Is the "first resurrection" in Revelation chapter 20 the only bodily resurrection in the Book of Revelation, or is there another found in chapter 11?
.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The argument of the A-mills goes around "it's the first (protos) resurrection, and Christ's resurrection is the first (protos) resurrection, and therefore it's talking about a 'spiritual resurrection' (which apparently takes place when some is born (gennao) of the Spirit from above)
Is the "first resurrection" in Revelation chapter 20 the only bodily resurrection in the Book of Revelation, or is there another found in chapter 11? .
Yes, anyone who is born of the Spirit is filled with the Spirit - but still, many walk around filled with the Spirit, and blindfolded by their own interpretations of certain aspects of scripture, all at the same time. That's the wine that makes us drunk - the power of belief in our own beliefs.
.. says the one who clearly does not grasp apocalyptic language, or only partially grasps it. Says the one who sees just as darkly through the dim stained glass as anyone else, yet claims he sees clearly.
Nope. But I don't continuously attempt to prove my point by claiming superior understanding (the way you do) - I'm only responding to your false claims regarding your 'superior' understanding. If you and every single Christian would go back to the position of "I don't know I'm right, I think I'm understanding this aright, but I'm willing to learn and to change my mind if necessary", then the Lord will bless us all with a depth of knowledge and understanding that by now His church should have (but doesn't, because of erroneous doctrines engraved in stone).Everyone apart from you.
Likewise. Just bear your words in mind next time you do it again to anyone.If you have nothing of substance to bring to the table, keep your ad hominem to yourself.
Nope. But I don't continuously attempt to prove my point by claiming superior understanding (the way you do) - I'm only responding to your false claims regarding your 'superior' understanding. If you and every single Christian would go back to the position of "I don't know I'm right, I think I'm understanding this aright, but I'm willing to learn and to change my mind if necessary", then the Lord will bless us all with a depth of knowledge and understanding that by now His church should have (but doesn't, because of erroneous doctrines engraved in stone).
I was using figurative language - as most here will have picked up and as ALL A-mills should understand - 'the thousand years is figurative language. It's symbolic for 2,000 years or more".You should start taking your own advice before calling Amils drunken and blind. This is vicious ad hominem that is barred on this forum. We are not going to take lectures from you.
You have been told countless times and ignored the truth countless times.
Until you grasp apocalyptic language you are never going to comprehend the book Revelation. What is more: until you grasp the various recaps you are never going to comprehend the book Revelation. You reject both. That is why you hold on for grim death to the Premil theory.
You should start taking your own advice before calling Amils drunken and blind. This is vicious ad hominem that is barred on this forum. We are not going to take lectures from you.
That is really not the point. The point is:Human beings don't require a loosed Satan roaming around in order to do evil deeds.
We are fully capable of that all on our own.
I'm not attacking you, personally. Merely addressing the balls you throw into the court. Claiming superior knowledge/understanding does not prove anything to anyone.
I'm not going to come back with a retort (hopefully you'll understand that I genuinely mean this): We should not be attacking one another - especially because this debate will not end until one of us is proved wrong by the return of the Lord.Yes you are. I do not claim superior knowledge, and you know that. I am simply relaying to you the biblical narrative that you always seem to struggle with. Countless passages are dismissed or ignored if they interfere with your Premil doctrine.
I'm not going to come back with a retort (hopefully you'll understand that I genuinely mean this): We should not be attacking one another - especially because this debate will not end until one of us is proved wrong by the return of the Lord.
I apologize to you for my tone.
Romans 3:4
"For what? If some did not believe, will not their unbelief nullify the faith of God? Let it not be! But let God be true, and every man a liar; as it is written, "That You might be justified in Your sayings, and will overcome when You are judged."
We can apply the same thing to:
"For what? If some did not believe the truth regarding the millennium of the Revelation, will their misunderstanding nullify the truth? Let it not be! But let God be true, and every man a liar; as it is written, "That You might be justified in Your sayings, and will overcome when You are judged."
Your Lord and my Lord is the same Lord. And He is our Savior - we ought to be so grateful regarding what He did for us that we would never argue about differences of opinion about something like this. The only One with superior knowledge/understanding is Jesus. Sometimes we forget that.
