Only The Saints Were Raised...

[skypair]

I confess that at the moment I'm not too learned on demonology as I should be.

TC -- it is quite interesting so I offer this without resort to what the questions were.

All demons were cast out of 3rd heaven with Lucipher. Satan alone apparently still has access.

Some demons left their first estate as spirit when the indwelt/possessed humans. When their "hosts" died, these were sent to chains awaiting the "judgment of the great day," the tribulation, Jude 1:6. Then they will emerge when, at the 5th trump, an angel with the key to the pit unleashes them AND JUDAS/AC spirit (Judas was demon possessed at death).

For this most part, demons can be understood as spirits like the Holy Spirit -- they have "personhood" though basically are "evil thoughts/wisdom" vs. God's Thoughts/Wisdom.

A person may be either a) influenced by them or b) possessed/controlled by them -- well, or both. But a Spirit-indwelt Christian cannot be indwelt of the demon spirit. Hence, the demon has to move out if the Holy Spirit is received in.

Casting our demons, IMO, is a matter of a) leading one to salvation or b) divesting the person of the control of demon(s) through spiritual authority over them -- whereupon they go to the pit though others may yet replace them.

Like the Holy Spirit, demons come in by invitation -- by receiving their "gospel." This is why decisional salvation or "decisional regeneration" is such a critical concept.

BTW, the Holy Spirit CAN'T be "cast out.'

skypair

 

[skypair]

So, I do not believe that Revelation is in Chronology order. I don't think it is possible for it to be.

There IS a chronological framework though, Bob, else it wouldn't be prophecy. The framework I see is 1-6, 10, 13, 16, 19-22 are in chronoloical order. The other chapters are "anchored" where they appear in the chronology by one or more events within the chapter that ARE in keeping with the chronology.

Try it out if you are a student of The Revelation. :jesus:

Just looking at history, I find no merit in your "allegorization" of the MK.

skypair

 

[skypair]

#4 is straight up Jesus talking with nothing added by me, don't know how you can disagree with the Lord rj; I mean you completely diagreed with the words of Jesus Himself.

"Hour," just like your "1000 years," has different contextual/lexical meanings. How can you honestly not allow "shades of meaning" in one place and assign them in another?

Instance: Surely you don't think that the tribulation is only "one hour" long, do you? Surely the 10 kings don't only rule one literal hour with the beast, right?

skypair

 

[rjprince]

Some demons left their first estate as spirit when the indwelt/possessed humans. When their "hosts" died, these were sent to chains awaiting the "judgment of the great day," the tribulation, Jude 1:6... (Judas was demon possessed at death).


Casting our demons, IMO ... whereupon they go to the pit though others may yet replace them.
skypair

Curious. Have never come across this before. If this is the correct interpretation of "left their first estate" what is the connection with the days of Noah, strange flesh, and Sodom and Gomorrah?

Since Jesus allowed the "legion" to inhabit the swine, did they then go to the pit after the swine committed soooey-cide? (LOL, sorry, just could not help mysef thar)

RJP

 

[Brother Bob]

Instance: Surely you don't think that the tribulation is only "one hour" long, do you? Surely the 10 kings don't only rule one literal hour with the beast, right?

skypair

Ha, you talk about me and time and then turn right around and do it yourself................

Originally Posted by Brother Bob
#4 is straight up Jesus talking with nothing added by me, don't know how you can disagree with the Lord rj; I mean you completely diagreed with the words of Jesus Himself.
"Hour," just like your "1000 years," has different contextual/lexical meanings. How can you honestly not allow "shades of meaning" in one place and assign them in another

You need to talk to Jesus about that and tell him we need a better explaination...........

 

[Brother Bob]

Just looking at history, I find no merit in your "allegorization" of the MK.

skypair

We did a whole thread on it. It is true, if history is true.

 

[Brother Bob]

No, they weren't even IN heaven when Christ died on the cross. They were in sheol. As soon as He brought them to heaven, they would have received them though.

skypair

wonder who those souls were under the altar of God without their white robes???

You think their souls were in hades also?

II. Historical review of millennial thinking in Christian theology.
A. Early church (c. 100-250) - millennium not emphasized. Variety of views.

B. Early reaction to view of earthly millennium.

1. Origen (c. 185-254) attributed such thinking to heretic, Cerinthus

2. Montanist heresy (c.175) had excesses of earthly millennial views.

3. Rampant speculation to calculate end time.

C. Augustine (354-430) rejected his previous earthly millennial position and interpreted

"1000 years" of Rev. 20 as symbolic of entire period from first coming of Christ to

second coming of Christ.

