If Amils are right and we are in the Millennium "Kingdom" now, what other verses back this up?

rwb said:

Prove through Scripture the first resurrection is the Church's resurrection. I for one would be very interested in seeing biblical support for this opinion. Because in one sense I might find some agreement. If by the Church's resurrection, you mean Christians who make up the full embodiment of Christ. It's hard to see how this can be viewed as the first resurrection of the dead, because truthfully Christ is the first. But I would be interested in understanding how you arrive at this opinion using the Bible?

Click to expand...

What is more: what corroboration do they have for 2 future resurrections separated by 1000 years+? Nothing!

Timtofly said:

John used the term "souls" because he was being figurative, not literal. We know they had literal physical bodies, because that is what Paul taught in 2 Corinthians 5. Even John pointed out in Revelation 7, they always had bodies and were serving God day and night in His Temple.

Click to expand...

What some are not grasping, which may or may not include you as well, but it is certainly including Amills not grasping this---Revelation 20:4 is showing 2 states of a person. It starts off by showing they are souls. Why would that be? Because they have literally been martyred, it's only natural that they would now be souls without bodies at that stage. But once this happens---and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years---this involving the first resurrection---it is nonsensical that they are still in a disembodied state at that stage.

Imagine if Christ had never bodily risen and that He just remained in a disembodied state indefinitely, how could He have defeated death if He never bodily rises first? This would obviously mean He never rises from the dead since no one in a disembodied state can rise from the dead unless they rise bodily first. Otherwise, from the perspective of those still physically alive on earth at the time, unless someone who has physically died has bodily risen from the dead, they are still physically dead in the meantime.

What Amils are saying per their interpretation of Revelation 20:4 is basically this, once these saints have been martyred, they remain bodily dead throughout the remainder of the thousand years. They remain in a disembodied state until Christ returns after the thousand years have expired. Meaning after satan's little season in this case.

DavidPT said:

This right here is yet another reason I can't be Amill. I'm not Catholic nor am I planning on converting to that religion. One can see Catholicism all over that view. Especially when it comes to reigning with Christ a thousand years in heaven per that view.

Click to expand...

Thank you so much David. Yup I like the way you put it. I'm grateful for your understanding. Grace and peace in Christ.

RandyPNW said:

It's okay to disagree. That's how we all learn.

To answer your question, I feel that Jesus focused on this age because it would end with his Coming and with his Kingdom taking control of the world away from Satan. The focus was on the need to fight deception and to prevail in difficult conditions.

In the Millennial Age, I do think things will be easier. Satan will be bound. There will still be sin, but international relations will be at ease, and individual nations will be more accountable to God.

Click to expand...

This won't be surprising to you, but I disagree. You not only believe that Jesus focused on this age, but you apparently believe He never had anything at all to say about the age to come. Why would He never have anything to say about that? I don't believe that makes any sense.

But, He did speak of the age to come. In Luke 20:34-36 He indicated that the resurrection of the dead would occur at the end of the age and that no one would get married or die anymore in the age to come. That doesn't match your understanding of the age to come. Can you tell me how you interpret this passage:

Luke 20:34 Jesus replied, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36 and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God’s children, since they are children of the resurrection.

RandyPNW said:

Well, I have a hard time wrapping my brain around the idea of the Millennium being now, the present age. By its very nature, it is difficult to correlate, because Rev 20 describes the Millennial Era as different from the present era. There are bound to be differences since they are spelled out as such.

Yes, this is why I'm a Premillennialist. It's because the Bible depicts the Millennium as future, following the present age and the time of Antichrist.

Click to expand...

Can you tell me what is different about the timing of the following two passages:

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, 6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Notice the similarities in these passages which I highlighted by color coding each one.

According to Revelation 1:5-6, when does Jesus Christ reign? Now. He was reigning already as of the time John wrote the book long ago. John indicated that Jesus currently is "the prince of the kings of the earth". Whose resurrection is the first resurrection? Christ's. That's what saying that He was the first begotten of the dead means. Other scripture, like Acts 26:23, Colossians 1:18 and 1 Corinthians 15:20 indicate that Christ's resurrection was the first resurrection as well. The context is that His resurrection was the first resurrection unto bodily immortality. Continuing in Rev 1:5-6, when were believers made kings and priests (or made into a kingdom of priests) "unto God and his Father"? Long ago already. What does it mean for believers that Jesus "loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood"? It means that the second death has no power over us.

