Universal Resurrection

[iamlamad]

What does the Word of God actually say?

Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.


Why did the Pilgrims disagree with your interpretation over 400 years ago?

Is it because the Messiah's death cannot be separated from the New Covenant fulfilled by His blood in Hebrews 12:22-24?

.

And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off

Exactly! But BEFORE the 70th week, which is written in a later verse.

 

[jeffweedaman]

And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off

Exactly! But BEFORE the 70th week, which is written in a later verse.

Absolutely incorrect.

Messiah does not even arrive until after 7 and 62 weeks pass.

25 So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks;

Messiah must be anointed after 7 and 62 weeks.
This clearly puts him in the 70th week to accomplish the work the Father gave him to do. This kick started the age of his amazing grace he now shows to all nations.



24 “Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city,
to finish the transgression,
to make an end of sin,
to make atonement for iniquity,
to bring in everlasting righteousness,
to seal up vision and prophecy
and to anoint the most holy place.


That clearly puts the 70th week in the past if you believe your sins have been washed away clean so you can be blessed with the gift of his Holy Spirit.

 

[Timtofly]

No, I do not have to admit that since it is clearly not true. My eschatology is based on more clear passages of scripture than Revelation 20. Such as John 5:28-29, which clearly indicates that there is one event (hour/time) coming when all of the dead will be raised rather than two (or more) future events where the dead will be raised as premils believe.

And then there is Matthew 25:31-46 which portrays all people being judged at the same time instead of people being judged at two entirely different times (separated by 1000+ years).

Well if there was not a Revelation 20, you could not use the word amillennial.

The church was judged on the Cross, unless you discount the New Covenant. The only other judgment is the GWT.

And the hour started when Jesus called Lazarus out of his grave. Jesus did not say an hour existed in some future judgment. It is not tied to the Cross, but the sound of His voice. Only those under the Atonement can hear His voice and be resurrected.

 

[jeffweedaman]

The church was judged on the Cross, unless you discount the New Covenant. The only other judgment is the GWT.

If that is the case then why are we considered worthy at a latter date???


2Thess 1
3 We ought always to give thanks to God for you, brethren, as is only fitting, because your faith is greatly enlarged, and the love of each one of you toward one another grows ever greater; 4 therefore, we ourselves speak proudly of you among the churches of God for your perseverance and faith in the midst of all your persecutions and afflictions which you endure.
5 This is a plain indication of God’s righteous judgment so that you will be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which indeed you are suffering. 6 For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire,

 

[Timtofly]

If that is the case then why are we considered worthy at a latter date???


2Thess 1
3 We ought always to give thanks to God for you, brethren, as is only fitting, because your faith is greatly enlarged, and the love of each one of you toward one another grows ever greater; 4 therefore, we ourselves speak proudly of you among the churches of God for your perseverance and faith in the midst of all your persecutions and afflictions which you endure.
5 This is a plain indication of God’s righteous judgment so that you will be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which indeed you are suffering. 6 For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire,

You are not part of the kingdom now?

Relief comes when a person dies. Or to those still alive at the Second Coming. Accepting citizenship of the kingdom is when one gives up one's own desires and receives the Atonement.

The judgment was at the Cross. You were not born at the Cross. You just recieve the same pass, because the church has already been judged.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Which means the dead in Christ rise before any of the unsaved dead do which supports Premill. If Amill was correct, the verse would be saying, "Christ first and then ALL THE DEAD when He comes." but no, the teaching is clear that the saved and unsaved do NOT rise at the same time. No surprise there since other passages including Revelation 20 make that also clear.

Amil does not claim that the dead saved and unsaved rise at the exact same moment in time. Amil claims that they rise at the same event, namely the second coming of Christ. First, the saved dead rise and are caught up with those who are alive and remain to meet Christ in the air. Then He destroys His enemies (2 Thess 1:7-10) and then the unsaved dead are raised and the judgment takes place right after that.

Also, you're not addressing what Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23. Again, he wrote there that the order of resurrections (unto bodily immortality) is Christ first and then those who are His at His coming. How does this allow for any other saved people to be raised at a different time, as premil believes (unless you don't think any saved people die during the thousand years)?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Can you tell me why Paul didn't explain the order of resurrections the way you do?
Sorry, but Paul agrees with John and John with Paul. There is no disagreement in scripture. However, some people imagine a disagreement.

I don't see your problem: OF COURSE it is the dead in Christ that rise first: that is what Paul wrote.

