Run AWAY from Calvinism!

[reformed1689]

Paul is long dead, as I'm sure you agree. I mean, what he wrote in the Bible lives on, I guess, but that's because God's Word endures forever, as Isaiah says and Peter quotes. And I agree with, well, God.

Well GOD says in his word, the devil still goes about and has not been put in the abyss. Eph. 4:27; 6:11; Rev. 12:9, 12; [Job 1:9–12; Luke 22:31; 2 Cor. 2:11]

 

[reformed1689]

LOL! There's only one world... :) Well, that people actually live on/in... Oh wait! Maybe you're speaking metaphorically...

Paul is long dead, as I'm sure you agree. I mean, what he wrote in the Bible lives on, I guess, but that's because God's Word endures forever, as Isaiah says and Peter quotes. And I agree with, well, God.


The abyss has been described as where Satan is, a spiritual realm. But it also described as a place “under the earth.” There is no denying that Scripture describes it this way; the question is this to be understood literally, or metaphorically? In other words:

a. Is this abyss literally under the surface of the earth, with no access to the earth?​

Or:

b. Is this abyss metaphorically "under the earth," a spiritual realm that is beneath ~ in the sense of being unseen ~ the physical and natural aspects of the earth?​

Well, the latter (b) is the case. After all, if it was totally under the earth, and a realm completely separated from the earth, demons would not even be a threat to us. Yet they are. The abyss (spiritual realm) does intersect with the physical realm on Earth. This is how Satan and the other demons are able to affect and influence humanity. But he is bound in the sense that he cannot deceive the nations as he could in the days of the Israelites before the advent of Jesus.

And this is the Reformed understanding of... well, I was going to say specifically Revelation 20, but it's far more than just what's found there. Allusions to this can be found all through the Bible, even in the writings of Paul and Peter.

Grace and peace to you..

And we disagree. Satan has not been locked away, he still runs free within what God has allowed.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

LOL! There is only one Word of God. :) Thank God for that...

Yes there is, but in this you are njot quoting from His Word but your reinterpretation of the Word!

Well He is reigning, and now, from heaven. So yes He is reigning on earth, but for now from heaven. But certainly, one great day He will reign on earth... on earth, because earth and heaven will be one. This is the Return of the King ~ a reference to the great J.R.R. Tolkien and Lord of the Rings, if you didn't catch it. :) But yes, then ~ then ~ yes, there will be no more sin, no more evil.

Wrong again ! gods Word says He is stil lhigh priest- continually living to make intercession fo rus! He will be king, but not yet.

There is no error, Ronald. You think there is; I get that. But there is none. All who go there are cast there after the millennium and the final Judgment.

Wrong again! The bible clearly and unambiguously says they are cast before the millenium, which you say is starting now! Once again your reading skills are horrific!

19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

God says they are cast when Jesus returns and you call that teh start of eternity. But then again you simply say that REv. 20 is just a rerun of REv. 19 That is known as an allegorical interpretation of Scripture, or in common vernacular---" I know what the bible says, but this is what it really means.

I went to China on mission trips twice and to smuggle bibles in during the 80's when Bibles were against the law. Upon my second visit, not one Chinese believer upon reading the Bible with nothing more than the holy spirit, not one came up with this mess you are flinging here.

 

[PinSeeker]

...in this you are not quoting from His Word but your reinterpretation of the Word! ... Wrong again!

So you think. So be it.

Gods Word says He is still high priest - continually living to make intercession for us!

That He is, and always will be.

He will be king, but not yet.

Ronald, Jesus said He was a King many times during His life on earth, my friend. Do you think He was then, but He ceased to be King when He ascended to heaven? Surely not, especially given where He is sitting.

The bible clearly and unambiguously says they are cast before the millenium...

