Second Coming of Christ = FIRST Resurrection without question

[BobRyan]

Now why did you respond to.my post? It wasn't sent to you!
It was nice yesterday to finish our conversation, with partial agreement.
So what do I do now?
Remind you a couple of days ago you said forget chapter headings.
Just read rev20:11-15&ch21:1-5 as one continuous segment

And I still agree with that - ignore chapter divisions - the authors did not have them. But I use chapter references to we all know how to navigate to the text being discussed - for the sake of clarity.

 

[BobRyan]

Jesus speaks about the real resurrection and the rapture at the same time be4 the great tribulation.
1 thes 4:16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a commanding shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet call of God. First, the Christians who have died will rise from their graves.
17After that, we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord

People will mourn because they are the leftbehind foolish virgins

May Jesus bless you all HalleluYAH

1 Thess 4 does not say "before the great tribulation the Lord shall descend with a shout and the voice of the archangel".

But Matt 24 DOES say "immediately AFTER the great tribulation ... He shall gather His elect"

 

[BobRyan]

I'll disagree. It is not about a play on the word FIRST. The first resurrection is the born again experience.. .

Not according to the Bible --

1. The Bible never calls the new birth "a resurrection". - "The Dead in Christ SHALL rise first" 1 Thess 4... not "The dead in Christ already were raised at their conversion".
2. Paul seeks to "attain to the resurrection" -- future to Paul's day

Phil 3
10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

2Cor 5
For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:

1 Cor 15
12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:

20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
...
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

 

[stuart lawrence]

And I still agree with that - ignore chapter divisions - the authors did not have them. But I use chapter references to we all know how to navigate to the text being discussed - for the sake of clarity.

Anyway, I'm sure I will be one of the first to enter the new Jerusalem.
Do you think im boasting?

And the last shall be first, and the first shall be last

 

[throughfiierytrial]

Not according to the Bible --

1. The Bible never calls the new birth "a resurrection". - "The Dead in Christ SHALL rise first" 1 Thess 4... not "The dead in Christ already were raised at their conversion".
2. Paul seeks to "attain to the resurrection" -- future to Paul's day

Phil 3
10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

2Cor 5
For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:

1 Cor 15
12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:

20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
...
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

Did I write all for nothing but dismissivness and no intelligent spiritual conversation?
Yes, the Bible does so call the born again experience the First Resurrection...this is picture language, symbolism or rather, a riddle.
See Ephesians 5:14:
This is why it is said:
“Wake up, sleeper,
rise from the dead,
and Christ will shine on you.”

Here the Bible uses the resurrection to describe being born again.

 

[stuart lawrence]

How can you have intelligent spiritual conversation concerning the first resurrection being when you are born again?

 

[throughfiierytrial]

How can you have intelligent spiritual conversation concerning the first resurrection being when you are born again?

Another "soldier" unaware of the Orthodox interpretation of Revelation. AND, if you had read it all the Ephesians to include the Ephesians passage which likens being born again with resurrection and this fits the passages of Revelation 20:4-5 to bring us understanding...it's all a riddle and the riddles are solved with passages throughout the entire Bible.
Proverbs 1:1-7:
The proverbs of Solomon son of David, king of Israel:

2 for gaining wisdom and instruction;
for understanding words of insight;
3 for receiving instruction in prudent behavior,
doing what is right and just and fair;
4 for giving prudence to those who are simple,
knowledge and discretion to the young—
5 let the wise listen and add to their learning,
and let the discerning get guidance—
6 for understanding proverbs and parables,
the sayings and riddles of the wise.

7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge,
but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

 

[stuart lawrence]

Another "soldier" unaware of the Orthodox interpretation of Revelation. AND, if you had read it all the Ephesians to include the Ephesians passage which likens being born again with resurrection and this fits the passages of Revelation 20:4-5 to bring us understanding...it's all a riddle and the riddles are solved with passages throughout the entire Bible.
Proverbs 1:1-7:
The proverbs of Solomon son of David, king of Israel:

2 for gaining wisdom and instruction;
for understanding words of insight;
3 for receiving instruction in prudent behavior,
doing what is right and just and fair;
4 for giving prudence to those who are simple,
knowledge and discretion to the young—
5 let the wise listen and add to their learning,
and let the discerning get guidance—
6 for understanding proverbs and parables,
the sayings and riddles of the wise.

