The "FIRST resurrection" - THE Focus of the NT saints?

[Brother Bob]

When the text says "AND they CAME to LIFE" it deals with the DEAD coming to LIFE (resurrection as we are told in 1Cor 15).

I agree with 1 Cor 15, don't know what that has to do with Rev 20:4 though.

When after dealing with THIS group of the DEAD "that came to LIFE" -- the text goes on to deal with "THE REST of the DEAD" -- then all doubt is removed - it is clearly showing us that the first group of the dead - those that did not worship the beast of Rev 13 (a composit of ALL the beasts in Dan 7) -- CAME to life and "The REST of the dead" did NOT come to life UNTIL after the 1000 years were completed.

Plainly says souls and if they were beheaded then their bodies were dead for sure. Rest of the dead, probably the bodies of those souls.

The "rapture"....when Jesus comes He will remove all the righteous from the earth, including those who have died before His return
There is only one resurrection when Jesus returns. It is the resurrection of both the righteous and the sinners who will stand before God to receive their punishment or their reward. Matthew 13:30, 49-50, Matthew 25:31-46, John 5:28-29, Acts 24:15, II Thessalonians 1:6-10, Revelation 1:7 Revelation 20:12-15, I Corinthians 15:51-52

Tribulation
2nd coming - and gathering of the saints to Christ.

Both the living and the dead are "taken up" to be with Christ at that time just as 1Thess 4 states. Raptured up to be with Christ.

They are with Christ "Where I am there you may be also" in heaven - raptured to heaven Just as Christ promised in John 14.

If all of the "saved" are in Heaven with the Lord at the rapture, why would He bring them back down to earth for a 1000 years, it does not make sense.

I wish you the best Bob,

 

[BobRyan]

The "rapture"....when Jesus comes He will remove all the righteous from the earth, including those who have died before His return

My point exactly sir.

"The Dead in Christ will rise FIRST"

There is only one resurrection when Jesus returns.

Again - Agreed.

Christ comes as predicted in John 14:1-3 and in Matt 24 and in 1Thess 3 and in 1Cor 15 and in 2Thess 2 and in ... and the saints are all raised -- in ONE resurrection -- the FIRST resurrection. ALL the saints raised and along with the living ALL taken to heaven.

We see the return of Christ in 1Thess 4 and Matt 24 and ... it is the point of the FIRST resurrection -- the one and only resurrection for the saints who are then all taken to heaven.

John Gill on Rev 20:4

and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of
Jesus, and for the word of God:
these, with the persons described in the next clause, are they who will sit on thrones, during the thousand years of Satan's being bound, and will have judgment given them; even such who have bore witness to the truth of Jesus being the Son of God, the true Messiah, and the only Saviour of sinners, and to him as the essential Word of God, or to the written word of God, the whole Gospel, all the truths and doctrines of it; and who have been beheaded for bearing such a testimony, as John the Baptist was, the first of the witnesses of Jesus: and since this kind of punishment was a Roman one, it seems particularly to point at such persons who suffered under the Roman Pagan emperors, and to design the same souls said to be under the altar, and to cry for vengeance, (Revelation 6:9) .
…
And which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither
had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands,
see (Revelation 13:1,4,14-16) . This describes such who shall have made no profession of the Popish religion, nor have supported it in any way; who shall not have joined in the idolatry of the Romish antichrist, but shall have protested against it, and departed from it, and shall have adhered to Christ, and to the true worship of God; see (Revelation 14:1) (15:2) . And so this, with the preceding character, includes all the saints that lived under Rome Pagan, and Rome Papal, to the destruction of antichrist, and the setting up of Christ's kingdom; not that these martyrs and confessors, or even all the saints of their times, are the only persons that shall share in the glory and happiness of the thousand years' reign of Christ, and binding of Satan; for all the saints will come with Christ, and all the dead in Christ will rise first, or be partakers of the first resurrection; and all that are redeemed by his blood, of whatsoever nation, or in whatsoever age of the world they have lived, even from the beginning of it, shall be kings and priests, and reign with him on earth, (Zechariah 14:5) (1 Thessalonians 3:13) (4:14,16) (Revelation 5:9,10) though John only takes notice of these, because the design of this book, and of the visions shown to him, was only to give a prophetic history of the church, from his time, to the end of the world; and these particularly are observed to encourage the saints under sufferings for Christ:
John Gill – on Rev 20:4
http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GillsExpositionoftheBible/gil.cgi?book=re&chapter=020&verse=004&next=005&prev=003

While there may be some points in which we differ - there are still many in which we find agreement sir.

