End time terminology

Beauty is that this is really easy to Get!!

Read Rev 20 - there are TWO resurrections and they are separated by 1000 years. (It is obvious and clear IN the text).

Rev 19 shows us the return of Christ and 20 shows us that the FIRST resurrection happens at that time.

Rev 20 tells us that ONLY in the first resurrection do we have the "holy and blessed" Rev 20:5 raised. Those over whom the 2nd death has no power. (So these are the good guys - see?).

In 1Thess 4 we are told when Christ returns there is a resurrection of the good guys!

Hmm -- how hard is this "to get"?

Seems pretty simple.

In Christ,

Bob

 

BobRyan: //Sadly - there is no reference in
all of scripture to a "pretrib rapture resurrection"//

Neither is there a reference to the Holy Trinity.
The doctrine of the Holy Trinity, however, is (thankfully)
right in the Bible. The doctrine of the Holy Trinity
is derived from the things that are in the Bible.

BobRyan: //However - there is the idea
of a rapture+resurrection in 1Thess 4.//

Yes, i know most people talk about just "rapture"
(which term BTW is NOT in any English
Bible i've ever seen). But, as you have pointed
out the Good News - the rapture is preceeded by
the resurrection. So I frequently remind folks
of the conjunction of the rapture and the resurrection
preceeding it by using the term "rapture/resurrection".

I find no place in the Bible that precludes multiple
resurrections of groups of the just in Christ.
Feel welcome to mention your verse if you have one.
In fact, I've a document (posted here upon
request) that shows at least two
general resurrections that are yet to happen and are
for the just in Christ.

--------------------------------------------
Ed
BTW
Revelation 20 says "first resurrection" not
"first AND ONLY resurrection". To read it "first
and only resurrection" you have to add to scripture
what is NOT there.
---------------------------------------------------
What on earth are you talking about? I never argue for "first and only" I argue for "First and SECOND" with the SECOND occuring "AFTER the 1000 years".

Are we "agreeing again?"

Or are you trying to introduced the nonsensical "First-Part I and ...FIRST part-23?" as ideas for "First" which is then followed by the SECOND ???

Something that one certainly does not GET from the text!!//

What then is the meaning of "first" that you prescribe
for "first" in Revelation 20:5-6?

BobRyan states: //I never argue for "first and only" ...//

Then asks: //Or are you trying to introduced
the nonsensical "First-Part I and ...FIRST
part-23?" as ideas for "First" which is
then followed by the SECOND ???//

Your question is an argument for "first and only".

I agree there is a resurrection at
the end of the Tribulation when Jesus comes to
defeat the antichrist and set up a physical kingdom
of Christ on a physical throne of David in a
physical Jerusalem. I just believe also in a
ressurrection before the Tribulation. For those
of you who can count that far that is "two"
FIRST resurrections.

 

That is easy.

Rev 20:4-5 points out that there is a FIRST and a SECOND.

I NO case in all of scripture do we find a FIRST and SECOND enumeration where FIRST meand 25 different events followed by SECOND as another set of different events.

That was easy.

Bob

 

Error is frequently easy.

First, i recommend you find out what
the English term "first" means.
(Please note that by your understanding
of "first" you are forbidden from
looking in two different dictionaries
/including dictiionary.com/ )

Let me give you a simplier question.

Revelation 20:4 (KJV1611):

And I sawe seates: and they sate vpon them, and iudgement was giuen vnto them, and I saw the soules of them that were beheaded for the witnes of Iesus, and for the word of God, and which did not worship the beast, neither his image, neither had taken his marke vpon their foreheads, or on their handes: and they liued, and reigned with Christ a thousand yeere.


The bolded "and I saw" above -- what does it mean? I'm really most interested in the
"and" part. There are several "and"s here
(and i think that "neither" is sort of a
negative "and").

Did your 3rd grade teacher, when you started
writing sentences tell you //never start
a sentence with an "and"//? Yet Revelation
20:4 starts with an "And" (as do many verses
in the Bible).

Here are some potential meanings of "and"

1. The Greek equivalent of Microft Word
"bullets".
2. connector of two similiar level subsets
3. connector of two exactly equal sets
(each set has the same exact list
of elements)
4. connector of two non-equal, non-same-level
subsets
5. AND
6. Inclusive OR
7. Exclusive OR

Which meaning of "and" connectsthe seats
and the souls in Revelation 20:4? BTW, later versions
of the King James Version have changed
"seats" here to "thrones".


BTW, where i'm going with this question is
that there are two different groups in
Revelation 20:4 who are resurrected/raptured
at different times - QED, "first resurrection"
included two general resurrections and not
just one.