The context of that is different than what I'm talking about. The context of the dead in Christ rising first in 1 Thess 4:13-17 is that they first rise from the dead and then they, along with those who are alive and remain, are caught up to meet the Lord in the air. Saying the dead in Christ rise first has nothing to do with the order of resurrections like Paul wrote about in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23.

But Paul did not consider those that rose when Christ arose, for it was only the elders. Paul was zeroing in on the end of the church age. When Christ comes, as shown in 1 Thes. 4, the dead in Christ rise first, but perhaps miliseconds later those who are alive in Christ are caught up, and together they are caught up to Jesus who will be hidden in a cloud.

Christ was first, as in #1; then the elders that Christ rose when He rose - then at the end of the church age, the dead in Christ first before those who are alive. Then some unknown time after, around the middle of the 70th week, the 144,000 will be caught up, for when John saw them in chapter 14, they were in heaven. After that, another group of dead will be resurrected: the Old Testament saints along with the Two Witnesses and the beheaded from the days of GT.

How does this fit with what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23? It doesn't at all. What you're saying here contradicts what he wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23 because there he said that the order of resurrections is simply Christ first (happened long ago, obviously) and then next in order is those who are His at His coming. That's it. You are talking about a scenario that Paul knew nothing about because it isn't true and doesn't agree with what he taught.

Perhaps the only real difference is the way we write. Remember, Paul wrote that resurrections have TURNS. When the dead in Christ rise, it is not the Old Testament saint's turn. Their "turn" will come later.

Show me where Paul gave any indication of this. He only said that the next in order are those who are His at His coming. Why are you trying to add to what he taught?

If you are still not satisfied, perhaps you can be more specific.

I'm being very specific.

I am not convinced anyone will die during the millennial reign. Do people die in heaven? The Millennial reign is like heaven on earth. The curse will be lifted and death is a part of the curse.

Please show me where scripture teaches that no one would die during the thousand years.

Finally, Paul did not talk about the resurrection of the damned. Only John did.

I didn't say he did. That's besides the point I'm making here.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off

Exactly! But BEFORE the 70th week, which is written in a later verse.

Where are you coming up with that? Show me exactly where it says the Messiah would be cut off before the 70th week.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Well if there was not a Revelation 20, you could not use the word amillennial.

What does that have to do with what I based my eschatology on? As I said, my understanding of the timing of the resurrection of the dead and the judgment is not based on Revelation 20 but on other more clear scripture instead.

The church was judged on the Cross, unless you discount the New Covenant. The only other judgment is the GWT.

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you not agree with Paul that we all will one day stand before the judgement seat of Christ to give an account of ourselves?

2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

Romans 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. 11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. 12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

And the hour started when Jesus called Lazarus out of his grave. Jesus did not say an hour existed in some future judgment. It is not tied to the Cross, but the sound of His voice. Only those under the Atonement can hear His voice and be resurrected.

It's apparent to me that you don't take the time to study scripture carefully. It seems like you just kind of wing it.

John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Are you trying to tell me that you think "they that have done evil" who will be resurrected unto "damnation" are under the Atonement? I doubt you believe that, so you need to reconsider what you said here.

 

[ewq1938]

Amil does not claim that the dead saved and unsaved rise at the exact same moment in time.

Many do say that actually.

Amil claims that they rise at the same event, namely the second coming of Christ. First, the saved dead rise and are caught up with those who are alive and remain to meet Christ in the air. Then He destroys His enemies (2 Thess 1:7-10) and then the unsaved dead are raised and the judgment takes place right after that.

At least you have it correct that there are two separate judgments and resurrections. You just need to factor in the info Revelation 20 gives about "the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished". which proves the time inbetween is a thousand years which also happens to be a SUPER long unknown length of time in Amillennialism interpretation. It's much shorter according to Premill.

Also, you're not addressing what Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23. Again, he wrote there that the order of resurrections (unto bodily immortality) is Christ first and then those who are His at His coming.

What's to address? Premill understands that as it's quite simple. The problem is to think the dead in Christ rise the same day as the unsaved dead. Revelation 20 forbids that.

How does this allow for any other saved people to be raised at a different time, as premil believes

It clearly says those who are his AT HIS COMING. Anyone saved during the thousand years is after AT HIS COMING.

(unless you don't think any saved people die during the thousand years)?

I don't but many Premill's do.

 

[ewq1938]

The context of that is different than what I'm talking about. The context of the dead in Christ rising first in 1 Thess 4:13-17 is that they first rise from the dead and then they, along with those who are alive and remain, are caught up to meet the Lord in the air. Saying the dead in Christ rise first has nothing to do with the order of resurrections like Paul wrote about in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23.