Thanks for sharing your views on this.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Brother Bob]

John Gill being a Calvinist would have trouble out of 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)

I thank you Bob, pray we are still friends.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Br.B in answer to BobR:

"What bible are you using? It is not in mine. It says "rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years was finished", Who is the "rest of the dead"? Also, Christ "

Br.B is right! The Bible I use - the original - does not even say 'again'! It just says "lived not" (as pointed out before but turned the blind eye to by BR in his usual honest manner).

And even the word 'achri' is translated unfortunately with 'until' while in context it should be 'while' or 'during'! In fact this word in the first place is an Adverbial Locative which in terms of time correctly would translate 'in'. The 'rest of the dead' "lived not during the thousand years".

Again, the original says, "they lived not IN THE END (Dative), they lived not THE Thousand Years (Nominative) THIS the First Resurrection (Nominative)". All the while those who participated in the 'first resurrection' - the salvation Jesus had wrought for them - sacrificed their lives for the witness of Him. They in having lost their lives, gained it - as Jesus said (in the Gospels).

 

[BobRyan]

The Bible GE uses is the original Bible of the NT writers???

Hmmm I learn something every day!

 

[BobRyan]

John Gill being a Calvinist would have trouble out of John Calvin!!

I am simply pointing out that a number of other auhors see this point about all saints and the fact that THE focus of all NT authors on the promised hope of resurrection is the same event John is highlighting both in John 5 and john14 and Rev 19-20:4

I thought about adding Jamieson, Fausset and Brown and others -- but my point is not to convince based on ad populum, I just wanted to show that many other Bible scholars find these details compelling.

I thank you Bob, pray we are still friends.

As always Sir. I never insist that anyone on this board agree with all of my views (who knows - I might even be wrong about something some day) -- and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the variations with those who also enjoy doing so.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Brother Bob]

Oh well, we can agree to disagree about them coming back from Heaven after they get there.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Somehow I am not getting my view across.

I believe in the Matt 24 sequence.

Tribulation
2nd coming - and gathering of the saints to Christ.

Both the living and the dead are "taken up" to be with Christ at that time just as 1Thess 4 states. Raptured up to be with Christ.

They are with Christ "Where I am there you may be also" in heaven - raptured to heaven Just as Christ promised in John 14.

When the 1000 years are completed the New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven and the "REST" of the dead are raised. The wicked. The SECOND resurrection described by Christ in John 5 and also mentioned in Rev 20 as those "over whom the second death" DOES has power.

So -- no resurrecting is going on during the 1000 years.

in Christ,

Bob

GE:

We get your view allright; it's yourself who don't 'get it'!

You again start your 'you quoting you' stuff, while again it's you, quoting you! And here's the prove of my accusation: this very post as virtually every post of yours!

BR:
Both the living and the dead are "taken up" to be with Christ at that time just as 1Thess 4 states. Raptured up to be with Christ.

Almost every word BobRyan's own, and 100% absent in that Scripture. Not even the idea, of been "taken up" or "raptured" exists. So again, who's knowing what he is writing, BR, or, Paul who actually wrote: "God, will descend, from heaven, and the dead in Christ, firstly-'prohton', will rise anew/again-'ana-stehsontai' (When did they first rise?); in the next place (or 'secondly') 'epeita', we - the living remaining - together with them, will be taken hold of-'harpaghehsometha' in / by/ clouds in-a-meeting of the Lord (He meeting us!) against the atmosphere / air - 'eis aera'.

Paul deals with the saved, writing to the living saints. The ungodly are not those he wants to encourage in the faith. That is why he does not here refer to 'the rest of the dead' who are also resurrected in this very day -- as written in many places elsewhere.

BR:
So -- no resurrecting is going on during the 1000 years.

GE:
If there were 'no resurrection going during the 1000 years', in the first place John would not have written what he wrote, for your words you deny here are John's very own and exact words! John the liar; BobRyan the Better Judge.