 

Yet our a-mill readers of
Matthew 13 say that the just and unjust
are raised exactly on the same 8-hour
work shift. Not sure it is all that
simple

Anyway, i agree with your statement:
"Read Rev 20 - there are TWO resurrections and they are separated by 1000 years. (It is obvious and clear IN the text)."

However, by your denying the posibility of
two or more resurrections within the
meaning of "first resurrection" you err
and miss a BIG BLESSING.

But hey, maybe you are blessed with the
gift of martyrdom and find your hope there?
I find my hope that because "first" is
an ordinal number not a cardinal number
i can hope that i will never see
the Tribulation period but get raptured
before the Tribulation period ever starts.

 

BobRyan: "I NO case in all of scripture do we
find a FIRST and SECOND enumeration
where FIRST meand 25 different events
followed by SECOND as another set of different events."

1Co 15:45 (KJV1769):
And so it is written, The first man Adam was
made a living soul; the last Adam was made
a quickening spirit.

1Co 15:47 (KJV1769):
The first man is of the earth, earthy:
the second man is the Lord from heaven

Add these together and it says the second man
was the last man. That destroys your argument.
"First" and "second" are about order.
"First" and "last" are about order.
You are tying to make "first" equal "first
and only" in Revelation 20:5-6. It just isn't
so, you are adding to the text.

I was in the second grade. But first I went
to First Grade. Now days everybody goes to
kindergarden and they say:
I was in the second grade. But first I went
to Kindergarden AND First Grade.
Notice in this perfectly good example that
"first" is NOT limited to one and only one.

Sorry, if you want to tie God's hands by
limiting Him to one and only one general
resurrection, you will have to try other than
here in Revelation 20.

 

Sorry TP to act like i'm stealing your topic to defend
my pre-tribualtion rapture, pre-millinnial Second
Coming of Jesus, futuristic viewpoint. But in fact
i'm really doing what you asked. For i have found
that the various eschatologies seem to revolve around
the meaning of words.

1) Above i've discussed the second "and" in Rev 20:4

2) above i've discussed the "first" in Rev 20:5&6.

the other key eschatologial words are:

3) the "and" in 2 Thessalonians 2:1

4) the "falling away" in 2 Thessalonians 2:3

5) the initial "and" in Matthew 24:31

ON these few words hinge the eschatologial hope we have
as Chrisians.

 

Ed responds

What a great example of a text that does NOT say "first and second".

We must remember that the REASON Christ is the second Adam is BECAUSE - Christ is the ONLY other human directly created by God as was the FIRST Adam. (Note that the lineage of the Gospel ALSO describes Adam as the "son of God" drawing the SAME parallel that Paul does showing them to be the two Adam's for humanity). There are not 22 - just 2.

What a great example of a text that DOES NOT allow for "25 OTHER Adams" EITHER in the case of FIRST or in the case of LAST!!

The text ONLY ALLOWS for ONE first Adam - at the fall and ONE Last Adam - Christ.

Many Christs, and Many Adam and Eve's are not allowed. You simply "need" them in your attempts to bend the FIRST and SECOND resurrection of Rev 20 into some vague notion of many resurrections --


1Co 15:47
47The first man was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord from heaven.

How MANY Lord's from heaven? ONE.

HOW MANY Adam's made directly from dust? ONE.

The twisting of Rev 20 that some attempt NEEDS to find MANY firsts and MANY seconds - or at least MANY events between the FIRST event and the SECOND event listed!!

And so for them - it is "all uphill"!

Get it?

Your OWN examples highlight your failure to get FIRST AND SECOND to mean "MANY" for FIRST and MANY for second.

In all cases of FIRST and SECOND - the Bible shows them to be unique -- ONE for each.

Obvious.

Simple.

Easy!

In Christ,

Bob

 

It is clear that the FIRST and SECOND Resurrection have NO resurrections IN BETWEEN.

This point is so clear and so easy - it amazes me that anyone would try to obfuscate such a simple obvious statement in scripture.

This shows the lengths to which some are willing to obfuscate the direct, simple text to insert some favorite tradition.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Indeed IT is called THE FIRST resurrection in Rev 20:4-5!

That is the easy part.

Nice to see you agree with an obvious statement of Scripture.

Indeed you believe in a resurrection BEFORE the FIRST resurrection that John tells us about in our future!

How "inventive" of you.

In the mean time - we have JUST the FIRST resurrection as stated IN Rev 20 AFTER the Rev 19 "event".