So, when you take Revelation 1:5-6 into account, that should tell you about the timing of a verse like Revelation 20:6. And the timing supports Amillennialism.

DavidPT said:

This right here is yet another reason I can't be Amill. I'm not Catholic nor am I planning on converting to that religion. One can see Catholicism all over that view. Especially when it comes to reigning with Christ a thousand years in heaven per that view.

Click to expand...

This is complete nonsense. Most Amils are not Catholics, so Catholicism has nothing to do with Amillennialism.

DavidPT said:

What some are not grasping, which may or may not include you as well, but it is certainly including Amills not grasping this---Revelation 20:4 is showing 2 states of a person. It starts off by showing they are souls. Why would that be? Because they have literally been martyred, it's only natural that they would now be souls without bodies at that stage. But once this happens---and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years---this involving the first resurrection---it is nonsensical that they are still in a disembodied state at that stage.

Click to expand...

That's not quite right David. Rev 20 is showing the fate of humanity, and what becomes of each of us when we physically die. We are either souls living and reigning with Christ in heaven, because we will not be physically resurrected in immortal, incorruptible bodies until the last day when the trumpet sounds the return of Christ and this age has ended.

OR we are among the rest of the dead, who will not live again until time, symbolized as a thousand years are finished. Then when Christ returns, the rest of the dead too will be physically resurrected to stand before the Judgment Throne of God, to be judged by the things found written in the books.

DavidPT said:

Imagine if Christ had never bodily risen and that He just remained in a disembodied state indefinitely, how could He have defeated death if He never bodily rises first? This would obviously mean He never rises from the dead since no one in a disembodied state can rise from the dead unless they rise bodily first. Otherwise, from the perspective of those still physically alive on earth at the time, unless someone who has physically died has bodily risen from the dead, they are still physically dead in the meantime.

Click to expand...

It is because death could not hold Him that Christ became the first resurrection from the dead that we must partake of in life to have no fear of the second death. Even before His bodily resurrection on the third day, He commended His spirit to the Father in death. Through His spirit (rational soul) Christ gave up His life. That's why He could promise the thief on the cross that he would be with Him in paradise on that very day. He did not ascend bodily to Father the day He died, but as spirit/soul, (which is what a living soul without a body is) Christ ascended to heaven. And there prepared us place for His own when they too physically died.

Luke 23:46 (KJV) And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

Spirit - 4151. πνεῦμα pneuma (pneûma) - from G4154; a current of air, i.e. breath (blast) or a breeze; by analogy or figuratively, a spirit, i.e. (human) the rational soul, (by implication) vital principle, mental disposition, etc., or (superhuman) an angel, demon, or (divine) God, Christ's spirit, the Holy Spirit:—ghost, life, spirit(-ual, -ually), mind.

DavidPT said:

What Amils are saying per their interpretation of Revelation 20:4 is basically this, once these saints have been martyred, they remain bodily dead throughout the remainder of the thousand years. They remain in a disembodied state until Christ returns after the thousand years have expired. Meaning after satan's little season in this case.

Click to expand...

That's exactly what Scripture shows us David! When we live and die in faith, only our physical bodies are without life. Christ has promised that all who die in Him will still live, not in the flesh, but as spirit/soul which is what a soul without a body is in heaven.

John 14:2-4 (KJV) In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

John 13:36 (KJV) Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards.

DavidPT said:

How can they be surrounded if they are not even on the earth at the time?

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? They are obviously surrounded before they are caught up to meet the Lord in the air. That isn't spelled out in each passage, but we know that is what will happen. Obviously, believers are going to be caught up to Christ before His wrath comes down on unbelievers.

After all, the dead in Christ rise first, followed by the rapture, and that it is obvious that these two events have already preceded what is recorded in Revelation 19:19. That is why those with Christ are seen descending with Him, because the dead in heaven have risen, and those who are alive and remain, they have been caught up together with them in the air, therefore leaving no camp of saints remaining on the earth in order to be surrounded, in any sense.

Click to expand...

It is the souls of the dead in Christ that come with Him from heaven. Neither the Revelation 19 nor the Revelation 20 passage specifically reference believers being caught up to Him at that time, but we know that will happen after He descends from heaven. Not all of the passages about the second coming contain all the same details, as I've pointed out to you many times before.