It does actually and you said so in your other post:

"First, the saved dead rise and are caught up with those who are alive and remain to meet Christ in the air. Then He destroys His enemies (2 Thess 1:7-10) and then the unsaved dead are raised and the judgment takes place right after that."


The fact that "the dead in Christ rise first" not only applies to the resurrection happens before the rapture but also before the unsaved dead rise. The first event that happens when the second coming commences is that first resurrection of the saved dead. You believe sometime later that day the unsaved dead will rise in a second group resurrection whereas Premill believes (as Revelation 20 shows) that a thousand years is the time inbetween. I commend you for knowing there are two separate groups that resurrect and that one happens before the other with certain events happening inbetween. You just need to consider that the time inbetween may be much longer than you currently see.

 

[Timtofly]

What does that have to do with what I based my eschatology on? As I said, my understanding of the timing of the resurrection of the dead and the judgment is not based on Revelation 20 but on other more clear scripture instead.

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you not agree with Paul that we all will one day stand before the judgement seat of Christ to give an account of ourselves?

2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

Romans 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. 11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. 12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

It's apparent to me that you don't take the time to study scripture carefully. It seems like you just kind of wing it.

John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Are you trying to tell me that you think "they that have done evil" who will be resurrected unto "damnation" are under the Atonement? I doubt you believe that, so you need to reconsider what you said here.

The judgment of the church is for rewards. Evil people are judged for their rejection of the Atonement. Different judgments at different times.

At physical death one gets their immediate reward. Eternal life and life in sheol.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Many do say that actually.

I have said it that way myself sometimes, but I'm telling you what we mean when we say that. In John 5:28-29, Jesus very clearly said that an hour/time is coming when ALL of the dead would be raised. They may not all be raised at the same exact moment, but He implies that it will happen at the same general time/event. Premil doesn't even have it occurring on the same day and has the saved and unsaved being resurrected 1000+ years apart. How does that agree with what Jesus said in John 5:28-29? I've never seen a premil yet explain how premil can be reconciled with what Jesus said in John 5:28-29. Maybe you could be the first.

At least you have it correct that there are two separate judgments and resurrections. You just need to factor in the info Revelation 20 gives about "the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished". which proves the time inbetween is a thousand years which also happens to be a SUPER long unknown length of time in Amillennialism interpretation. It's much shorter according to Premill.

There is no judgment described in Revelation 20 except for after the thousand years. You assume there is one at the beginning or just before it, but there is no description of that. Passages like Matthew 25:31-46 show all people (saved and lost) being judged at the same time rather than 1000+ years apart. That is another passage that I've never seen a premil give a reasonable interpretation of before. Again, maybe you could be the first.

What's to address? Premill understands that as it's quite simple.

Maybe your version of premil, but most premils would say that there will be people who are saved and will die during the thousand years. If that were the case then why is their resurrection never mentioned in scripture? I'm not expecting you to answer for them, but it' something that most premils should consider. Your solution to this dilemma would be that no one dies during that time, but I don't find that to be reasonable at all.

The problem is to think the dead in Christ rise the same day as the unsaved dead. Revelation 20 forbids that.

No, it does not. You are allowing your interpretation of Revelation 20 to trump the rest of scripture which indicates that all of the dead are resurrected and all people are judged on the same day.

It clearly says those who are his AT HIS COMING. Anyone saved during the thousand years is after AT HIS COMING.

Do you think that any who are saved during the thousand years will die? If so, when will they be resurrected and where does scripture refer to their resurrection? Paul surely knew nothing about such a thing since he didn't write about it.

I don't but many Premill's do.

Okay, so you don't believe anyone dies during the thousand years. What is your basis for thinking that?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

It does actually and you said so in your other post:

"First, the saved dead rise and are caught up with those who are alive and remain to meet Christ in the air. Then He destroys His enemies (2 Thess 1:7-10) and then the unsaved dead are raised and the judgment takes place right after that."

No, you misunderstood. In the context of 1 Thess 4:13-17 itself, Paul mentioning the dead in Christ rising first is not in relation to them rising from the dead before the unsaved, but rather that they have to rise from the dead first before those who are alive and remain can be caught up to meet the Lord because they all will be caught up at the same time. That is my point.

The fact that "the dead in Christ rise first" not only applies to the resurrection happens before the rapture but also before the unsaved dead rise.