That dude lied deliberately and knowingly. I'm 100% Pre-mill, but I do not believe that all A-mills are trying to deceive. They just think we don't get it because they don't get it.
That said, there are some people who will knowingly and deliberately ignore scripture wherever and whenever scripture proves them wrong - maybe because they think they will have egg in their face in front of a whole lot of people if they admit they were wrong, and maybe because their salary comes from a congregation where teaching anything else will get them fired.
There are lots of motives for not following scripture, for those who deliberately and knowingly choose to follow what they know is a misinterpretation - but I don't think that that motive can be ascribed to all a-mills. I just think they're drunk on something (but it's not alcohol).
Obviously to you it is still a hidden plan.There is no teaching about "Adam's 6000 years of physical punishment and spiritual separation" in the sacred pages. That is invented by people like you to support false doctrine.
The two witnesses have a body that can not be destroyed until the second it happens. How can two humans under current conditions stand in the same spot for 42 months non stop. That death is after the longest job in history before lunch (death) break.Is the "first resurrection" in Revelation chapter 20 the only bodily resurrection in the Book of Revelation, or is there another found in chapter 11?
.
The argument of the A-mills goes around "it's the first (protos) resurrection, and Christ's resurrection is the first (protos) resurrection, and therefore it's talking about a 'spiritual resurrection' (which apparently takes place when some is born (gennao) of the Spirit from above)
Below is one part of the truth regarding which souls that were beheaded are seen to live and reign with Christ - but I'm posting it in a reply to your comment - because when the A-mills see something like this, they automatically immediately pull their blindfolds back over their eyes, like most of us pull our masks up over our mouths and noses these days, the moment we get into a crowded place:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
We know that Adam died (spiritually) when he sinned - He was cut off from the life of God which is birthed by the Spirit of God, and his body would eventually die also - but Adam was still a man with a body and a soul - and the noun anastasis (resurrection) wherever it's found in the N.T, is referring to the resurrection of the body, when it is raised from the dead and changed into a spiritual body (I've inserted the passages below):-
Genesis 2:7
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed [ nâphach ] into his nostrils the breath [ neshâmâh ] of life; and man became a living soul [nephesh]."
John 3:7
"That which is born (γεννάω [gennáō]) of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born (γεννάω gennáō) of the Spirit ( πνεῦμα [pneûma] ) is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born (Greek: γεννάω [gennáō]) from above (Greek: ἄνωθεν [ánōthen]). "
In the passage below, the New Testament teaches us very clearly and unambiguously that it is the body (σῶμα sōma) that will be raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) a spiritual (πνευματικός pneumatikós) body (σῶμα sōma).
1 Corinthians 15:35-38 & 42-57
"But someone will say, How are the dead (νεκρός nekrós) raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) up, and with what body (σῶμα sōma) do they come? Foolish one! What you sow is not made alive (ζωοποιέω zōopoiéō) unless it dies..
.. And what you sow, you do not sow the body (σῶμα sōma) that is going to be, but a bare grain (perhaps of wheat or of some of the rest)..
..And God gives it a body (σῶμα sōma) as it has pleased Him, and to each of the seeds its own body (σῶμα sōma)."
"So also the resurrection (ἀνάστασις anástasis) of the dead (νεκρός nekrós)..
..It is sown in corruption, it is raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) in incorruption; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) in power;..
..it is sown a natural (ψυχικός psychikós) body (σῶμα sōma), it is raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) a spiritual (πνευματικός pneumatikós) body (σῶμα sōma).
There is a natural (ψυχικός psychikós) body (σῶμα sōma), and there is a spiritual (πνευματικός pneumatikós) body (σῶμα sōma).
And so it is written, "The first man, Adam, was made a living (ζάω dzah'-o) soul (ψυχή psychḗ)," the last Adam was a life-giving (ζωοποιέω zōopoiéō) Spirit (πνεῦμα pneûma)..
..But not the spiritual (πνευματικός pneumatikós) first, but the natural (ψυχικός psychikós); afterward the spiritual (πνευματικός pneumatikós).