RandyPNW said:

This doesn't mean mankind always has to capitulate, nor does it mean we can't arrive at an age where Satan is bound and mankind can more freely display goodness and victory over our lower passions as peoples.

But I agree--in the present age large-scale success in righteousness among peoples doesn't last. Satan has to be completely bound for that to happen, in my opinion.

Click to expand...

I am not sure where you got these ideas. But they are not biblical. They run across the biblical revelation of fallen man. You clearly have far too high a regard for the character and ability of man. You obviously deny the total depravity of man. You attribute qualities to unregenerate man that do not exist in Rev 20 or anywhere else in Holy Writ. Where does it teach this stuff in Rev 20? Nowhere! Where does it teach this stuff in rest of Scripture? Nowhere! This (sadly) is representative of the Premil fundamentals. Premils force so much upon the sacred text that does not exist in it. While they give lip-service to Rev 20 their expectation has no likeness to Rev 20. When pressed to show their tenets in Rev 20 they sidestep this by repeating their opinion, as if that is suffice.

There is no goodness in natural man. There is nothing but putridness and corruption.

Does the Bible attribute any wholesome qualities to the flesh? Is there any godly attribute in the flesh? Is there any holy ability in the flesh to please God? Is there any virtue in man outside of Christ? Is there a slither of goodness? Is there an ability to please God? Is there not a divine spark within man that God can work with? When man is left to his own devices will he come to God?

No, no, no!

Solomon acknowledged in 1 Kings 8:46 confirms: “for there is no man that sinneth not.”

Psalm 14:3 declares, speaking of man, “there is none that doeth good, no, not one.”

Can you see it here? We are born spiritually dead. We are born facing the wrong direction. That’s why we need to turn around. Man is born totally depraved. He is born in sin and iniquity.

The Psalmist outlines man’s grim state: “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Psalm 51:5).

The Bible teaches that unsaved man is not able to save himself, nor to initiate it, nor to help it along, nor even to desire it.

Psalm 58:3-4 says, “The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear.”

Psalm 143:2 says: “in thy sight shall no man living be justified.”

Proverbs 22:15 says: “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child.”

Ecclesiastes 3:12 says, “I know that there is no good in them.”

Ecclesiastes 7:20 says, “For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.”

Job 11:12 says of sinful man: “For vain man would be wise, though man be born like a wild ass's colt.”

Job 15:14-16 says, “What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous? Behold, he putteth no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight. How much more abominable and filthy (or corrupt) is man, which drinketh iniquity like water?”

Job 25:4 correlates: “How then can man be justified with God? or how can he be clean that is born of a woman?”

Isaiah 64:6-7 says, “we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. And there is none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee: for thou hast hid thy face from us, and hast consumed us, because of our iniquities.”

Man is an enemy of God. He is a rebel to His commands and demands; he doesn’t understand the deep things of God and he does not have the ability to fulfill the high demands of God.

The Old Testament prophet Jeremiah confirms man’s awful predicament in Jeremiah 13:23: “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.”

Can a black Ethiopian change his skin? Does he have the ability to change the color of his skin? Can the leopard change the variety of his spots? Of course not! These things are natural to them, and they cannot be altered. So is sin and rebellion to the natural man. These things are natural to him, and cannot be altered with natural ingenuity. You have as much chance of changing your own nature as the Ethiopian can change his skin and the leopard his spots.

Romans 3:10-12 explains why, saying, “There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one."

Man is in a wretched spiritual condition outside of Jesus. Man is dead, blind and deaf. He cannot come to God. God must come to Him.

Romans 3:23 testifies, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”

This doesn’t leave anyone out – it says “all.”

That’s why the Bible says in Ephesians 2:3: "we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others."

1 Corinthians 2:14 says, “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

This passage says it all!!! The natural man cannot in any way receive “the things of the Spirit of God” never mine act upon them. Fallen man is an alien and enemy by nature to heaven’s demands.

The Bible says in 1 John 1:8-10 says, "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us."

The unregenerate are unable to hear Christ’s words (John 8:43-44); they are not able to accept nor to understand the things of the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:14); they are not able to submit to God's law (Romans 8:7); they are not able to please God (Romans 8:8); they are not able to see the light of the gospel, because they are spiritually blind (2 Corinthians 4:4); they are not able to come to Christ (John 6:44). The Bible says they are dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1 and 5).