No, that is not at all what Paul was saying in 1 Thess 4:13-17.

The first event that happens when the second coming commences is that first resurrection of the saved dead. You believe sometime later that day the unsaved dead will rise in a second group resurrection whereas Premill believes (as Revelation 20 shows) that a thousand years is the time inbetween.

The "sometime later" almost certainly won't be long at all if 1 Cor 15:51-52 is any indication of the timing of the events that will occur on that day. It will be as long as it takes for Christ to take vengeance on His enemies by sending fire down upon them (2 Thess 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-12, Rev 20:9). I don't think that will be a long period of time.

I commend you for knowing there are two separate groups that resurrect and that one happens before the other with certain events happening inbetween. You just need to consider that the time inbetween may be much longer than you currently see.

Do you actually think I haven't considered that? I believe what I do after many years of study and, to me, the scriptural evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of amil.

Premil has no valid explanation for passages like the ones I've brought up which all indicate that all of the dead rise on the same day, all of Christ's enemies will be destroyed on that day and all people will be judged that day as well. I believe Revelation 20, contained within a book with a great deal of symbolism, needs to be understood in light of these other clearer passages instead of the other way around.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The judgment of the church is for rewards. Evil people are judged for their rejection of the Atonement. Different judgments at different times.

At physical death one gets their immediate reward. Eternal life and life in sheol.

How do you explain Matthew 25:31-46 then? That passage clearly shows believers and unbelievers being judged at the same time when Christ comes in His glory. I have seen premils try to explain how Matthew 25:31-46 can fit with premil and I have yet to see a premil give an interpretation of that passage that I find to be reasonable at all. Not even close.

 

[ewq1938]

No, you misunderstood. In the context of 1 Thess 4:13-17 itself, Paul mentioning the dead in Christ rising first is not in relation to them rising from the dead before the unsaved, but rather that they have to rise from the dead first before those who are alive and remain can be caught up to meet the Lord because they all will be caught up at the same time. That is my point.

I already addressed that.

No, that is not at all what Paul was saying in 1 Thess 4:13-17.

That's irrelevant because you and I both know the dead in Christ rise before the unsaved dead rise and one way it is proven is using that verse.

The "sometime later" almost certainly won't be long at all if 1 Cor 15:51-52 is any indication of the timing of the events that will occur on that day.

Revelation 20 is the only passage that tells us how much time is inbetween the two resurrections.

It will be as long as it takes for Christ to take vengeance on His enemies by sending fire down upon them (2 Thess 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-12, Rev 20:9). I don't think that will be a long period of time.

The dead aren't raised right after Christ takes vengeance on His enemies. He must rule the enemies he didn't kill, for a thousand years and then there is the short season of Satan which is an unknown amount of time. Only after those events and timeframes will the unsaved dead rise to be judged.

Do you actually think I haven't considered that? I believe what I do after many years of study and, to me, the scriptural evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of amil.

Nothing favors Amillennialism. The fact that there are two judgments and resurrections disproves the majority of Amil believers. You are only the second one I have met in decades of discussions that accepts that there is two judgments and resurrections.

Premil has no valid explanation for passages like the ones I've brought up which all indicate that all of the dead rise on the same day, all of Christ's enemies will be destroyed on that day and all people will be judged that day as well. I believe Revelation 20, contained within a book with a great deal of symbolism, needs to be understood in light of these other clearer passages instead of the other way around.

None of those passages say all the dead rise on the same day and none specify how much time passes inbetween them. Only Revelation 20 speaks of that amount of time and it's a long period of time. There is nothing symbolic in "the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished". But, to use the symbolic mindset of Amill that period of time would be seen as far longer than just a thousand years so even in Amill thinking the two resurrections cannot happen on the same day according to Revelation 20 thus all Amills use that same excuse you do to avoid what it says: "I believe Revelation 20, contained within a book with a great deal of symbolism, needs to be understood in light of these other clearer passages instead of the other way around."

Why use passages that DO NOT mention when the unsaved dead rise and ignore what another passage does say? It's clearly a defense of the incorrect theological doctrine.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

That's irrelevant because you and I both know the dead in Christ rise before the unsaved dead rise and one way it is proven is using that verse.

No, you can't prove it just with that passage (1 Thess 4:13-17) since the unsaved dead are not even mentioned there.

Revelation 20 is the only passage that tells us how much time is inbetween the two resurrections.