1. Council of Ephesus (431) condemned earthly millennium interpretation as heretical

superstition.

2. Became orthodox view of Church for centuries.

D. Reformation (sixteenth century) - Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Anabaptists accepted symbolic

interpretation of "1000 years." Regarded Catholic Pope as Antichrist.

E. Seventeenth - nineteenth centuries - gradually revived earthly millennium view.

F. Nineteenth & twentieth centuries.

1. J.N. Darby (Plymouth Brethren), followed by D.L. Moody, C.I. Scofield, H.A. Ironside

(Dallas Theological Sem.), developed theological system of Dispensationalism

incorporating earthly millennium and pre-tribulation rapture of Church. Became a

primarily American theological phenomenon.

2. Majority of theological community (Post-millennial and Amillennial) has regarded

Dispensationalism as a modernist aberrational (disorder of the mind) interpretation.

 

[Brother Bob]

I really do not find it necessary to repeat all the history that has already been posted on other threads.

John Calvin;
(On the 'Millennial Reign' of Christ)
"But a little later there followed the chiliasts, who limited the reign of Christ to a thousand years. Now their fiction is too childish either to need or to be worth a refutation. And the Apocalypse, from which they undoubtedly drew a pretext for their error does not support them. For the number "one thousand" (Rev. 20:4) does not apply to the eternal blessedness of the church but only to the various disturbances that awaited the church, while still toiling on earth. On the contrary, all Scripture proclaims that there will be no end to the blessedness of the elect or the punishment of the wicked.
"For when we apply to it the measure of our own understanding, what can we conceive that is not gross and earthly? So it happens that like beasts our senses attract us to what appeals to our flesh, and we grasp at what is at hand. So we see that the Chialists (i.e. those who believed that Christ would reign on earth for a thousand years) fell into a like error." Jesus intended "... to banish from the disciples' minds a false impression regarding the earthly kingdom: for that, as He points out in a few words, consists of the preaching of the Gospel. They have no cause therefore to dream of wealth, luxury, power in the world or any other earthly thing when they hear that Christ is reigning when He subdues the world to Himself by the preaching of the Gospel. It follows from this that His reign is spiritual and not after the pattern of this world." - Comm. on Acts 1:8 (Torrance, VI, 32).
(On the Nature of Christ's Kingdom)
"We shall ever deny ...that Christ's Kingdom is visible. For however the sons of God are dispersed, without any reputation among men, it is quite clear that Christ's Kingdom remains safe and sure, since in its own nature it is not outward but invisible. Christ did not utter these words in vain, 'My Kingdom is not of this world.' (John 18:36) By this expression He wished to remove His Kingdom from the ordinary forms of government." (Commentary on Daniel_, lecture eleven)

 

[rjprince]

My list is a little different but they all mean that time has come to an end. I don't even know what some of these translations are but they all say that time has come to an end (Judgement will take place, my emphasis)

Mat 25:31-34, 41... (see above)

For the life of me, I see not thousand years in between these two scripture.

FIRST, none of these passages say that time comes to an end! It is not there.

SECOND, can you see 2000 years in the middle of Isa 61:2 below?

Isa 61:1-2
1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

Do you see a 2,000 year gap? JESUS DID! When He FOUND the place where this passage was and then read it in the Synagogue at Nazareth (Luke 4:16-30), HE STOPPED READING RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF VERSE 2! Then He closed the scroll and handed it back to the minster. Then He said "This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears."

Why did Jesus stop in the middle of verse 2 and not speak of the "day of vengeance of our God"? Because the day of vengeance of our God had not come, and was not to come then. IT STILL HAS NOT COME! The outpouring of God’s wrath is yet to come. Although you can’t read about the gap in the middle verse 2, anywhere in the OT, you see where Jesus inserted the gap in Luke 4:19-20.

THIRD, you still have not responded to the weak translation issue regarding the phrase "there should be time no longer" in Rev 10:6. I understand that YOUR POSITION HAS NO RESPONSE to the text when it is translated well, but at least admit it.

FOURTH, you did not respond to the fact that for the first 200 years, the church had it right regarding a literal kingdom. Particularly, please respond to the teaching of Jesus in Acts 1 and the question of the apostles and the answer by Jesus. (NOTE: I do not consider your quote from Calvin to be a response for he did not address the issues I raised, nor does he accurately represent the position of premillennialism/chiliasm in that in his statement of their view they limit the rule of Christ to only 1,000 years)

FIFTH, you did not respond to the fact that as far as church history goes, they had quite a few things wrong very early on, till the reformation. The age or persistence of a view does not make it right, or wrong. The test is whether or not it lines up with a clear reading of the text, and consistent comparison with the rest of Scripture.