Quite the opposite. Again, the events of Revelation 19:11-21 do not precede the events of Revelation 20:1-6. I may be repeating something I said earlier, but all Christ’s enemies have been destroyed in Revelation 19:11-21. If Revelation 20:1-6 were to represent events later than 19:11-21, there would be no one left for Satan to deceive in 20:3. So the events of Revelation 19:11-21 cannot precede the events of Revelation 20:1-6.

...millennium, which you say is starting now!

Continuing now.

Once again your reading skills are horrific!

Again, so you think. Not so, but so be it.

You're conversational skills, Ronald, are apparently horrific. Well... I don't really think they're actually "horrific," I just think... well, in something people feel strongly about, they tend to get very... emotional, and defensive, I guess. If you want to continue, I would ask you to be civil, and not insulting ~ have some grace, which, I know it's in there somewhere... :) But otherwise, I'm gracefully withdrawing.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

And we disagree. Satan has not been locked away.

Yes, we do disagree. He is not able to deceive the nations. Jesus is very clear about this in Matthew 12. He has bound the strong man (Satan) from doing so. This has made it possible for Him to commission us to go and make disciples of all nations. If he hadn't done this, we would not be able to so.

...he still runs free within what God has allowed.

With regard to individuals, yes. But nations, no. The problem, it seems, is what people suppose Satan's being or having been bound and thrown into a pit, or an abyss, and having it shut and sealed over him, as read in Revelation 20:2-3, really means. And not just that, specifically, but how people read Revelation in its entirety.

Well GOD says in his word, the devil still goes about and has not been put in the abyss.

Right, well, see above concerning the abyss. But beyond that, again, Jesus, Who is the Word, clearly says otherwise:

"But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house." (Matthew 12:28-29).​

And the Father certainly does not contradict the Son (or vice-versa).

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

That He is, and always will be.

Nope. Jesus holds 3 offices, Prophet, Priest and King. They are not concurrent but consecutive.

From the start of HIs ministry till his condemnation, He was prophet.

From HIs death till He returns He is priest.

From His return through eternity He is King.

Continuing now.

So when did those who rejected the mark and did not worship the image of the beast rise from the dead?
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.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Souls and spirits do not die! Bodies do! REsurrection means the body rising, so when did these bodies leave their graves? This also means the image of the beast and the mark happened before Jesus Because you say the millenium happen shortly after Jesus resurrected or ascended. So the beast was an OT figure!

 

[PinSeeker]

Let's see:

Nope. From the start of HIs ministry till his condemnation, He was prophet. From His death till He returns He is priest. From His return through eternity He is King.

Well, yep. To your points here, consecutively:

PROPHET
The function of a prophet is to speak God’s Word to people. He certainly did this when He walked the earth, but even beyond that, He was, is, and always will be the Word of God (John 1:1). He does not simply speak the Word of God as a mere human prophet, but is Himself the Word made flesh (John 1:14). He is the final word, the ultimate revelation of God: “In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe” (Hebrews 1:1–2). So He was, is, and always will hold the office of prophet.

PRIEST
Christ, Robert, as the writer of Hebrews says, is "a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek" (Hebrews 7:1-26). Hebrews 7:21 contains a quote from Psalm 110:4... "The Lord (God the Father) has sworn and will not change His mind, 'You (David's Lord, Christ Jesus, God the Son) are a priest forever.'"

KING
Just for the sake of discussion, if what you say were true of His Kingship, that He will not be King until His return, then:

The magi were terribly mistaken when they asked Herod, In Matthew 2:2, "Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.​

Nathanel was terribly mistaken when he, in John 1:49, answered Jesus, saying/proclaiming/exclaiming, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!”​

Zechariah was terribly mistaken in his prophecy, particularly in Zechariah 9 ~ and Matthew in his citation of what Zechariah said in Matthew 21 ~ when he, relating God's words to the people, said, "Say to the daughter of Zion, 'Behold, your king is coming to you, humble, and mounted on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a beast of burden." Matthew was sure to say that Jesus's triumphal entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday was the fulfillment of this prophecy.​