7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge,
but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

I dont despise wisdom but I do despise folly.
The first resurrection is for the following:

And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshipped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands.
They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.( the rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years had ended) this is the FIRST resurrection
Rev20:4&5

If you are right, you haven't been born again, so you are condemned to the lake of fire

 

[stuart lawrence]

The simple text is not enough for scholars and theologians. They like to search the scriptures and strive to theologise their doctrines through much hard work of the academic mind.
They often simply end up leaving the truth of the stated word far behind

 

[throughfiierytrial]

I dont despise wisdom but I do despise folly.
The first resurrection is for the following:

And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshipped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands.
They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.( the rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years had ended) this is the FIRST resurrection
Rev20:4&5

If you are right, you haven't been born again, so you are condemned to the lake of fire

And again this too is a riddle...all the dead in Christ are those beheaded because of their testimony for Christ. When we are of Christ, we have not our head...no we deny our very life for Him...Christ is our head...we then are "beheaded". It is a riddle. For Jesus said...For it is the one who is least among you all who is the greatest.” (So He is not picking the actually beheaded Christians out as special...that too would be against His teachings in the N.T.)

 

[DavidPT]

I'll disagree. It is not about a play on the word FIRST. The first resurrection is the born again experience...plug it into the Revelation passages and you'll see it is the only answer.

If this is the case, that of course makes the thousand years and little season occur in this age before the 2nd coming. According to Revelation 20, every single person that has part in the first resurrection are blessed and holy. And every last one of them reign with Christ a thousand years. Obviously the thousand years precedes satan's little season. With that fully in mind, and that the first resurrection is allegedly the born again experience, what about anyone saved during satan's little season? How can they be part of the first resurrection if the thousand years are already in the past at that point? Remember, to have part in the first resurrection means one reigns with Christ a thousand years. Either you have to prove no one is saved during satan's little season, or you have to instead admit the first resurrection couldn't possibly mean the born again experience. Still assuming the thousand years and little season occur in this age before the 2nd coming, unless no one can be saved during satan's little season prior to the 2nd coming, the little season proves the first resurrection couldn't possibly be the born again experience, for some of the reasons I showed above.

 

[stuart lawrence]

And again this too is a riddle...all the dead in Christ are those beheaded because of their testimony for Christ. When we are of Christ, we have not our head...no we deny our very life for Him...Christ is our head...we then are "beheaded". It is a riddle. For Jesus said...For it is the one who is least among you all who is the greatest.” (So He is not picking the actually beheaded Christians out as special...that too would be against His teachings in the N.T.)

The first resurrection is for those who come out of the great tribulation (rev7:14)

So according to your doctrine, you are not born again

 

[DavidPT]

If anyone's name was not found in the book of life they were thrown into the lake of fire

Would have to read

No ones name was found in the book of life so they were all thrown into the lake of fire

Maybe the book of life is only opened in order to prove anyone at that judgment, that their names can't be found in it, and not that anyone at that judgment, their names can be found in it. There are clearly two resurrections, the resurrection of the just, the resurrection of the unjust. The first resurrection has the former covered. What does that leave? The resurrection at the GWTJ which then makes it the resurrection of the unjust.

 

[throughfiierytrial]

The first resurrection is for those who come out of the great tribulation (rev7:14)

So according to your doctrine, you are not born again

This earth's life is the Great Tribulation for each believer.

 

[throughfiierytrial]

Maybe the book of life is only opened in order to prove anyone at that judgment, that their names can't be found in it, and not that anyone at that judgment, their names can be found in it. There are clearly two resurrections, the resurrection of the just, the resurrection of the unjust. The first resurrection has the former covered. What does that leave? The resurrection at the GWTJ which then makes it the resurrection of the unjust.