How much biblical evidence do you need Randy to understand how corrupt the flesh is and how depraved it is?

1. The Bible says that the unsaved (who only have one nature – the flesh) are “ignorant” (Romans 10:3; 1 Corinthians 14:38; Ephesians 4:18; Hebrews 5:2; 2 Peter 3:5) of God and spiritual things.
2. The Bible says that prior to salvation man is a spiritual corpse that is “dead in … sins” (Ephesians 2:1; Colossians 2:13).
3. Prior to salvation man is spiritually “blind” (Matthew 13:13, 15-16; 2 Corinthians 4:4).
4. Prior to salvation man is spiritually “deaf” ((Psalm 58:4; Ezekiel 12:2; Matthew 13:13, 15-16).
5. Prior to salvation man is “by nature a child of wrath” (Ephesians 2:3).
6. The Bible says that “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God” (1 Corinthians 2:14).
7. The Bible says that “they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them” (1 Corinthians 2:14).
8. The Bible says “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).
9. Prior to salvation one is a spiritual “prisoner” of Satan (Isaiah 14:17, 42:6, 61:1).
10.Prior to salvation one is bound in “chains” of sin (Psalm 68:6, 107:8-16; Isaiah 61:1).
11.Outside of Christ there is “none that seeketh after God” (Romans 3:10).
12.Outside of Christ there is “none righteous” (Romans 3:10).
13.Outside of Christ there is “none that understandeth” (Isaiah 14:20; Romans 3:10).
14.Outside of Christ there is “none that doeth good” (Ecclesiastes 3:12; Romans 3:10).
15.Prior to salvation the unregenerate does not hear the words of Christ (John 8:43-44).
16.Prior to salvation the unregenerate is not able to come to Christ (John 6:44, 64-65).
17.Prior to salvation the unregenerate is not able to submit to God's law (Romans 8:7).
18.Prior to salvation the unregenerate is not able to please God (Romans 8:8).
19.Prior to salvation you were “alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works” (Colossians 1:21).
20.Outside of Christ your “old man” was “corrupt according to the deceitful lusts” (Ephesians 4:22).
21.Outside of Christ you were ‘vain in your imaginations, and your foolish heart was darkened’ (Romans 1:21).
22.Outside of Christ you were ‘walking in the vanity of your mind, Having your understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that was in you, because of the blindness of your heart” (Ephesians 4:17-19).
23. It says, “the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.” (2 Corinthians 4:4).
24.Outside of Christ the Bible says “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9).
25.The Bible says that outside of Christ “I know nothing by myself” (1 Corinthians 4:4).
26.The unsaved “are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6).
27.The Bible says that outside of Christ man is “deceived” (Job 12:16, 15:21; Romans 7:11; 2 Timothy 3:13; Titus 3:3; Revelation 18:23, 20:10).

We are looking at man without God. We are looking at self here. We are looking at the flesh. We are looking at the real you, when you are not in the Spirit. Left to his own impulses the flesh will always run from God’s high and lofty demands.

RandyPNW said:

Nothing is "hyper-literalist" about reading Rev 20 literally. A statement of fact must be understood as fact, not relegated it meaningless by turning it to symbolism.

Click to expand...

This was an odd thing to say. Clearly, there is symbolism within the book of Revelation. We all seem to disagree on how much symbolism there is, but we all agree that there's at least some symbolism there. What you said here would indicate that the parts that are symbolic are meaningless and it's the only parts that are literal which have meaning. You probably didn't intend to make that point, but that's how you're coming across here.

Amils see Revelation 20 as being very important despite recognizing the symbolism used there. If something is described symbolically, what it's describing in reality is very important regardless of whether it is described literally or symbolically.

RandyPNW said:

The Amil argument is that Christ has defeated Satan on the cross,

Click to expand...

Do you disagree with that argument? Is that not what passages like Hebrews 2:14-15 and 1 John 3:8 indicate?

and the NT age is sort of a "clean up" operation. Both sides must acknowledge that Paul referred to Satan as the prince of this world. He still has power and the ability to persecute the Church. This is not just true towards the end of this age, with the rise of Antichrist, but it has been true all down through the age, with the rise of many Antichrists.

Satan was given power by God. He is never more powerful than God. God obviously is letting Satan make his eternal decision to withdraw from God and from His word. And God is letting the consequences play out on earth.