All of Jesus's disciples were terribly mistaken when, on this same Palm Sunday during Jesus's triumphal entry into Jerusalem when they were shouting, "Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!" And then on top of that, in response to the Pharisees telling Jesus to rebuke His disciples, replied, "I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out" (Luke 19), which also, if what you say were true, would make Jesus either terribly mistaken or lying there, too.​

Jesus Himself was either terribly mistaken or lying when He replied in the affirmative to Pontius Pilot's query, "Are you the King of the Jews?" (Matthew 27, Mark 15, Luke 23, John 18)​

Well, none of the above were mistaken or (perish the thought) lying. On top of all that, the writer of Hebrews tells us, in Hebrews 13:8, that "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever." So again, He was, is, and always will be all three; He did, does, and always will hold all three offices/titles.

So when did those who rejected the mark and did not worship the image of the beast rise from the dead?

Each in his/her own appointed time, Ronald. What you read in Revelation 20:4-6 ~ whether you believe it or not; it is what it is ~ is not past only or future only, but happening... stretching into the past since His birth, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension and the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost up to now, at present, and stretching into the future to His return, when Israel will be complete, when the fullness of the Gentiles has been brought in and the partial hardening of Israel is removed... in this way all of Israel will be saved. The last part of Revelation 20:4 ~ "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years" ~ is not to be read as future only but what is happening progressively over the thousand years, that people are coming, at their appointed times, to reign with Christ over the entire course of the present age Galatians 1:4, 1 Timothy 6:17, Titus 2:12, Hebrews 9:9), these last days (Hebrews 1:2, James 5:3, 2 Peter 3:3), the final hour (1 John 2:18).

Souls and spirits do not die! Bodies do!

Right. I'm... not sure why you felt the need to say that... I agree.

Resurrection means the body rising, so when did these bodies leave their graves?

It doesn't necessarily refer to the body rising, Ronald. There are two resurrections, Ronald, and the first is spiritual.

This also means the image of the beast and the mark happened before Jesus Because you say the millenium happen shortly after Jesus resurrected or ascended. So the beast was an OT figure!

No, it doesn't, Ronald. But Satan did exist, long before Jesus was born of Mary... :)

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

It doesn't necessarily refer to the body rising, Ronald. There are two resurrections, Ronald, and the first is spiritual.

So you do believe spirits die! One can only be raised biblically if one dies! We are born dead spiritually and are made alive through the spirit when we are born again! but that is not a resurrection!

Each in his/her own appointed time, Ronald. What you read in Revelation 20:4-6 ~ whether you believe it or not; it is what it is ~ is not past only or future only, but happening... stretching into the past since His birth, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension and the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost up to now, at present, and stretching into the future to His return, when Israel will be complete, when the fullness of the Gentiles has been brought in and the partial hardening of Israel is removed... in this way all of Israel will be saved. The last part of Revelation 20:4 ~ "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years" ~ is not to be read as future only but what is happening progressively over the thousand years, that people are coming, at their appointed times, to reign with Christ over the entire course of the present age Galatians 1:4, 1 Timothy 6:17, Titus 2:12, Hebrews 9:9), these last days (Hebrews 1:2, James 5:3, 2 Peter 3:3), the final hour (1 John 2:18).

so then what is this 2000 year old mark and what is this 2000 year old image that these continously resurrecting saints did not worship! And only the beheaded for not worshipping the beast or his image,

also what is the mark?