Just because a statement or a position seems to line up with one passage does not mean the statement or position is right. Drag that view through the WHOLE of Scripture to see how well it does within the context of the whole Bible – only then has the position has withstood the thorough test of Scripture, but not until then.

Here is just one more thought that I have been working on lately, nope will make it a separate post... Will call it "Successive Revelation..." Should be up this afternoon...

 

[Brother Bob]

FIRST, none of these passages say that time comes to an end! It is not there.

We were discussing the resurrection of the just and unjust in one resurrection for me and I think you mentioned 3 more yet to come.

All scripture I gave you speak of one resurrection of the just and unjust, spoken by Jesus Himself. I will accept His word for it.

SECOND, can you see 2000 years in the middle of Isa 61:2 below?

Isa 61:1-2
1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

Do you see a 2,000 year gap? JESUS DID! When He FOUND the place where this passage was and then read it in the Synagogue at Nazareth (Luke 4:16-30), HE STOPPED READING RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF VERSE 2! Then He closed the scroll and handed it back to the minster. Then He said "This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears."

I assume you are trying to show "time", of which I do not find 2000 years ever mentioned. Your point being??

THIRD, you still have not responded to the weak translation issue regarding the phrase "there should be time no longer" in Rev 10:6. I understand that YOUR POSITION HAS NO RESPONSE to the text when it is translated well, but at least admit it.

I told you and will tell you again, regardless of which translation you use, it speaks of the end of time. Also, you never gave an answer to there being no time before the earth was formed? When this thousand years you teach, will there be a day and a night or do you know and if so, where did you get your knowledge of such. Also, in this thousand years, it says the souls lived and reigned, just souls, not bodies and all in "past" tense.

Rv20:4c:
"kai edzehsan (and they lived)

kai ebasileusan (and ruled)

meta tou Xristou (with Christ)

xilia eteh (1000 years)"

'edzehsan' - Indicative Aorist 3rdP Pl - 'Constative' mention of fact: "they lived". To me there seems to be no grounds for an Ingressive A., in other words, I cannot see how the word could mean 'they began to live'.

'ebasileusan' - Do.

In both cases there is absolutely no chance the time aspect could be future. ('Tenses' are not exactly characteristic of the G language. I like the useful word 'aspects' for the G 'times'.)

FOURTH, you did not respond to the fact that for the first 200 years, the church had it right regarding a literal kingdom. Particularly, please respond to the teaching of Jesus in Acts 1 and the question of the apostles and the answer by Jesus. (NOTE: I do not consider your quote from Calvin to be a response for he did not address the issues I raised, nor does he accurately represent the position of premillennialism/chiliasm in that in his statement of their view they limit the rule of Christ to only 1,000 years)

I did respond, you must of missed it. The first 200 years, there were some teaching a literal MK, and some a Spiritual MK. The Spiritual prevailed for 1600 years. Long time don't you think?



Here is one that taught it but was kinda afraid it seems to stand on it very firm.

Justin Martyr (A.D.150)
CHAP. XI.--WHAT KINGDOM CHRISTIANS LOOK FOR.
"And when you hear that we look for a kingdom, you suppose, without making any inquiry, that we speak of a human kingdom; whereas we speak of that which is with God, as appears also from the confession of their faith made by those who are charged with being Christians, though they know that death is the punishment awarded to him who so confesses. For if we looked for a human kingdom, we should also deny our Christ, that we might not be slain; and we should strive to escape detection, that we might obtain what we expect. But since our thoughts are not fixed on the present, we are not concerned when men cut us off; since also death is a debt which must at all events be paid." (First Apology of Justin Martyr, ch. 11)
"Chiliasm found no favor with the best of the Apostolic Fathers... the support from the Apologists too, is extremely meager, only one from among their number can with reasonable fairness be claimed, (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, v. 25 - 36

Here is Phillip Schaff, historian and well respected. As you can see your doctrine was called "heresy".

Philip Schaff(1877)
"Though millenialism was supressed by the early church, it was nevertheless from time to time revived by heretical sects." (Schaff's History, pg. 299 )

FIFTH, you did not respond to the fact that as far as church history goes, they had quite a few things wrong very early on, till the reformation. The age or persistence of a view does not make it right, or wrong. The test is whether or not it lines up with a clear reading of the text, and consistent comparison with the rest of Scripture.