 

[Brother Bob]

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 interpretation.

I know not how true this account is of the thousand year reign, but have heard of Darby before as starting the Pre-millemium doctrine. If this doctrine didn't start until the ninetenth century, give me the Old Time Doctrine.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Continued:

BR:
"They are with Christ "Where I am there you may be also" in heaven - raptured to heaven Just as Christ promised in John 14.

GE:
"where I am" ... where will Jesus be when He has come to this earth? in heaven? then He could not have come to this earth again to have the saints with Him where He shall be! 'In heaven'? That makes Jesus talk nonsense; and John! But Jesus didn't say what BobRyan says He said. He said: "I will come to you!" (18)

The big thing is, that the disciples won't be left alone. While Jesus will be gone, He will send the Holy Spirit in His place as Comforter. But then He shall come again, so that His children shall be where He is (3) - together with Him again and never left alone! Jesus' faithfulness!

Verses 5 and 6 make it very clear 'where', Jesus would bring the believers to, and 'the way' He would take them. Were He to take them away 'to heaven', He would have destroyed his very own intention!

BobRyan just adds his own words to correct what God in error had said.

 

[BobRyan]

Oh well, we can agree to disagree about them coming back from Heaven after they get there.

We know that after the 1000 years the saints "inherit the earth" Matt 5 and we see them on earth in the New Earth in Rev 21 and 22...

How can that even be debatable??

We also know that at the appearing of Christ in Rev 19 and 1Thess 4 He takes the saints to heaven as promised in John 14:1-3. Surely that has to be a pretty well accepted fact.

EVEN those who go for a pre-trib or mid-trib rapture have saints coming back to earth after 3.5 or 7 years in heaven.

The "correct view" simply has that as 1000 years in heaven not 3 or 7.:thumbs:

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

God said -

Rev 20
4 Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.



5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection.[/b]
6 Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years.

The text does not say "DURING the thousand years THEY CAME TO LIFE" it does not say "AFTER the START of the thousand years they cam to life at various times and reigne for various lengths of time"

RATHER we have TWO resurrections (the FIRST that is BEFORE the 1000 years and the SECOND that is AFTER the 1000 years is complete). With the saints of all ages reigning with Christ -- aLL for 1000 years no less.

BR:
So -- no resurrecting is going on during the 1000 years.

GE:
If there were 'no resurrection going during the 1000 years', in the first place John would not have written what he wrote, for your words you deny here are John's very own and exact words! John the liar; BobRyan the Better Judge.

As usual GE you are not at a loss for some kind of wild off the wall response.

It is expected sir.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

BR:

"When the 1000 years are completed the New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven and the "REST" of the dead are raised. The wicked. The SECOND resurrection described by Christ in John 5 and also mentioned in Rev 20 as those "over whom the second death" DOES has power."

GE:

BR: "When the 1000 years are completed the New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven and the "REST" of the dead are raised. The wicked."

GE: When the 1000 years are completed the New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven (Rv21) and ALL the dead are raised - in the (general) "resurrection of the flesh" in the flesh, as the Confession says. The "REST of the dead" ('the wicked' of Rv19 and 20) are also raised, in that day.

The New Jerusalem comes out of heaven onto the earth, the saved enter into it, and the enemy moves up against it and circles it about (20:9). They are destroyed. Now Jesus has fulfilled His promise of John 14, and they all lived happily ever after upon this earth.

Where do you get it from that everybody went up into somewhere in the makro cosmos there once again to face a thousand years long court session, then to descend low down to earth once more for the terrible ordeal of the hell blown down upon the wicked? Not even the purgatory of the antichrist pictures such a frightening 'salvation'.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

BR:

"The SECOND resurrection described by Christ in John 5 and also mentioned in Rev 20 as those "over whom the second death" DOES has power.""

GE:

I challenge you again - like before when you must have seen it safer to pretend my post doesn't exist - quote me from John 5 this "SECOND resurrection described by Christ"!
You put words in Jesus' mouth; and in John's. Have you no fear? have you no integrity? Have you no respect?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

BR:

The text does not say "DURING the thousand years THEY CAME TO LIFE" it does not say "AFTER the START of the thousand years they cam to life at various times and reigne for various lengths of time"

RATHER we have TWO resurrections (the FIRST that is BEFORE the 1000 years and the SECOND that is AFTER the 1000 years is complete). With the saints of all ages reigning with Christ -- aLL for 1000 years no less.