KING
Just for the sake of discussion, if what you say were true of His Kingship, that He will not be King until His return, then:

The magi were terribly mistaken when they asked Herod, In Matthew 2:2, "Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.
Nathanel was terribly mistaken when he, in John 1:49, answered Jesus, saying/proclaiming/exclaiming, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!”
Zechariah was terribly mistaken in his prophecy, particularly in Zechariah 9 ~ and Matthew in his citation of what Zechariah said in Matthew 21 ~ when he, relating God's words to the people, said, "Say to the daughter of Zion, 'Behold, your king is coming to you, humble, and mounted on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a beast of burden." Matthew was sure to say that Jesus's triumphal entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday was the fulfillment of this prophecy.
All of Jesus's disciples were terribly mistaken when, on this same Palm Sunday during Jesus's triumphal entry into Jerusalem when they were shouting, "Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!" And then on top of that, in response to the Pharisees telling Jesus to rebuke His disciples, replied, "I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out" (Luke 19), which also, if what you say were true, would make Jesus either terribly mistaken or lying there, too.
Jesus Himself was either terribly mistaken or lying when He replied in the affirmative to Pontius Pilot's query, "Are you the King of the Jews?" (Matthew 27, Mark 15, Luke 23, John 18)

Well I take it you do not understand that Jesus came as Messiah for Israel! If Israel had accepted Jesus as Messiah as a nation (through their leaders) then Jesus would have still had to die under Pilates hand, but upon His resurrection He would have vanquished the enemies and established the promised kingdom to Israel. Israel rejected Him, so the kingdom (the millenial kingdom) was postponed till a future generation as the bible declares.

But as you reject a literal 1000 year kingdom, you most likely also reject all teh still unfulfilled OT prophecies concerning the kingdom and how Israel will be the focal point.

these are understood th eBible when they accept the words as written and not symbolize (allegorize) them to mean something different.

The kingdom was postponed, but only Jesus' disciples were told that in Matt. 13 after Israel committed the unpardonable sin in Matt. 12.

But God foreknew that Israel would reject jesus and Jesus would have to die and that Israel would be scattered to all the four corners of the earth and then in the last days be regathered to her promised land to pass under the rod of Gods Judgment! It is all there in easy to read common language!

 

[PinSeeker]

So you do believe spirits die!

No, I don't, Ronald. I don't. Need I say it again? But you, I, all human beings after Adam and Eve are born spiritually dead in sin, at enmity with God. This is the state Adam and Eve fell into in Genesis 3, just as God said they would in Genesis 2:17, and is the state in which we are all, without exception, born.

One can only be raised biblically if one dies!

Well, is dead. See above. And, just as Paul says in Ephesians 2:4-6 regarding us Christians, "God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ and raised us up with Him and seated us with him in the heavenly places." Regarding Paul's phrase, "raised us up with Him," the Greek there is "συνεγείρω synegeírō," which is, literally, roused from death, and then, of course, raised up ~ resurrected ~ with Christ. Peter puts it this way, in 1 Peter 1:3, that "God... (a)ccording to His great mercy, has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead..."

We are born dead spiritually and are made alive through the spirit when we are born again!

Absolutely! Hallelujah! Amen! I agree. And this is our spiritual resurrection.

...but that is not a resurrection!

Yes it is. It is the spiritual ~ not the physical, because that will come at Jesus's return; this is exactly what Paul is saying in 1 Corinthians 15, where he actually speaks of both the first (vv.42-49; spiritual; occurring in this age) and second (vv.50-55; physical; occurring at the end of the age) resurrections:

"So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. Thus it is written, 'The first man Adam became a living being'; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven." (vv.42-49)​

"I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: 'Death is swallowed up in victory.' 'O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?'" (vv.50-55)​

Okay, this seems like a good place to break up what you just posted and address the other part separately. I do this just to try to make this a little but less... unwieldy.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

So then what is this 2000 year old mark and what is this 2000 year old image that these continuously resurrecting saints did not worship! And only the beheaded for not worshipping the beast or his image... also what is the mark?

The mark of the Beast is a counterfeit for the seal of God’s name on the saints (Revelation 7:2-8; Revelation 14:1; cf. Ezekiel 9; Deuteronomy 6:8). The Beast owns those who are marked and they are his slaves (Revelation 14:9; Revelation 19:20; Revelation 20:4), and this is exactly what Paul says in Romans 6... we were once dead in our sin and therefore slaves to unrighteousness, but now we have become obedient from the heart and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. The mark denotes spiritual allegiance and ownership, both in the case of God’s mark and in the case of the counterfeit by the Beast. In both cases the mark is at root spiritual rather than visible. Now, Ronald, don't try to say that "spiritual" and "literal" are opposite each other. :)

This is another good breaking point. I'll continue below.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

Well I take it you do not understand that Jesus came as Messiah for Israel!