Just because a statement or a position seems to line up with one passage does not mean the statement or position is right. Drag that view through the WHOLE of Scripture to see how well it does within the context of the whole Bible – only then has the position has withstood the thorough test of Scripture, but not until then.

I think it did and does line up with scripture. It is you that believe the scripture is different than the 1600 years of doctrine, not me.

Blessings,

BBob,

 

[rjprince]

BBob,

You have repeatedly said that time will cease, it will be no more. You used Rev 10:6 as your proof text. I pointed out the weakness in the translation. You have not offered any other evidence to the effect that "time will cease". The placement, arrangement, order, or number of the resurrections do not determine that time will or will not cease.



BBob – "... I do not find 2,000 years ever mentioned..."

THANK YOU! THAT IS MY POINT! IT WAS NOT MENTIONED, but it has been 2,000 years since the first advent of the Lord Jesus and we STILL have not gotten to the second part of Isa 61:2! THAT is my point! You cannot find it in that one passage which speaks only of a ministry of blessing and then vengeance, but nonetheless there has been a 2,000 year gap. Jesus knew there would be a gap, so He did not quote the last part of verse 2, or else he could not have said, "This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears."



BBob – "I told you and will tell you again, regardless of which translation you use, it speaks of the end of time. Also, you never gave an answer to there being no time before the earth was formed?"

NONE OF THE PASSAGES YOU CITES SPEAK OF THE END OF TIME EXCEPT REV. 10:6!!!!!!! The fact of whether or not there was time before the earth was formed is NOT relevant! There was no Adam before he was formed, but now there is! He will spend eternity somewhere! After he was formed, he exists!




BBob – "...souls not bodies..."

WHAT?! God breathed into Adam the breath of life and he became a living soul... Does that mean he didn’t have a body?


BBob – "constative... ingressive..."

Sorry, I do not have my Dana Mantey text handy. What is your point? Aorist tense represents point in time action, past is not necessarily a characteristic of aorist as best as I recall. It has been a good while since I have done any translation from my UBS3.

In any case, sometimes the Bible states things that have not happened as though they have. It is a matter of the promise being so sure that God states it as already having happened. For example, called, justified, sanctified, and glorified in Rom 8:28 ff.




BBob – "The first 200 years, there were some teaching a literal MK, and some a Spiritual MK. The Spiritual prevailed for 1600 years. Long time don't you think?"

I addressed the time issue earlier, ignoring my argument and restating yours does not deal with the fact that the doctrine of justification by faith was buried for centuries as well....
Quoting Schaff who calls millennialism a heresy only gives his view, it does not make it so.

The teaching of the OT, the words of Jesus in Acts 1, predates and trumps all of what may come later...



BBob – "...As you can see your doctrine was called "heresy".

Would you roll over and play dead if I quoted someone who called postmil/amil heresy? Don’t expect that I will either. Let’s deal with this on the basis of "what saith the Scripture".

 

[Brother Bob]

BBob,

You have repeatedly said that time will cease, it will be no more. You used Rev 10:6 as your proof text. I pointed out the weakness in the translation. You have not offered any other evidence to the effect that "time will cease". The placement, arrangement, order, or number of the resurrections do not determine that time will or will not cease.
(You don't answer anything. Will there be day and night in you MK? and if so, how do you know?)


BBob – "... I do not find 2,000 years ever mentioned..."

THANK YOU! THAT IS MY POINT! IT WAS NOT MENTIONED, but it has been 2,000 years since the first advent of the Lord Jesus and we STILL have not gotten to the second part of Isa 61:2! THAT is my point! You cannot find it in that one passage which speaks only of a ministry of blessing and then vengeance, but nonetheless there has been a 2,000 year gap. Jesus knew there would be a gap, so He did not quote the last part of verse 2, or else he could not have said, "This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears."
( You must of won something here, but its beyond me!, Anyway, they didn't believe Jesus when He said this day is this Scripture fullfilled, for they would not accept the Spiritual Kingdom! So, it may of been fullfilled, but they didn't know it.)


BBob – "I told you and will tell you again, regardless of which translation you use, it speaks of the end of time. Also, you never gave an answer to there being no time before the earth was formed?"