As usual GE you are not at a loss for some kind of wild off the wall response.

It is expected sir."

GE:

You just further demonstrate your complete ineptness and unwillingness to receive the Word of God. I gave you the Word of God from the 'TEXT' - not from some interpretation of it. You answer with an interpretation - some 'transaltion' - that because it suits your preconceived ideas, you, kake the Word of God.

You are an unworthy servant.

Am I ever going to get anywhere with you? Or with the Seventh Day Adventists?

In South Africa there fortunately are very poor Seventh Day Adventists. I find that they do have an ear for the Truth. But those better off in earthly things, they are all perfect specimens of Laodecean Christians.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

The Bible GE uses is the original Bible of the NT writers???

Hmmm I learn something every day!

GE:

No, you don't. You're unteachable. You are omniscient.

I am not intimidated by the high secret societies of men under the spell of the jesuits who translate the Bible. I as mr Nobody will take the Greek original, the derision of the elite despite, as my only authority - as God's authoritive Word. Ridicule me, be sarcastic - you have no answer and only parade your own poverty in understanding for riches, ease and pomp.

Let me immediately say, the translation refered to by BobRyan for his distorted views, does not necessarily sort under the type of translations I implied. He wrungs his views out of what may be a perfectly sound translation, or rather, he pushes his views into it. My point is, a true translation made in the fear of the Lord, never claims to be 'the text' itself, and will allow for better rendering, from the nature of its undertaking. The model of such translations, is the King James Version. I appreciate and respect the labour of God's true servants in translating of the Word of God. It more often than not are those slaves of preconceived ideas who actually don't show proper respect.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

The SOLE reason the SDAs concocted their '1000 years' heresy is to harbour the biggest heresy of an 'investigative judgment'. It is theirs form beginning to end, one if not the, "pillar", of their 'faith'.

That to me is enough reason already to discard any pointer in that direction.

 

[BobRyan]

BR:

The text does not say "DURING the thousand years THEY CAME TO LIFE" it does not say "AFTER the START of the thousand years they cam to life at various times and reigne for various lengths of time"

RATHER we have TWO resurrections (the FIRST that is BEFORE the 1000 years and the SECOND that is AFTER the 1000 years is complete). With the saints of all ages reigning with Christ -- aLL for 1000 years no less.

As usual GE you are not at a loss for some kind of wild off the wall response.

It is expected sir."


GE:

You just further demonstrate your complete ineptness and unwillingness to receive the Word of God. I gave you the Word of God from the 'TEXT' - not from some interpretation of it. You answer with an interpretation - some 'transaltion' - that because it suits your preconceived ideas, you, kake the Word of God.


You are an unworthy servant.

Less whining - more facts please.

If you are going to argue that you are a better translator than the NASB - then after your performance here - you might want to keep that to yourself.

I am going to have to stick with the Word of God - not the word of GE.

As horrible as that probably sounds to you in the state you are in - that is just how it will be and how it has been in our discussions.

You are going to have to appeal to actual facts sir.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

GE:

Let me immediately say, the translation refered to by BobRyan for his distorted views, does not necessarily sort under the type of translations I implied. He wrungs his views out of what may be a perfectly sound translation,
.

Then why do you insist on a red herring like "GE is a better translator"?? Why do you work so hard to shoot your own arguments down??

Less emotion GE - more facts please.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

[/size]

Less whining - more facts please.

If you are going to argue that you are a better translator than the NASB - then after your performance here - you might want to keep that to yourself.

I am going to have to stick with the Word of God - not the word of GE.

As horrible as that probably sounds to you in the state you are in - that is just how it will be and how it has been in our discussions.

You are going to have to appeal to actual facts sir.

in Christ,

Bob

GE:

You quoted: "and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection."

As I have edited my post, this Translation - be it which ever - says nothing different from what I maintain the Greek says. It is YOU, who is at odds with it. I expounded, more thoroughly explained, just what this Translation means, looking at the Greek. Now you say it is I that think I am a "better translator than the NASB". No it is you think that highly of yourself. But you just typically again illustrate your audacity.