Oh.... yes, I do understand... :) But obviously ~ at least for now ~ our understandings are quite different. I've said this before, and this is where at least one of the roots of the disagreement is ~ we have different understandings of who ~ who ~ Israel really is... who is really of Israel... the Israel of God. As I have quoted Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, many times before (not all in conversations with you, but others, too):

"no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter..." (Romans 2:28-29) ... "...not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but 'Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.' This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring..." (Romans 9:6-8) ... "...a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved..." (Romans 11:25-26).​

So, yes, Jesus did in fact come as Messiah for Israel, as you say, but not as you seem to mean. The true Israel of God is not ~ it never was ~ just physical Israel. And true Jews are not limited to ~ never were limited to ~ only physical descendants of Abraham. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile; all are one in Christ. All those in Christ, that is. This is God's Israel. And we in Christ, whether physically Jew or Gentile, are of God's true Israel and are thus true Jews, and thus all children of the promise and thus counted as offspring. Here, what the writer of Hebrews says is very timely in this discussion:

"Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world." (Hebrews 1:1-2)​

In this passage, we should see/know that God does not have two different peoples, and not two different plans for those people groups. Even as Gentiled, now that we are in Christ, the Israelites of old are "our fathers." We are all one, the Israelites of old and we who have been grafted in. They are us and we are them. The whole Bible is as much our story as it is theirs! He spoke to the Israelites of old in different ways ~ in types and shadows by and through the prophets, because Jesus had not yet come in person ~ than the way He has spoken to us now ~ by His Son. So, He spoke through different means, but not at all differently ~ and even precisely the same ~ in content! Do you see? Yes, it is very plain, in common language, as you say.

Again, a good breaking point.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

If Israel had accepted Jesus as Messiah as a nation (through their leaders) then Jesus would have still had to die under Pilate's hand, but upon His resurrection He would have vanquished the enemies and established the promised kingdom to Israel.

Well, but in that little schema, the Gentiles would have been left out in the cold, and thus... well, you know. :) And I'm sure you would agree that that was never God's intention, so ~ and I mean no offense by this, but ~ that kind of nullifies any point you were trying to make, to be quite honest.

Israel rejected Him, so the kingdom (the millennial kingdom) was postponed till a future generation as the bible declares.

Well, I'll at least sort of agree with you here, but I would submit that that "future generation" began at Pentecost. :) But still... I'd like to know what part or parts of the Bible you're referring to here. Ah... it looks like you do below, so I'll address it there.

But as you reject a literal 1000 year kingdom...

I do not.

...you most likely also reject all the still unfulfilled OT prophecies concerning the kingdom and how Israel will be the focal point.

I do not.

Again, the disagreement is basically rooted in who Israel really is. So that takes us back to what I've said above.

These are understood the Bible when they accept the words as written and not symbolize (allegorize) them to mean something different.

Again with the "allegory"... uh... "stuff." It's ridiculous, but I get that you have to maintain that false dichotomy to "validate" what you are saying.

The kingdom was postponed, but only Jesus' disciples were told that in Matt. 13 after Israel committed the unpardonable sin in Matt. 12.

Yeah, so, okay. :) The Pharisees committed the unpardonable sin. The Pharisees. Yes, they were Jews, but not of God's Israel. I disagree regarding any postponement of the kingdom, because among other things, Jesus Himself, on numerous occasions, said the kingdom was at hand, and that He is ~ not "will be" ~ a King. I may need you to flesh out more fully what you think you're reading/understanding in Matthew 12 and 13 so I can fully address it.