The first man was out of earth, earthy; the second Man was the Lord from Heaven. Such the earthy man, such also the earthy ones. And such the heavenly Man, such also the heavenly ones..
..And according as we bore the image of the earthy man, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man..
..And I say this, brothers, that flesh (σάρξ sárx) and blood (αἷμα haîma) cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does corruption inherit incorruption.
Behold, I speak a mystery to you; we shall not all fall asleep, but we shall all be changed; in a moment, in a glance of an eye, at the last trumpet..
..For a trumpet shall sound, and the dead (νεκρός nekrós) shall be raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) incorruptible, and we shall all be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality..
..But when this corruptible shall put on incorruption, and when this mortal shall put on immortality, then will take place the word that is written, "Death (νεκρός nekrós) is swallowed up in victory.
O death (νεκρός nekrós), where is your sting? O grave, where is your victory?"
The sting of death (νεκρός nekrós) is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ."
Wherever it appears in the New Testament (in every single verse where it appears), the Greek word ἀνάστασις (anástasis) is always and only used in reference to rising again from death in the body, albeit when Christ appears, the body of the one who rises from death in his body will be a changed body. The same goes for the verbs used for rise, risen, raised, whenever they are used in reference to the resurrection - they are always and only referring to rising again from the dead in the body:
1. Christ is the first (πρῶτον prōton) to have risen from the dead; and
2. those who have been birthed (γεννάω gennáō) by the Spirit [πνεῦμα pneûma] from above (ἄνωθεν ánōthen), are
3. spiritually in Christ, and have therefore risen with (συνεγείρω synegeírō) Him; and
4. He is therefore the firstborn (πρωτότοκος prōtótokos) from the dead; and
5. the firstborn (πρωτότοκος prōtótokos) among many brothers; and
6. the first-fruits (ἀπαρχή aparchḗ') of the resurrection, which is a resurrection from death.
The word resurrection implies that something had died - as the apostle Paul stated:
Romans 8:10-11
"And if Christ is in you, indeed the body [σῶμα sōma] is dead because of sin, but the Spirit [πνεῦμα pneûma] is life because of (Christ's) righteousness
- but if the Spirit [πνεῦμα pneûma] of the One who raised up [ἐγείρω egeírō] Jesus from the dead dwells in you, the One who raised up [ἐγείρω egeírō] Christ from the dead shall also vitalize [ζωοποιέωby zōopoiéō] your mortal [θνητός thnētós] bodies [σῶμα sōma] by His Spirit [πνεῦμα pneûma] who dwells in you."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The argument of the A-mills which goes around those who had been beheaded is referring to the first (protos) resurrection, and Christ's resurrection is the first (protos) resurrection, and therefore it's talking about a 'spiritual resurrection' (which apparently takes place when some is born (gennao) of the Spirit from above).
Could it include John the Baptist, who was beheaded during the first century?
Where is his soul now?
.
Amils are clearly confused about the first resurrection, no doubt.
But when it comes to prophetic events involving before the thousand years, during the thousand years, and after the thousand years, there are certain events, such as the 42 month reign of the beast, and the martyrdom Revelation 20:4 records it caused, that have to fit this timeline. There is chronology here that can't be ignored or denied. Such as, before the thousand years there is a time period where satan is not yet in the pit. During the thousand years satan is in the pit the entire thousand years. After the thousand years he is no longer in the pit. But Amils have him in and out of the pit during the thousand years, because if they are correct about when the thousand years are meaning, there are numerous Scriptures, such as I brought up in the OP, that show satan couldn't possibly be in the pit at the time. Yet Amils claim he is.
These martyred by the beast, according to Revelation 20:4, is key in determining where the thousand years actually fit. Their martyrdom can only occur after the beast has ascended out of the pit first. Yet, Amils claim, or at least some of them appear to, that the beast ascends out of the pit after the thousand years. If that's true, is one to believe something silly, such as, those in Revelation 20:4 who are martyred because of this beast, they are martyred while the beast is not, while it's in the pit, that they are martyred before a beast ever rises out of the sea, and another out of the earth?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?