 thousand that Josephus tells us about. A group of 144,000 would not have been unreasonable, mixed in with this typical amount of Passover celebrants.
The number of people circulating in Jerusalem during passover was a much greater number, but the numbering of those resurrected with Christ was all from Jerusalem tombs, and they would have to have been around between passover and pentecost, since the disciples were to wait until they were given the Holy Spirit before going out to Judea, Samaria, and the ends of the earth, and something was supposed to wait for the sealing of the 144,000--which means it wasn't immediate.

And it seems odd that the only book that talks about so great a resurrection is a book that is mostly prophetic, whether prophetic of 70 AD or something later, it was still prophetic, as in telling of future events (mostly) at the time of its writing.
[Rev 1:1 NLT] This is a revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants the events that must soon take place. He sent an angel to present this revelation to his servant John,
[Rev 4:1 NLT] Then as I looked, I saw a door standing open in heaven, and the same voice I had heard before spoke to me like a trumpet blast. The voice said, "Come up here, and I will show you what must happen after this."

Perhaps the 144,000 "firstfruits" is of a different plant or harvest. Paul called the house of Stephanas "firstfruits".
[1Co 16:15 KJV] I beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and [that] they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints,)

Or, if "firstfruits" is supposed to be in the same context as Christ's resurrection, it might be telling us that those raised from the dead at His resurrection were not raised in their glorified bodies--that they weren't raised to never die again, but merely experienced an overflow of power from God when He raised Jesus from the dead. And that they WEREN'T the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation.
 
Upvote 0

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,420.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Or, if "firstfruits" is supposed to be in the same context as Christ's resurrection, it might be telling us that those raised from the dead at His resurrection were not raised in their glorified bodies--that they weren't raised to never die again, but merely experienced an overflow of power from God when He raised Jesus from the dead

Any saint that was ever resurrected was in their glorified, immortal body. They could never die again, but were like the angels, being the children of the resurrection, as Luke 20:36 wrote. If it were possible for a resurrected saint to die again, this would flatly contradict Hebrews 9:27 that says, "it is appointed unto men ONCE TO DIE, and after that the judgment." ONCE ONLY. No double jeopardy for the saints when it comes to physical death.

Imagine the effect of so many people walking around Jerusalem, telling others about Christ's resurrection, being seen day after day by people that knew they had been dead. This must have included a large number of relatives or friends of even the most ardent Sadducee, who didn't believe in the resurrection of the dead. And that number would have to have included people that had died some time before, so it might have included some famous people, like Samuel or the Maccabee brothers--or at least many whose dead bodies had already turned to dust, and they had gathered their bones into ossuaries.

Yes, to all of this. This astounding event in Matthew 27:52-53 was the very reason why the discouraging error of the Hymenaeus and Philetus heresy cropped up. These two men were claiming that the resurrection was past already (2 Timothy 2:17-18). They must have either heard of these Matthew 27 saints, or seen them operating in the church, and were presuming that this past, AD 33 resurrection was the only one that would ever happen. This was wrong teaching, of course, since AD 33 was only the "FIRST resurrection" of the "FIRST-fruits" to be raised from the dead. Another resurrection was about to come for that generation in the near future, which Paul explained to both Felix, those on Mars Hill, and to Timothy (Acts 24:15, Acts 17:31, 2 Timothy 4:1).

Perhaps the 144,000 "firstfruits" is of a different plant or harvest. Paul called the house of Stephanas "firstfruits".
[1Co 16:15 KJV] I beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and [that] they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints,)

This "First-fruits" term is alternately used on occasion for a spiritual type of group harvest of those becoming believers, as in James 1:18 where the believers were called "a kind of first-fruits of His creatures". But there is a reason why these 144,000 could not possibly be just a spiritual kind of harvest. In the description of the 144,000 First-fruits, they are said to be "redeemed from the earth". This was the "redemption of their body" coming out of the ground.

Additionally, the 144,000 were all called "virgins". That is because there is no marriage nor giving in marriage in the bodily-resurrected state. And they were described as being sinless; "And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God." Sinless perfection without deceit is a feature of the bodily-resurrected state for believers.


And it seems odd that the only book that talks about so great a resurrection is a book that is mostly prophetic, whether prophetic of 70 AD or something later, it was still prophetic, as in telling of future events (mostly) at the time of its writing.