But God foreknew that Israel would reject Jesus and Jesus would have to die and that Israel would be scattered to all the four corners of the earth and then in the last days be regathered to her promised land to pass under the rod of Gods Judgment!

Hmmm... yeah, same here. I agree on this always having been God's plan regarding Israel and Jesus, for sure. But our apparent disagreement regarding who Israel really is, who God's Israel is really comprised of, comes back into play here, and then what (where) "her promised land" is ~ the Promised Land is not just a tiny country on the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea. :) I'll put it this way for you Ronald. Think bigger. In all these things. Like a whole, whole, whole lot bigger. :)

It is all there in easy to read common language!

I agree. :)

Grace and peace to you, Ronald!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

No, I don't, Ronald. I don't. Need I say it again? But you, I, all human beings after Adam and Eve are born spiritually dead in sin, at enmity with God. This is the state Adam and Eve fell into in Genesis 3, just as God said they would in Genesis 2:17, and is the state in which we are all, without exception, born.

Sorry but that is not a resurrection. Resurrection is ana stasia (standing again ) someone or thing had to be alive and die to be resurrected. Our spiritual birth is not a resurrection.

Well, is dead. See above. And, just as Paul says in Ephesians 2:4-6 regarding us Christians, "God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ and raised us up with Him and seated us with him in the heavenly places." Regarding Paul's phrase, "raised us up with Him," the Greek there is "συνεγείρω synegeírō," which is, literally, roused from death, and then, of course, raised up ~ resurrected ~

that is not a resurrection but an elevation. Sorry but you are confusing words.

Yes it is. It is the spiritual ~ not the physical, because that will come at Jesus's return; this is exactly what Paul is saying in 1 Corinthians 15, where he actually speaks of both the first (vv.42-49; spiritual; occurring in this age) and second (vv.50-55; physical; occurring at the end of the age) resurrections:

NHo it is not. In order for something to resurrect, it had to be alive and die. Our spirits were dead never alive. They were made alive but not resurrected.

The mark of the Beast is a counterfeit for the seal of God’s name on the saints (Revelation 7:2-8; Revelation 14:1; cf. Ezekiel 9; Deuteronomy 6:8). The Beast owns those who are marked and they are his slaves (Revelation 14:9; Revelation 19:20; Revelation 20:4). The mark denotes spiritual allegiance and ownership, both in the case of God’s mark and in the case of the counterfeit by the Beast. In both cases the mark is at root spiritual rather than visible. Now, Ronald, don't try to say that "spiritual" and "literal" are opposite each other

How do you know you never took the mark? We were all children of the devil before being born again! But the MARK IS A VISIBLE MARK. GOD USED THE WORD FOR A PHYSICAL STAMP SO SORRY! yOU ARE ONCE AGAIN RUNNING AWAY FOR THE LITERAL TO THE ALLEGORICAL.

So what exactly to you is the mark? How does one acquire it? What is the i mage of the beast that people worship! That also is a physical thing. The False prophet (whom I assume you believe has also been around for around 2,000 years) orders all to worship the beast and his image and he even makes the image speak! When did thaqt happen????????????????

 

[PinSeeker]

Sorry but that is not a resurrection

Yes, it is. We disagree.

Resurrection is ana stasia (standing again )

Jesus died and rose again. He was resurrected physically. And we will be someday, but as of now, we have been raised again in Christ. Before that, we were dead in our sin. We have been spiritually resurrected.

Our spiritual birth is not a resurrection.

We were spiritually dead, dead in our sin, and were raised in Christ, born again to a living hope. Yes, it is a resurrection.

Our spirits were dead never alive. They were made alive but not resurrected.

That, Ronald, is a total contradiction. "Made alive, but not resurrected." That's astounding. The very definition of 'resurrection' is 'a rising from the dead.'

We were all children of the devil before being born again!

Agreed. And dead in our sin, in need of new birth in the Spirit, in need of resurrection.