NONE OF THE PASSAGES YOU CITES SPEAK OF THE END OF TIME EXCEPT REV. 10:6!!!!!!! The fact of whether or not there was time before the earth was formed is NOT relevant! There was no Adam before he was formed, but now there is! He will spend eternity somewhere! After he was formed, he exists!
(Each and everyone spoke of the resurrection of the just and unjust in selfsame hour, One resurrection, seems to me there is no need to explain anything else, the words of Jesus destroys your 3 future resurrections.)



BBob – "...souls not bodies..."

WHAT?! God breathed into Adam the breath of life and he became a living soul... Does that mean he didn’t have a body?
(You need to get you an English teacher to help you out. It says: "souls OF THEM", which is a part of a whole, ask a teacher.)

BBob – "constative... ingressive..."

Sorry, I do not have my Dana Mantey text handy. What is your point? Aorist tense represents point in time action, past is not necessarily a characteristic of aorist as best as I recall. It has been a good while since I have done any translation from my UBS3.

In any case, sometimes the Bible states things that have not happened as though they have. It is a matter of the promise being so sure that God states it as already having happened. For example, called, justified, sanctified, and glorified in Rom 8:28 ff.
(God sees all at one time, He has already saw our deaths and resurrections, so He sees us justified, sanctified and glorified. God is not bound by this time thing that you are trying to measure His thousand years, when He is outside of time.)



BBob – "The first 200 years, there were some teaching a literal MK, and some a Spiritual MK. The Spiritual prevailed for 1600 years. Long time don't you think?"

I addressed the time issue earlier, ignoring my argument and restating yours does not deal with the fact that the doctrine of justification by faith was buried for centuries as well....
Quoting Schaff who calls millennialism a heresy only gives his view, it does not make it so.
(Well, you didn't like Calvin's comments so I thought I would give you Schaff's, who seems to be impartial.)

The teaching of the OT, the words of Jesus in Acts 1, predates and trumps all of what may come later...
(You quote the words of Jesus here but will not accept His words, "the hour is coming when all in the grave shall come forth, unto them that have done good the resurrection of life and unto them who have done evil the resurrection of damnation. One resurrection.)


BBob – "...As you can see your doctrine was called "heresy".

Would you roll over and play dead if I quoted someone who called postmil/amil heresy? Don’t expect that I will either. Let’s deal with this on the basis of "what saith the Scripture".

(No, would not surprise me and I could live with it as you are, but it is history that your doctrine is heresy).

God Bless,

BBob,

 

[skypair]

Curious. Have never come across this before. If this is the correct interpretation of "left their first estate" what is the connection with the days of Noah, strange flesh, and Sodom and Gomorrah?

Without scripture citation, I can only guess at your question. In the days of Noah, these demons possessed men to have sex beyond marriage (as many as they chose) -- one of God's commands from the Garden was one wife. "Strange flesh" in S&G mentioned by Jude does not suggest demonic possession (no giants) though it was likely.

Since Jesus allowed the "legion" to inhabit the swine, did they then go to the pit after the swine committed soooey-cide? (LOL, sorry, just could not help mysef thar)

That's a good one! :laugh: Are you perchance from Arkansas??

Yes, the "legion," knowing their fate, hoped to continue in the earth rather than the "pit" so that asked to go into the pigs. Of course, swine (smarter that men) would rather die than be possessed of a demon!

skypair

 

[skypair]

Bobby

Take a deep breath, bro, and gather yourself...

You been talking to "Harvey" again, haven't you? Your imaginary rabbit friend. Listen -- the things you are "seeing" eschatologically are fabrications. They did NOT, first off, happen in the literal sense. Even you admit that.

Second, you are being unreasonable in your interpretations. You don't have a good handle on The Revelation chronology and you are making "toilet paper" of it with your attempts to analyze it.

But please, don't be offended and go off and sulk. Just study what we are trying to relate to you.

One resurrection issue: What do Rev 20:4 and 20:11 have in common? NOTHING! They are 2 different resurrections!! Post-trib and post-MK. You cannot continue to run even just those 2 together as 1!

Now think on this please -- "hour" means an a non-specific period of judgment. In the physical case it is 7 years. In the spiritual case, it is 1000 years. All it means is that God has set aside a TIME for judgment.

The MK is now: You KNOW better! Is the lamb laid down with the lion, Bobby? Are we "beating our swords into plowshares" yet? Is the reaper reaping right behind the sower? Where, in your opinion, is "new Jerusalem?" Just stop and think a minute before you make such obviously bogus assertions.

skypair

 

[Brother Bob]

Take a deep breath, bro, and gather yourself...