Well, in Revelation 1:19, John was told to "Write the things which thou hast seen" (past events), and the things which are" (presently happening in John's days), and the things which are about to be hereafter;" (soon to unfold in the time John was writing). This language allows for even ancient historical events to be described in Revelation, as a backdrop to provide a context for the current and future events John was writing about.

 
Upvote 0

Derf

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2021
1,463
361
61
Colorado Springs
✟98,682.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I'm quite interested in your comments on this. Because your user name is on-topic with it, I take it that it's something you've looked into quite a bit. I'm going to drill you a bit, if you don't mind, 1. because it will help me understand your position better, and 2. because I want to find the holes in your doctrine. I will try to do it respectfully, but if it doesn't seem that way, I hope you will still indulge the questions.
Any saint that was ever resurrected was in their glorified, immortal body. They could never die again, but were like the angels, being the children of the resurrection, as Luke 20:36 wrote. If it were possible for a resurrected saint to die again, this would flatly contradict Hebrews 9:27 that says, "it is appointed unto men ONCE TO DIE, and after that the judgment." ONCE ONLY. No double jeopardy for the saints when it comes to physical death.
I question whether this makes sense for all cases of resurrection, especially those resurrected before Jesus' death. It puts you into the same quandary about the use of the term "firstfruits" not being accurate as you seem to think I'm in regarding Heb 9:27. If Jesus isn't really the first (because of those He raised from the dead before His death, Samuel, Moses (at the Transfiguration) and possibly some raised by Elijah and Elisha), then how can He be called the "firstfruits" of the resurrection? And if He's not "technically" the firstfruits, and that's an ok way to understand the scripture, then the same reasoning can be used to justify an additional resurrection of the mortal body prior to the resurrection to the glorified body.
Any saint that was ever resurrected was in their glorified, immortal body. They could never die again, but were like the angels, being the children of the resurrection, as Luke 20:36 wrote. If it were possible for a resurrected saint to die again, this would flatly contradict Hebrews 9:27 that says, "it is appointed unto men ONCE TO DIE, and after that the judgment." ONCE ONLY. No double jeopardy for the saints when it comes to physical death.
Once that assumption is made--that the only way to be resurrected is to be resurrected into the glorified body, your conclusion is a good one. But that assumption needs to be verified somehow. I've proposed a few situations where it doesn't make the most sense.

Jesus in Luke 20:36 was speaking of an era of time, as much as an event ("in the resurrection", not "after the resurrection"). So it "the resurrection" had not taken place, as you point out below, then those that were raised prior to Jesus' death were not "in" the resurrection of Luke 20:36.
Yes, to all of this. This astounding event in Matthew 27:52-53 was the very reason why the discouraging error of the Hymenaeus and Philetus heresy cropped up. These two men were claiming that the resurrection was past already (2 Timothy 2:17-18). They must have either heard of these Matthew 27 saints, or seen them operating in the church, and were presuming that this past, AD 33 resurrection was the only one that would ever happen. This was wrong teaching, of course, since AD 33 was only the "FIRST resurrection" of the "FIRST-fruits" to be raised from the dead. Another resurrection was about to come for that generation in the near future, which Paul explained to both Felix, those on Mars Hill, and to Timothy (Acts 24:15, Acts 17:31, 2 Timothy 4:1).
Your three citation there EASILY comport with a resurrection that has not yet happened, especially since it is unlikely even in your doctrine that the resurrection of the unjust has happened, right? In other words, if the resurrection of the unjust has not happened yet, and Paul refers to it in those citations, then it's reasonable to conclude that the resurrection of the just has also not yet happened.

But because there's no indication of an earlier and later resurrection of the just prior to the one that he talks about, it is more easily understood as supportive of a future resurrection.