But the MARK IS A VISIBLE MARK. GOD USED THE WORD FOR A PHYSICAL STAMP SO SORRY! YOU ARE ONCE AGAIN RUNNING AWAY FOR THE LITERAL TO THE ALLEGORICAL. So what exactly to you is the mark? How does one acquire it? What is the i mage of the beast that people worship! That also is a physical thing. The False prophet (whom I assume you believe has also been around for around 2,000 years) orders all to worship the beast and his image and he even makes the image speak! When did that happen????????????????

Yet again... welcome to your opinion, which is what it is regardless of how much or how loudly you shout... :) It's very literal, and not "allegorical," but just not in the way you suppose. It's visible in the form of works, yes. That's how we know other Christians; their good works are evidence of their God-given faith. But it's not like a brand on our foreheads or a permanent magic marker drawing on some other part of our body... :) See post 1328 above.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yes, it is. We disagree.

Well when you redefine resurrection from its universal definition, you can get it to mean anything you want.

resurrection
ˌre-zə-ˈrek-shən
NOUN

1. the rising of Christ from the dead
   the rising again to life of all the human dead before the final judgment

Strong’s Definitions G450; a standing up again, i.e. (literally) a resurrection from death (individual, genitive case or by implication, (its author)), or (figuratively) a (moral) recovery (of spiritual truth):—raised to life again, resurrection, rise from the dead, that should rise, rising again

Key word AGAIN!!!! You can make up your own definitions, but then I speak from the bible, and you speak from your redefinitions.

Jesus died and rose again. He was resurrected physically. And we will be someday, but as of now, we have been raised again in Christ. Before that, we were dead in our sin. We have been spiritually resurrected.

We were never raised a first time! We were never alive spoiritually afirst time- so it is not a resurrection, according to the definition of the word!

Agreed. And dead in our sin, in need of new birth in the Spirit, in need of resurrection.

Wrong again! being born again is not a resurrection of one who died, but a second birth

That, Ronald, is a total contradiction. "Made alive, but not resurrected." That's astounding. The very definition of 'resurrection' is 'a rising from the dead.'

Wrong again! See the definitions posted above. biblically our spirits are made alive and we are raised for a newness of lifew! But our spirits never died! they cannot be resuurected. They can only be made alive!

.

 

[PinSeeker]

Well when you redefine resurrection from its universal definition...

I'm not redefining anything, Ronald. You even quote it here, exactly as I have said:

resurrection
ˌre-zə-ˈrek-shən
NOUN

1. the rising of Christ from the dead
   the rising again to life of all the human dead before the final judgment

Strong’s Definitions G450; a standing up again, i.e. (literally) a resurrection from death (individual, genitive case or by implication, (its author)), or (figuratively) a (moral) recovery (of spiritual truth):—raised to life again, resurrection, rise from the dead, that should rise, rising again

I don't have any problem with the standing thing, but whether one actually stands or not, it is a restoration of life from death. And you agree with that, surely.

We were never raised a first time!

Sure. I never said otherwise. But spiritually, we were dead in our sin, and because of the work of the Holy Spirit, we are spiritually dead no longer, but raised ~ spiritually ~ from the dead. This is the first resurrection.

Those who die physically between now and Jesus's return will experience the second resurrection, which is physical. This resurrection will be general; we will all be resurrected for the final Judgment. For many, this will be the resurrection to eternal life, and for others it will be a resurrection to judgment (John 5:28-29). If this is the second resurrection, Ronald ~ and it is ~ then there must be a first. What do you see as the first resurrection? Because it seems to me you're saying there is no first resurrection, and that's obviously not true; there cannot be a second without there previously having been a first, right?

We were never alive spiritually a first time- so it is not a resurrection, according to the definition of the word!