You been talking to "Harvey" again, haven't you? Your imaginary rabbit friend. Listen -- the things you are "seeing" eschatologically are fabrications. They did NOT, first off, happen in the literal sense. Even you admit that.

Second, you are being unreasonable in your interpretations. You don't have a good handle on The Revelation chronology and you are making "toilet paper" of it with your attempts to analyze it.

But please, don't be offended and go off and sulk. Just study what we are trying to relate to you.

One resurrection issue: What do Rev 20:4 and 20:11 have in common? NOTHING! They are 2 different resurrections!! Post-trib and post-MK. You cannot continue to run even just those 2 together as 1!

Now think on this please -- "hour" means an a non-specific period of judgment. In the physical case it is 7 years. In the spiritual case, it is 1000 years. All it means is that God has set aside a TIME for judgment.

The MK is now: You KNOW better! Is the lamb laid down with the lion, Bobby? Are we "beating our swords into plowshares" yet? Is the reaper reaping right behind the sower? Where, in your opinion, is "new Jerusalem?" Just stop and think a minute before you make such obviously bogus assertions.

skypair

I don't think you have the least idea how the Mk was taught in the beginning that there would be "marriages" and "sensual

indulgences" in this MK, (sound familiar?) which were in line with some of the old Jewish beliefs. They dropped that part for it was killing them.

LINK;
http://books.google.com/books?id=l9...s=1HHqo9wwle&sig=jvTLZFSiKQkc8KfbKTFJZoI0KFs\

Your doctrine of MK was silenced in the church as heresy. I think it should still be silenced.

You did not answer the question of day and night. You do not have scripture where this MK is going to be, in heaven or on

the earth. You say 1 hour is just a space of time, so is 1000 years, so in reality a 1000 years, could be 1 hour, being they

both are just a non-specific period to use your words. You are talking like those who began this merry go round in the early

century of sensual indulgences in this MK. No where in the teachings of Jesus, or the writing of the epistles are there any

mention of this MK, I wonder why?

BTW, I don't have to sulk, it is your doctrine that was consider heresy since the early century and always have been, not mine. People on here are yearning for the truth, and all they have to do is read what Jesus said, the hour is coming when all in the grave shall come forth, (one resurrection) second coming of Christ, unto them that have done good the resurrection of life, (that is all the saved need to know, no need to worry about a MK in the minds of people who know not what they say), and unto them that have done evil the resurrection of damnation. (One resurrection for both the just and unjust, the just will hear Him say "come", the unjust will hear Him say "depart", thats it!!!!) Spurgeon would not have anything to do with your MK, Calvin said it was spiritual all the church fathers said it was spiritual. You have John Darby to follow, good luck.

Amazing how much more you fellows know than did all of the early theologians, preachers and teachers.

God's Blessings,

BBob,

 

[TCGreek]

BBob,

1. Is there a time in apocalyptic literature when numbers shouldn't be taken literally?

2. What principle of Scripture compels us to take numbers in apocalyptic literature literally?

 

[rjprince]

BB,

Just for the sake of simplicity, let's just forget about the MK and ALL of Revelation, just for a few posts, OK?


When Jesus rose from the dead, what happened regarding the bodies of many of the saints which slept?

ANSWER: THEY WERE RAISED AND APPEARED IN JERUSALEM.

What would you call that?

ANSWER: A RESURRECTION.

If there were still some left in the grave, be they righteous or wicked, are they going to stay there for eternity? If not, and they ever come out of their graves, what would you call that?

ANSWER: A RESURRECTION.

1 + 1 = how many?

ANSWER: 2. TWO RESURRECTIONS, NOT ONE.

 

[rjprince]

I started to include 1Thes 4:16, but thought better of it...

 

[TCGreek]

BB,

Just for the sake of simplicity, let's just forget about the MK and ALL of Revelation, just for a few posts, OK?


When Jesus rose from the dead, what happened regarding the bodies of many of the saints which slept?

ANSWER: THEY WERE RAISED AND APPEARED IN JERUSALEM.

What would you call that?

ANSWER: A RESURRECTION.

If there were still some left in the grave, be they righteous or wicked, are they going to stay there for eternity? If not, and they ever come out of their graves, what would you call that?

ANSWER: A RESURRECTION.

1 + 1 = how many?

ANSWER: 2. TWO RESURRECTIONS, NOT ONE.

Couldn't it be one resurrection but different phases, if you will?

 

[rjprince]

Couldn't it be one resurrection but different phases, if you will?

Separated by 2,000 years? Or more precisely 1,970 something years? Seems to me that we should phase out that idea, IMHO.