This "First-fruits" term is alternately used on occasion for a spiritual type of group harvest of those becoming believers, as in James 1:18 where the believers were called "a kind of first-fruits of His creatures". But there is a reason why these 144,000 could not possibly be just a spiritual kind of harvest. In the description of the 144,000 First-fruits, they are said to be "redeemed from the earth". This was the "redemption of their body" coming out of the ground.
An interesting possibility. But why would they need to be "sealed" from harm, if they are in their resurrection bodies?
Additionally, the 144,000 were all called "virgins". That is because there is no marriage nor giving in marriage in the bodily-resurrected state. And they were described as being sinless; "And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God." Sinless perfection without deceit is a feature of the bodily-resurrected state for believers.
Again...interesting idea. I'll have to look into it. I think your idea discards too easily other possibilities that fit better with the text.
Well, in Revelation 1:19, John was told to "Write the things which thou hast seen" (past events), and the things which are" (presently happening in John's days), and the things which are about to be hereafter;" (soon to unfold in the time John was writing). This language allows for even ancient historical events to be described in Revelation, as a backdrop to provide a context for the current and future events John was writing about.
We were told what John "hast seen"--it was described in verses 10-18 in the same chapter. It was reiterated, along with some interpretation, in vs 20. "Things which are" can easily be the letters to the churches (their condition at the time of the vision). And then we get the transition to "things which shall be hereafter" introduced with the words, strangely enough, "I will shew thee things which must be hereafter" (in 4:1)

So while I think your ideas are intriguing, your case is weak, and those passages are easily understood in the traditional ways, not requiring a special and significant extra resurrection to eternal life that is barely referenced by only a single New Testament author, and never by Jesus himself.
 
Upvote 0

3 Resurrections

That's 666 YEARS, folks
Aug 21, 2021
1,838
294
Taylors
✟84,420.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I'm quite interested in your comments on this. Because your user name is on-topic with it, I take it that it's something you've looked into quite a bit. I'm going to drill you a bit, if you don't mind, 1. because it will help me understand your position better, and 2. because I want to find the holes in your doctrine. I will try to do it respectfully, but if it doesn't seem that way, I hope you will still indulge the questions.

I sense a kindred spirit. I, too, have been trying to find the holes in my own views for 9 years now. If there is error within them, I want to know it and discard whatever is not in sync with the entirety of scripture. That is why I present these online, in case those with a critical eye might see something that I do not.

If Jesus isn't really the first (because of those He raised from the dead before His death, Samuel, Moses (at the Transfiguration) and possibly some raised by Elijah and Elisha), then how can He be called the "firstfruits" of the resurrection?

The term "First-fruits" is connected to the agricultural harvests under Mosaic law. God used this symbolism connected with the 3 typical harvest seasons in the land of Canaan (Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles) to represent three group resurrection events taking place over the span of history. Even though there were a sprinkling of other individuals resurrected over the millennia, from Elijah's ministry forward, we know that NONE of them had ever ascended to heaven (John 3:13). And this ascension to heaven for a glorified, resurrected saint is the culmination of our salvation process.

It is not enough simply to have our incorruptible, immortal glorified bodies raised above ground out of the grave. For our salvation process to be completely perfected, we must finally be standing face-to-face with God's glory in our glorified bodies, where we are "presented faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy" (Jude 1:24) This is how Christ became the unique one of ALL those previous individual samples of individuals that were bodily resurrected before Himself. Christ was the unique "First-born", and the "First-begotten" one out of those other 144,000 First-fruits to ascend to His Father in heaven, just before morning on His resurrection day. (As in "I have begotten thee from the womb before the morning" - Psalms 110:3 LXX). No other resurrected person could enter heaven until Jesus had opened up the way by going there first. That's why the Mosaic law put such emphasis upon the importance of the "First-born" of the matrix being dedicated to the Lord. It symbolized Christ the glorified, resurrected "First-born" ascending to the Father's presence before anyone else.

This is also why Paul spoke of a "better resurrection" than the few cases of women who "had received their dead raised to life again" (Hebrews 11:35). For those few to have been given a glorified resurrected body was wonderful, but they still had to remain on the earth in that resurrected state at least until Christ had become the "First-born" and the "First-begotten" in heaven that resurrection day. A "better resurrection" was one which allowed an entire resurrected group to ascend to heaven and the Father. This happened for the first time in AD 70. For the first time, glorified, resurrected men were allowed to enter the temple in heaven when the last of those 7 angels had finished pouring out their plagues in Revelation 15:8.

An interesting possibility. But why would they need to be "sealed" from harm, if they are in their resurrection bodies?