LOL! Okay well not only were we "never alive spiritually," but also, conversely and incontrovertibly, we were ~ and the Bible is very clear on this; Paul is especially in Romans 4-6 ~ dead in our sin. Now, we have been brought from death to life, which is, by definition, a resurrection. Yes, it's new birth in the Spirit, but we are brought from death to life ~ raised up with Christ ~ and this is undeniably a resurrection... the first resurrection.

being born again is not a resurrection of one who died, but a second birth

Call it what you want, Ronald. It's both. See above.

Biblically our spirits are made alive and we are raised for a newness of life!

I agree, and always have. Yeah, raised to newness of life... resurrected in Christ, raised with Him and seated with him in the heavenly places.

But our spirits never died! they cannot be resuurected.

They were dead, but now alive. Yes, we have been spiritually resurrected.

They can only be made alive!

Agree. Given new birth in the spirit, and resurrected ~ because we were previously dead ~ spiritually. Trying to make some kind of mutually exclusive distinction between the two, there, Ronald, places you far outside not only common understanding of... well, language, generally speaking :) ... and orthodox Christian thought on that point.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I don't have any problem with the standing thing, but whether one actually stands or not, it is a restoration of life from death. And you agree with that, surely.

Nice try. You have said that spirits that have been dead since inception are resurrected. In order for a spirit to be resurrected it had to have lived anbd then died. that is what resurrection means as you even said a REstoring. People are born spiritually dead, their spirits did not live once and died.

They were dead, but now alive. Yes, we have been spiritually resurrected.

The way you play fast and loose with word definitions is one of the reasons why today8s church is dying on the vine. Once again something cannot be resurrected if it had never lived AND died prior. we were born spiritually dead so we did not live spiritually prior. We are quickened and made alive but not resurrected.

 

[ChristisGod]

Nice try. You have said that spirits that have been dead since inception are resurrected. In order for a spirit to be resurrected it had to have lived anbd then died. that is what resurrection means as you even said a REstoring. People are born spiritually dead, their spirits did not live once and died.



The way you play fast and loose with word definitions is one of the reasons why today8s church is dying on the vine. Once again something cannot be resurrected if it had never lived AND died prior. we were born spiritually dead so we did not live spiritually prior. We are quickened and made alive but not resurrected.

it sounds like someone is conflating the new birth with the resurrection of the saints.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

it sounds like someone is conflating the new birth with the resurrection of the saints.

This is one of the reasons why Western believers are so immature when it comes to doctrine. We have so many weak teachers that use words so badly that people do not realize there is enormous differences in words anymore! It weakens doctrine which in turn weakens faith and our walk with God.

 

[PinSeeker]

Nice try.

:)

You have said that spirits that have been dead since inception are resurrected.

I really don't know how you mean this. If you mean ~ as I have said ~ that we are all spiritually dead from birth until we are born again of the Spirit ~ which is another way of speaking of our spiritual resurrection in Christ ~ then yes. But the way you put it here is... well, kind of ridiculous, so I really don't know if that's what you mean or not. It seems not, since what you said immediately following this is, well, garbled, so say the least. Except for "(p)eople are born spiritually dead." That I agree with, as I have said many times.

...their spirits did not live once and died.

Well, right. But that's not necessary for a resurrection to take place, if that's what you mean. Only having been dead, and then raised from the dead.

The way you play fast and loose with word definitions...

I do no such thing.

Once again something cannot be resurrected if it had never lived AND died prior.

No, for a resurrection to occur, one has only to rise from the dead. This is the definition of 'resurrection.' We will be reunited with our physical bodies at Jesus's return. As will unbelievers; this resurrection is general... it is the second resurrection... and the Judgment immediately follows. So, regarding the physical resurrection, we will have been physically alive before, but this is not necessary for a resurrection to occur, but only that the physical body is raised from the dead. So it is also with our spiritual resurrection, the first resurrection, which occurs when we are born of the Spirit.

We are quickened and made alive but not resurrected.

Yes, it is. It seems, Ronald, you're just being hard-headed. But, I realize that you're probably thinking the same of me. So be it.

Grace and peace to you.