You are still looking at my answers from your own framework/interpretation so it doesn't work for you. Are you or are you not willing to compare notes? Gotta sign off here...at least for now.

 

[BobRyan]

Maybe the book of life is only opened in order to prove anyone at that judgment, that their names can't be found in it, and not that anyone at that judgment, their names can be found in it. There are clearly two resurrections, the resurrection of the just, the resurrection of the unjust. The first resurrection has the former covered. What does that leave? The resurrection at the GWTJ which then makes it the resurrection of the unjust.

That is true - the system is objective and observable - the point is made that their names at the time of the judgment were not in the book of life. The only outcome in Rev 20 is "cast into the lake of fire" -- not "welcomed into heaven". Hence Christ calls it the "resurrection of Judgment" in John 5.

And those over whom the 2nd death has no power - are only those in the first Resurrection which Christ calls the "resurrection of LIFE" in John 5.

 

[DavidPT]

You are still looking at my answers from your own framework/interpretation so it doesn't work for you. Are you or are you not willing to compare notes? Gotta sign off here...at least for now.

Either the last trump precedes the GWTJ or it doesn't. And if it does, the saints would have already put on immortality before this judgment even occurs. How then could there be saints at this judgment awaiting to put on immortality? Does not Revelation 20 indicate it is only the dead standing in front of God at this judgment? Could anyone that has already put on immortality at the last trump, prior to whenever this judgment occurs, be of the dead at this judgment? I wouldn't think so since it would obviously be a contradiction.

 

[BobRyan]

Did I write all for nothing but dismissivness and no intelligent spiritual conversation?
Yes, the Bible does so call the born again experience the First Resurrection...this is picture language, symbolism or rather, a riddle.
See Ephesians 5:14:
This is why it is said:
“Wake up, sleeper,
rise from the dead,
and Christ will shine on you.”

Here the Bible uses the resurrection to describe being born again.

You are using "extreme inference" to infer into the text the term "First Resurrection" that is not there at all.

Paul points out that the resurrection of the dead is future and says he is doing everything so that if by any means "I might ATTAIN to the resurrection of the dead" Philippians 3:10-11 - so regardless of the fact that some imagery assigned to the new birth - uses some symbolic term about "life" - does not mean we can wrench the entire subject into "ignore Phil 3 and suppose that the term in Rev 20 for First Resurrection means new birth".

This Phil 3 detail does not fit in your inference model. The model you propose does not survive this Bible detail. Which is why each time you sidestep it - I keep bringing it in as an irrefutable answer to the issue.

nor does the Rev 20 detail fit your by-inference-alone model - the detail that the saints are raised to reign with Christ at the Rev 19 second-coming event called the first resurrection --

 

[stuart lawrence]

This earth's life is the Great Tribulation for each believer.

The second resurrection is a thousand years after the first. There must be countless second resurrections if there's one every thousand years after someone is born again.

Again, your argument does not stand up to what is plainly written.

Theological assumption if the academic mind

 

[throughfiierytrial]

You are using "extreme inference" to infer into the text the term "First Resurrection" that is not there at all.

Paul points out that the resurrection of the dead is future and says he is doing everything so that if by any means "I might ATTAIN to the resurrection of the dead" Philippians 3:10-11 - so regardless of the fact that some imagery assigned to the new birth - uses some symbolic term about "life" - does not mean we can wrench the entire subject into "ignore Phil 3 and suppose that the term in Rev 20 for First Resurrection means new birth".

This Phil 3 detail does not fit in your inference model. The model you propose does not survive this Bible detail. Which is why each time you sidestep it - I keep bringing it in as an irrefutable answer to the issue.

nor does the Rev 20 detail fit your by-inference-alone model - the detail that the saints are raised to reign with Christ at the Rev 19 second-coming event called the first resurrection --

I end here, but know that this is the most ancient interpretation of Revelation passed down in Orthodox Churches...I would think you'd want to know what your disagreeing with...you are sooooo very, very wrong.