Click to expand...

What would you say is the difference between what Satan was able to do during Old Testament times compared to New Testament times?

Spiritual Jew said:

Do you disagree with that argument? Is that not what passages like Hebrews 2:14-15 and 1 John 3:8 indicate?

What would you say is the difference between what Satan was able to do during Old Testament times compared to New Testament times?

Click to expand...

Colossians 2:15 tells us: “having spoiled (or divested or disarmed) principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.”

Satan has not been rendered immobile or inoperative but is limited in his power, kingship and influence by being defeated on the cross. He is like a dog on a chain. He is shackled.

DavidPT said:

John only speaks of two resurrections in Revelation 20. And the most important resurrection of all, other than Christ's, Amills would have us believe John never saw that resurrection in Revelation 20, the bodily resurrection of the saved at the 2nd coming of Christ.

Click to expand...

And Premils would have us believe that the most important resurrection of all is not even referenced in Revelation 20. Premils don't allow scripture to interpret scripture. In the rest of scripture, Christ's resurrection is referred to as the first resurrection (Acts 26:23, 1 Cor 15:20;22, Col 1:18, Rev 1:5). So, that should be the first thing that comes to mind when seeing a reference to "the first resurrection", but that is not the case for Premils.

RandyPNW said:

No, I'm not being obstinate and demanding, as you seem to be. I'm just answering your complaints over the Premil position. Often your all-inclusive approach does not fit what I personally believe.

As you said, I base my argument on Rev 20--I don't need to catalogue a whole pile of Scripture proofs when it is that simple. The book speaks of a future period of a 1000 years. I just accept that.

Click to expand...

But, you just assume that the thousand years is future. You don't recognize that your interpretation of Revelation 20 contradicts many other more straightforward scriptures like Matthew 13:47-50, John 5:28-29, Matthew 25:31-46, Matthew 28:18, Ephesians 1:19-23, Col 1:12-13, 1 Cor 15:22-24, 1 Thess 4:13-5:9, 2 Thess 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-13 and others which teach that Christ is reigning now, that we are in Christ's kingdom now, that all of the dead are resurrected at the same general time, that everyone is judged at the same general time, that all believers will be changed at the same time at Christ's return, that all living unbelievers will be killed at Christ's return and so on.

sovereigngrace said:

Paul confirms the finality of the return of Jesus, in 1 Corinthians 15:22-24, stating, “as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming [Gr. parousia]. Then cometh the end [Gr. telos], when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.”

Please note the careful correlation between the parousia and the telos. This is a truth that is found throughout the NT. They are synonymous with each other. There is absolutely nothing that Premillennialists can do with such a clear and climactic passage apart from deny the obvious or add unto Scripture by inserting “a thousand years” in-between the coming (parousia) of Christ and the end (telos) where it does not belong. This is the dilemma for Premil throughout the Word. They are fighting the obvious. They are fighting God’s truth.

The Greek simply reads:

Christos – Christ
en – at
autos – His
parousia – coming
eita – then
telos – the end

The coming of the Lord is shown to be the end of the world. There is no gap of time in-between the coming of Christ, the resurrection and the end. They all belong to the one final climactic overall event.

The phrase “he shall have delivered up” comes from the single Greek word paradidomi meaning surrender, yield up, intrust, or transmit. This is what happens to the kingdom when Christ comes. He surrenders it to His Father, He yields it up.

The converse phrase “he shall have put down” comes from the single Greek word katargeo meaning: bring to nought, none effect, or abolish. This is what happens to “all” existing “rule and all authority and power” when Jesus Comes. The rule of man comes to an end and now it becomes the rule of God.

The Apostle Paul instructs the believer in 1 Corinthians 1:7-8 to “come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming [Gr. parousia] of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall also confirm you unto the end [Gr. telos], that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

The coming of the Lord is again associated with “the end.” We can see here how the phrases “the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,” “the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” and “the end” are depicted as synonymous. The second coming is depicted throughout the Word as a climactic event that ushers in the conclusion of time. Within this teaching is a comforting promise for every child of God that that Christ shall “confirm” or establish or secure us “unto the end.”