No, it does not. Christ's resurrection is the first resurrection, as Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 15:20-23. We all spiritually have part in His resurrection when we're saved. You are making the resurrection of the dead in Christ the first resurrection instead, but that is not what scripture teaches about the first resurrection.

The dead aren't raised right after Christ takes vengeance on His enemies. He must rule the enemies he didn't kill, for a thousand years and then there is the short season of Satan which is an unknown amount of time. Only after those events and timeframes will the unsaved dead rise to be judged.

Show me the scripture which teaches that Christ will only take vengeance on some of His enemies when He returns instead of all of them. Paul certainly didn't teach that. In 2 Thess 1:7-10 he only taught that Christ will be taking vengeance on His enemies when He returns. What basis is there for thinking that He won't take vengeance on all of them? That's certainly not what is portrayed in passages like Matthew 24:35-39 or 2 Peter 3:10-12.

Nothing favors Amillennialism. The fact that there are two judgments and resurrections disproves the majority of Amil believers.

No, it absolutely does not.

You are only the second one I have met in decades of discussions that accepts that there is two judgments and resurrections.

Why are you so ignorant about amils? Most of them believe just as I do. They only say that the saved and lost are resurrected at the same time because it will be very close to the same time. Just not exactly the same moment. Also, I didn't say there are two judgments. There are two destinies (one for the saved and one of the lost), but there is one judgment day and Matthew 25:31-46 portrays all people (saved and lost) being judged at the same time (generally speaking) when Christ comes.

None of those passages say all the dead rise on the same day and none specify how much time passes inbetween them.

How does a singular time/hour that is coming when all of the dead will be raised turn into two completely separate times/hours coming when the dead are raised? Please break John 5:28-29 down for me and show me how it can possibly agree with premil.

Why use passages that DO NOT mention when the unsaved dead rise and ignore what another passage does say? It's clearly a defense of the incorrect theological doctrine.

I use passages that show Jesus saying there is one hour/time coming when all of the dead will be raised. You change that into two hours/times coming when the dead are raised. You don't accept what He taught in John 5:28-29. You also don't accept one future judgment day, as portrayed in passages like Matthew 13:36-43 and Matthew 25:31-46. Why are you willing to interpret Revelation 20 in such a way that contradicts passages like those?

 

[ewq1938]

I have said it that way myself sometimes, but I'm telling you what we mean when we say that.

The majority express it as simultaneous or "at the same time". I know of only two people out of hundreds have expressed it as you do and like I said, good for you.

In John 5:28-29, Jesus very clearly said that an hour/time is coming when ALL of the dead would be raised.

There will come a time all baseball teams will play against another team but that doesn't mean all on the same day. A time will come for all the dead to be raised. First, the dead in Christ rise, then after a thousand years "the rest of the dead" will rise. That's what we find when looking at all of the related passages. Leaving the most important passage out of this is clear error.

They may not all be raised at the same exact moment, but He implies that it will happen at the same general time/event.

There is no "may not" about it. We know from Revelation 20 there are most definitely not raised at the same exact moment, far from it.

Premil doesn't even have it occurring on the same day and has the saved and unsaved being resurrected 1000+ years apart.

Premill doesn't because Revelation 20 doesn't nor does any passage.

How does that agree with what Jesus said in John 5:28-29? I've never seen a premil yet explain how premil can be reconciled with what Jesus said in John 5:28-29. Maybe you could be the first.

It's the same thing as I mentioned about with the baseball teams.

Joh 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

First of all "hour" can be any amount of time since it can be literal or figurative:

G5610
ὥρα
hōra
ho'-rah
Apparently a primary word; an “hour” (literally or figuratively): - day, hour, instant, season, X short, [even-] tide, (high) time.
Total KJV occurrences: 108

It's been translated as hour, day and even season. A thousand years and longer can also be a "hora".

Joh 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

So, in this unknown amount of time there will be two resurrections. First (called the first resurrection) the dead in Christ will be resurrected. Then much later in this same "hora", at it's end will the second or last resurrection take place and that's "the rest of the dead" who did not rise with the first group.

There is no judgment described in Revelation 20 except for after the thousand years.

That's incorrect:

Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

There's always a judgment associated with a resurrection and since you agree there are two resurrections then there must be two judgments. One judgment is for reward, and the other judgment is for punishment.

You assume there is one at the beginning or just before it, but there is no description of that. Passages like Matthew 25:31-46 show all people (saved and lost) being judged at the same time rather than 1000+ years apart. That is another passage that I've never seen a premil give a reasonable interpretation of before. Again, maybe you could be the first.