And we have that SAME event described in 1Thess 4 as the resurrection of the dead in CHRIST.

Easy.

Simple.

Obvious.

In Christ,

Bob

 

This gets back to my "other" question - where is it that we find TP goes much past the first or second post when he opens a topic?

I can't tell that he is following this one at all.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I checked through some of TPs posts.
About 28% were in one topic he started.
Another 18% were in a second topic he
started.

TP speaking of 1 Thess 4 says:
"Since the rapture interpretation of that
passage had never really been taught
until the scofield bible commentary,"

1 Thessalonians 4:17-18 (KJV1611):
Then we which are aliue, and remaine,
shalbe caught vp together with them
in the clouds, to meet the Lord
in the aire: and so shall wee euer bee
with the Lord.
18 Wherefore, comfort one an other with these words.

The words translated here "caught vp"
were translated "raptos" in a Latin language
Bible. That "raptos" would be "rapture" in English.
Latin language Bibles pre-date "the scofield bible commentary".

 

The events in Rev 19 can not possibly be viewed as "the first coming of Christ".

The FIRST resurrection of Rev 20:4 includes those who overcame the mark of the beast (an obviously end-time event) so they can not be tossed back in time to the point of Christ's birth.

This is all future to John - and Christ's birth is not in His future.

How can you possibly re-work the Rev 20:4 events that follow the Rev 19 second coming of Christ so that they go back in time to His birth?

You say that as if it is obvious IN the text - when in fact you would have to have "read it IN" to the text - (eisegetically).

In Christ,

Bob

 

The fact that scofield takes the rapture event of 1Thess 4 and assigns it to a secret event prior to Christ's return - does not change the fact that this is indeed a "rapture" where the saints are raised AT the appearing of Christ THAT is future to Paul's day (and to John's day) AND that happens just as the John describes it in Rev 19-20. Paul and John appear to be in perfect agreement.

Paul identifies the fact that AT that event - the saints are caught up in the air to be with Christ.

And Christ points out in John 14 that they go WITH HIM to heaven to that place He has prepared for them.

In Christ,

Bob

peace [/QB][/QUOTE]

 

TP, whether much or not, your thinking all along had been sound, never allow being persuaded otherwise. Your's is how godly men have always believed.
Revelation is a book of SYMBOLS, but when it comes to the SYMBOL of 1000 years (scarsely mentioned even in Rv itself), it must be literal?
No ways! It's a SYMBOL of Christ's reign on earth from the day He departed from earth and sent His Holy Spirit to rule in the Kingdom of Heaven upon this earth, which has extended to this day. Glory to the KING who lives and rules eternally, forever more, whose Kingdom shall see no end, but only a brighter day the day He comes with the clouds of angels from heaven to establish His seat of rule physically, here, God with us! "Thy Kingdom come" - the prayer of the Christian believer, faithfully answered by our Father who is in heaven, every time prayed by them with whom He abideth forever as He promised them in Mt.28 - "I am with you always"! As much as Jesus is present, there is present and real His Rule and Dominion and Power and Kingdom. He fakes it not, but is the Gaurantor of a better Covenant, the Covenant of Grace - the Constitution of the Kingdom of heaven.

 

In any case - Rev 20 really does talk about the 1000 years and also speaks to "THE First resurrection" that occurs in the future as John looks forward.

This "First" resurrection is what starts the 1000 years according to Rev 20 and it happens AFTER the 2nd coming events of Rev 19.

The idea that the 1000 years are not "Real" or that the FIRST resurrection is not really the FIRST or that the resurrection of Chapter 20 does not follow the visible 2nd coming of Chapter 19 - have to be "edited INTO the chapter" eisgetically. You have to "Believe in those traditions FIRST" and then "Read them INTO the text" not to get the clear point of the text.

I just can't believe that TP never "bothered to notice" this.

In Christ,

Bob

 

One shall be caught up in the Kingdom of heaven, and his life be hidden in Christ in God before He comes so as his corruptibality be changed into incorruptibility, for what is of the flesh cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.
When Christ comes, of course the redeemed will be lost as it were watching and being caught up as Christ and the New Jerusalem descend for God to be with us on the Great White Throne for ever more. "We shall meet Him is the air" - I go meet my visitors at my gate, and then we visit at my gate all day long? So we go meet Christ to welcome Him home - which He prepared and creates anew when his feet touch this earth at His coming. The mountain shall rent in twain - and in between the City will descend - on a clear and virgin, 'remade' earth.
That's how I see it. Christ's coming will be both the end to sin and all its results of all time, and His coming will be the beginning of the eternal inheritance of the saved.