The two words that are used in the New Testament to describe the start and finish of this current temporal state of time are archē meaning “beginning” and telos meaning “end.” They are the antithesis of each other. The word archē basically means the origin or the commencement. The word telos means the termination, completion or that by which a thing is finished. Notably, the Bible continually relates this phrase “the end” [Gr. telos] to the second coming. The Lord’s return is shown to usher in the completion of this age and of time.

Scripture constantly shows the creation of this earth and the beginning of this world to be the beginning of this age. Likewise, the end of this world and the regeneration of this earth is repeatedly shown to correspond with the end of this age. Time and history find themselves sandwiched in between these two great events. Simply put: “this age” refers to “time” and “the age to come” or the “hereafter” refers to “eternity.”

Click to expand...

Exactly. And another thing I like to point out that goes along with what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:22-24 is this passage where Jesus sums up what the parable of the wheat and tares (weeds) is about:

Matthew 13:40 “As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42 They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Whoever has ears, let them hear.

Jesus will return at the end of the age (Matthew 24:3). Notice that it will be at the end of the age that "the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father". Why is the kingdom called "the kingdom of their Father" at that point? Because Jesus will have delivered the kingdom to the Father at that time. What time? At His second coming, as 1 Corinthians 15:22-24 indicates.

sovereigngrace said:

What is more: what corroboration do they have for 2 future resurrections separated by 1000 years+? Nothing!

Click to expand...

Not even close. Frankly, the way they try to get around what Jesus said in John 5:28-29 is embarrassing (for them). He very clearly said there that there is a one time event coming in the future during which ALL of the dead will be resurrected. It's not reasonable whatsoever to squeeze a thousand year time period (plus Satan's little season) into what He said there.

The foundation of our doctrine should include straightforward scripture like John 5:28-29 and 2 Peter 3:10-13. We should then interpret more difficult scripture, such as that found in the highly symbolic book of Revelation, according to the more clear and straightforward scriptures and make sure that our interpretations of the more difficult passages do not contradict what is taught in the more clear passages. I know you already know all this, but it's amazing to me that Premils have no understanding of this concept.

The two resurrections are in accord with our nature and condition. We can't expect it to happen to us who are exist in time and have so much to repair before uniting whole for eternity.
Our bodies succumb to the futility and decay of creation and the soul can no longer offer location and be animated.
The life in the body either defects or perfects the soul.
To participate in Christ's resurrection from a disembodied state, the soul must be prepared to resurrect first. God banned us from Paradise for that reason
Our body and soul shouldn't tome together at once.imperfect and defective Jesus suffered no imperfection of soul. No reason they should be apart. Except for our sake.
But or us we experience 2 resurrections our soul is prepared then resurrected to eternal life first.
When all our souls have seen God in heaven and in the Glory, and all the elect are ready as one body ,all will resurrect to their own unique individual eternal life.
The souls of the damned undergo no process of reparation. They will exist eternally in the defects they died in.
They wait only for our salvation to complete.



The spirit of Prophecy is Jesus. Was,is, will be.
Events of prophecy happened , are happening , not complete.

The mission of the prophet is to correct what is. The past or future are revealed toward that purpose. All that is, is now.
Revelation describes what is.

Spiritual Jew said:

Exactly. And another thing I like to point out that goes along with what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:22-24 is this passage where Jesus sums up what the parable of the wheat and tares (weeds) is about:

Matthew 13:40 “As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42 They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Whoever has ears, let them hear.

Jesus will return at the end of the age (Matthew 24:3). Notice that it will be at the end of the age that "the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father". Why is the kingdom called "the kingdom of their Father" at that point? Because Jesus will have delivered the kingdom to the Father at that time. What time? At His second coming, as 1 Corinthians 15:22-24 indicates.

Click to expand...

How can Premils deny the constant location of the judgment of the righteous and the wicked at this climactic event? It is a denial of the inspired facts.

sovereigngrace said:

How can Premils deny the constant location of the judgment of the righteous and the wicked at this climactic event? It is a denial of the inspired facts.

Click to expand...

I don't know how they can do that. It's difficult to get them to address passages like Matthew 13:40-43 and Matthew 13:47-50 which clearly show everyone being judged at the end of the age, which is when Christ will return (Matt 24:3).

They have no explanation for how those passages fit with their view. They will sometimes address passages like John 5:28-29 and Matthew 25:31-46 and try to explain how they can reconcile Premil with those passages, but they do so in a very unconvincing way.

Deleted