The 144,000 First-fruits, Matthew 27 resurrected saints of the "First resurrection" had remained on the earth, up until that AD 70 Pentecost day resurrection. They had been "sealed" on their own resurrection day (when that group were given those white robes indicating their resurrected state - Rev. 6:9-11). A "seal" in scripture represents a delayed fulfillment of an assured promise. We ourselves even in this life are "sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise" dwelling within us until "the redemption of the purchased possession" - the resurrection of our physical bodies. These 144,000 Matthew 27 saints were "sealed" at their own resurrection event to show that their eventual, final ascension to heaven and God's presence was still an assured promise, but only delayed for a "little season" after that AD 33 "First resurrection".

We remember that those 144,000 were said to be the only ones who could learn that "new song" ( Revelation 14:3). That is because their situation was a unique one. As being the group of the resurrected "multitude of captives" which were given to men by the ascending Christ, they patiently served in the early church, edifying the believers. They acted as prophets, apostles, evangelists, pastors, and teachers, as Ephesians 4:11-12 tells us. Paul also said in Romans 8:23 of these Matthew 27 saints, that the church "HAD the First-fruits of the Spirit" among them, patiently waiting along with the church for their final escort into heaven with the others.
e
Your three citation there EASILY comport with a resurrection that has not yet happened, especially since it is unlikely even in your doctrine that the resurrection of the unjust has happened, right?

I would say along with Paul in Acts 24:15 that a resurrection of both the just and the unjust was about to take place in his generation. That resurrection of the "unjust" only resulted in their physical bodies perishing in the grave, unlike the physical bodies of the just, which were given immortality - a quality only found with Christ, and by extension those who are IN Christ.

When the souls of the unjust come from Hades to stand before God in judgment, they have no protective righteousness of Christ covering them. Therefore, God's consuming fire destroys the wicked, both body and soul (Luke 12:5). It is as Psalms 1:4-6 said, "The ungodly are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous. For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish."
 
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

Derf

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2021
1,463
361
61
Colorado Springs
✟98,682.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I sense a kindred spirit. I, too, have been trying to find the holes in my own views for 9 years now. If there is error within them, I want to know it and discard whatever is not in sync with the entirety of scripture. That is why I present these online, in case those with a critical eye might see something that I do not.
I've had my own hobbyhorse for about the same amount of time--that I'm questioning the idea that "death" means "separation", and that everywhere the New Testament talks about "death", it really means "separated from God". I've been trying to re-orient my thinking of to see if the scripture can be taken more literally when it says "death". You might notice that it comes up pretty often.
The term "First-fruits" is connected to the agricultural harvests under Mosaic law. God used this symbolism connected with the 3 typical harvest seasons in the land of Canaan (Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles) to represent three group resurrection events taking place over the span of history. Even though there were a sprinkling of other individuals resurrected over the millennia, from Elijah's ministry forward, we know that NONE of them had ever ascended to heaven (John 3:13). And this ascension to heaven for a glorified, resurrected saint is the culmination of our salvation process.
I went to Exodus to look through some of the references to these "harvest" feasts, and I got the impression that there were "firstfruits" (spring) and the "ingathering" (fall), and Pentecost was listed with them as one of the three times all males were to come to Jerusalem, but it wasn't called a "harvest", nor did it have the additional baggage of other feasts/holy days around it (like Passover/Unleavened Bread in the Spring and Booths/Atonement in the Fall). Even the name "Pentecost" or "Weeks" seems to have no relationship to harvest-type activities, even though it seems clear that it is the kicking-off point of the church being made "fishers of men", which is like harvesting.
It is not enough simply to have our incorruptible, immortal glorified bodies raised above ground out of the grave. For our salvation process to be completely perfected, we must finally be standing face-to-face with God's glory in our glorified bodies, where we are "presented faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy" (Jude 1:24) This is how Christ became the unique one of ALL those previous individual samples of individuals that were bodily resurrected before Himself. Christ was the unique "First-born", and the "First-begotten" one out of those other 144,000 First-fruits to ascend to His Father in heaven, just before morning on His resurrection day. (As in "I have begotten thee from the womb before the morning" - Psalms 110:3 LXX). No other resurrected person could enter heaven until Jesus had opened up the way by going there first. That's why the Mosaic law put such emphasis upon the importance of the "First-born" of the matrix being dedicated to the Lord. It symbolized Christ the glorified, resurrected "First-born" ascending to the Father's presence before anyone else.
I think I agree that the salvation process needs to have that final activity, and I think that's the difference in the two groups represented by:
[1Ti 4:10 KJV] For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.
He is savior to all men in that all are raised from the dead, eventually, but specially of those that believe, that we will be with Him forever ("face to face with God's glory").
This is also why Paul spoke of a "better resurrection" than the few cases of women who "had received their dead raised to life again" (Hebrews 11:35). For those few to have been given a glorified resurrected body was wonderful, but they still had to remain on the earth in that resurrected state at least until Christ had become the "First-born" and the "First-begotten" in heaven that resurrection day. A "better resurrection" was one which allowed an entire resurrected group to ascend to heaven and the Father. This happened for the first time in AD 70. For the first time, glorified, resurrected men were allowed to enter the temple in heaven when the last of those 7 angels had finished pouring out their plagues in Revelation 15:8.
I think the "better" resurrection makes more sense as one that is lasting, rather than one that is temporary (they died again), because it is contrasted with those that were able to save themselves from death but chose not to: "not accepting deliverance". If that's the case, then it could apply to those resurrected with Christ--that they were raised but not in their glorified/incorruptible bodies.