It's pretty simple really. All this takes place after the first judgment and resurrection. This is when the unsaved will be judged and punished. The saved are told they will inherit the kingdom which is a reference to the kingdom of the NHNE and then God addresses the unsaved for their punishment. Resurrections are not mentioned in this passage because in this timeframe, all the resurrections have already taken place.


Mat 25:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
Mat 25:32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
Mat 25:33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
Mat 25:34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
Mat 25:35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
Mat 25:36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
Mat 25:37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
Mat 25:38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
Mat 25:39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
Mat 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
Mat 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
Mat 25:42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
Mat 25:43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
Mat 25:44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
Mat 25:45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Maybe your version of premil, but most premils would say that there will be people who are saved and will die during the thousand years. If that were the case then why is their resurrection never mentioned in scripture?

Almost nothing is written about what happens in the thousand years so of course there is nothing about daily life, death or resurrections. That's why I simply take the position that they live the entire time and I base that on this:

Dan_7:12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.

This takes place at the same timeframe of the Antichrist and his armies being defeated but the civilians being left alive to be ruled over. I believe then that the season and a time refers to the thousand years and the short season after where they finally die.

No, it does not. You are allowing your interpretation of Revelation 20 to trump the rest of scripture which indicates that all of the dead are resurrected and all people are judged on the same day.

No scripture says all rise on the same day.[/QUOTE]

 

[DavidPT]

I already addressed that.



That's irrelevant because you and I both know the dead in Christ rise before the unsaved dead rise and one way it is proven is using that verse.





Revelation 20 is the only passage that tells us how much time is inbetween the two resurrections.





The dead aren't raised right after Christ takes vengeance on His enemies. He must rule the enemies he didn't kill, for a thousand years and then there is the short season of Satan which is an unknown amount of time. Only after those events and timeframes will the unsaved dead rise to be judged.





Nothing favors Amillennialism. The fact that there are two judgments and resurrections disproves the majority of Amil believers. You are only the second one I have met in decades of discussions that accepts that there is two judgments and resurrections.



None of those passages say all the dead rise on the same day and none specify how much time passes inbetween them. Only Revelation 20 speaks of that amount of time and it's a long period of time. There is nothing symbolic in "the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished". But, to use the symbolic mindset of Amill that period of time would be seen as far longer than just a thousand years so even in Amill thinking the two resurrections cannot happen on the same day according to Revelation 20 thus all Amills use that same excuse you do to avoid what it says: "I believe Revelation 20, contained within a book with a great deal of symbolism, needs to be understood in light of these other clearer passages instead of the other way around."

Why use passages that DO NOT mention when the unsaved dead rise and ignore what another passage does say? It's clearly a defense of the incorrect theological doctrine.

To add to all of that, since this discussion involves both John 5:28-29 and Revelation 20, maybe the following analogy I came up will work, or maybe not.

John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.


For the hour is coming, in the which all that are in highschool, shall graduate high school.

No one would argue that every single person in highschool, that they all graduate the same hour, or even the same day, or even the same year. Obviously, freshmen don't graduate when seniors do, as an example. What matters in John 5:28-29 is not that they all have to be raised the same hour, or even the same day, what matters is, that they are raised, period. As long as they are raised, regardless what hour that might involve, even if that hour is over a thousand years after they that have done good are raised, the hour obviously still comes for them also, when they too shall hear His voice and rise from the dead.

 

[ewq1938]

re.

No, it does not. Christ's resurrection is the first resurrection

Sure but that's not what is being discussed in Revelation 20. There, two groups of the dead will be raised. First one group called the first resurrection, and second are "the rest of the dead". Inserting Christ's resurrection is a contextual fallacy designed to redefine what the first resurrection actually is in that chapter.

, as Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 15:20-23. We all spiritually have part in His resurrection when we're saved. You are making the resurrection of the dead in Christ the first resurrection instead, but that is not what scripture teaches about the first resurrection.

You are wrong. You are taking the context from one passage and inserting it in another passage. That is not rightly dividing the word and is a clear sign of the many errors of Amillennialism.

Show me the scripture which teaches that Christ will only take vengeance on some of His enemies when He returns instead of all of them.

They all get some type of vengeance but not all are killed. That is explained in Revelation 19 where he kills some, but others are spared to be ruled over and the verb is in the future tense proving a future rule over mortals past the second coming slaughtering.

Why are you so ignorant about amils? Most of them believe just as I do.

First of all, calling someone ignorant is offensive. Second, that isn't true. Most do not understand the two resurrections as you do.