The 144,000 First-fruits, Matthew 27 resurrected saints of the "First resurrection" had remained on the earth, up until that AD 70 Pentecost day resurrection. They had been "sealed" on their own resurrection day (when that group were given those white robes indicating their resurrected state - Rev. 6:9-11). A "seal" in scripture represents a delayed fulfillment of an assured promise. We ourselves even in this life are "sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise" dwelling within us until "the redemption of the purchased possession" - the resurrection of our physical bodies. These 144,000 Matthew 27 saints were "sealed" at their own resurrection event to show that their eventual, final ascension to heaven and God's presence was still an assured promise, but only delayed for a "little season" after that AD 33 "First resurrection".

We remember that those 144,000 were said to be the only ones who could learn that "new song" ( Revelation 14:3). That is because their situation was a unique one. As being the group of the resurrected "multitude of captives" which were given to men by the ascending Christ, they patiently served in the early church, edifying the believers. They acted as prophets, apostles, evangelists, pastors, and teachers, as Ephesians 4:11-12 tells us. Paul also said in Romans 8:23 of these Matthew 27 saints, that the church "HAD the First-fruits of the Spirit" among them, patiently waiting along with the church for their final escort into heaven with the others.
If Eph 4:11-12 is talking about those 144,000, are you saying that nobody else were "prophets, apostles, evangelists, pastors, and teachers"? If not nobody else, why do you say those verses apply at all to those 144,000?

I would say along with Paul in Acts 24:15 that a resurrection of both the just and the unjust was about to take place in his generation. That resurrection of the "unjust" only resulted in their physical bodies perishing in the grave, unlike the physical bodies of the just, which were given immortality - a quality only found with Christ, and by extension those who are IN Christ.
That sounds a little grisly. Are you saying that the unjust were resurrected in their previous, corruptible bodies, but they weren't able to get out of their graves, so they died again and their bodies restarted decomposition?

All the apostles (the normal human type) seem to think both that the resurrection and Christ's kingdom were coming soon. So it seems reasonable that if they were not correct about the kingdom, then the resurrection also might have been delayed.

Why would you say that only those who are in Christ will receive an immortal body? If death is only supposed to happen to a man once, why would you now say it happens again? What purpose is served by resurrecting bodies only to let them die and decay again?
When the souls of the unjust come from Hades to stand before God in judgment, they have no protective righteousness of Christ covering them. Therefore, God's consuming fire destroys the wicked, both body and soul (Luke 12:5). It is as Psalms 1:4-6 said, "The ungodly are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous. For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish."
Maybe this answers my questions to your previous paragraph, but I hope you will still answer them directly.

I agree they have no "protective righteousness", but are they raised in the same type of body they previously had? You might notice this is getting into the "death"="separation" mantra. I've been thinking that if they really died (like, there was nothing left of them--no functioning, no thoughts, etc), then it's quite the miracle for them to be alive once more. And the salvation of Christ applies to them in some way, though not in every way, it's possible that's how it applies--that they are raised from the dead. But if they are raised after the "once to die" condition from Heb 9:27, then what else is available to them, but a lasting condition without death, described as the "lake of fire" in Rev 20 (which is why it is given the term "2nd death"--because it isn't like the first death, or "death" at all, but that kind of death is no longer applicable to mankind).
 
Upvote 0