Deflection! The favorite ploy of Premillennialists when they are confronted with Biblical truth they have no answer for! None, but Jesus shall be resurrected bodily until the hour coming, when the last trumpet sounds and time shall be no longer!
The difference between The Resurrection and the first resurrection.
- Thread starter Stewardofthemystery
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Deflection! The favorite ploy of Premillennialists when they are confronted with Biblical truth they have no answer for! None, but Jesus shall be resurrected bodily until the hour coming, when the last trumpet sounds and time shall be no longer!
Paul knew Jesus was bodily resurrected already YET Paul did not consider the first resurrection to be past already. In fact Paul warned about this false doctrine.
2 Timothy 2:16-18
King James Version
16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
Don't be obtuse! You know very well by now, we've told you often, the first resurrection of the dead to immortal life is Christ's resurrection. That's why man MUST have part in His first resurrection before they physically die to overcome the second death. It is in our partaking of Christ's resurrection life that we have eternal life through His Spirit in us. We do NOT have immoral life by being physically resurrected in mortal bodies still destined to die. That's what would be for anyone physically resurrected before the hour coming, when the last trumpet sounds and time shall be no longer.
I agree! If you were Truly born again of the Holy Spirit and taught by Christ then you would not be led astray by the false doctrines of man that you continue to cling to.
Boy, the thoughts that came into my head in hearing that you are the Head! LOL
That's why I quoted Paul telling us that Christ has already resurrected from the dead! His bodily resurrection to immortality is long ago PAST! It seems it is only you Premillennialists who keep insisting a bodily resurrection shall come before the hour coming, when the last trumpet sounds and time shall be no longer!
Paul just a few verses before says, "Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:" If Paul did not believe the first resurrection is past already why does he tell us to remember that Jesus Christ WAS (past tense) raised from the dead? HELLO, do you have reading comprehension difficulties?
Is it not also Paul who says, "That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles."
tailgator
Well-Known Member
Liars and deceivers who say the resurrection is past already.
2 Timothy 2
17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
Paul never wrote that any where in Scripture. That is your own imagination at work.
Those under the law, who disobeyed the law, physically died. That is what happened. The punishment was not being spiritually shunned like some modern protestants, or excommunicated like the catholics.
Some claim that a soul that sins, even ceases to exist, annihilation. Your point is foreign to standard doctrine. You cannot help but sin, as you are already in a state of death. This current physical body is already dead. You are spiritually dead. What you seem to claim; is that if you sin, you can loose your salvation and God's grace cannot overcome your own will and desire.
The Lake of fire is the second death, but it is also physical and spiritual, as the soul, body, and spirit can all be tossed alive into the LOF. But that only happens after one stands in judgment before God or Jesus. No one is given the Second Death because they are born physically, and then sin. They are given the Second Death, because they look God in the face and still reject God, or the Lord rejects them, as those of Israel who will be rejected by Jesus at the Second Coming per Matthew 25.
Since Noah, redemption has been by faith, and obedience of faith. Even under the physical Law of Moses, there was both faith and works. Just works without faith was dead, and just faith without works was dead. Since the Cross we, have not been under the burden of the sacrificial Covenant. But we still have to have good works and faith, not just faith and living in wickedness before God.
We will not be physically redeemed until the soul sheds Adam's dead corruptible flesh and puts on God's permanent incorruptible physical body. We are spiritually dead until we become glorified. The only spiritual life we have is in the Holy Spirit, and if we are doing our own thing other than through the Holy Spirit, we are still spiritually dead, even having the Second Birth.
No one gets the first resurrection, while still living in a mortal body. The first resurrection is into God's permanent incorruptible physical body. Only then will one not face the second death. Amil claim that only happens once at the Second Coming. No, the first resurrection happened to Lazarus, and all the OT redeemed waiting in Abraham's bosom. They are all currently in Paradise, and will never stand in judgment to be tossed into the LOF, the second death.
The thief on the Cross whom Jesus forgave and redeemed, was redeemed that day and physically entered Paradise that day, no longer to stand in judgment, nor tossed into the LOF at a future date. No one to whom the second birth has been given freely remain in a state of death until the Second Coming. The Day of redemption is when the soul leaves Adam's dead corruptible flesh and enters God's permanent incorruptible physical body to enjoy all Paradise has to offer. They have all been made alive and no longer in a state of death, physical nor spiritual. Because they are all whole and waiting in heaven with God. One cannot freely disobey God while serving God day and night in that heavenly temple.
Only the dead both physically alive and physically dead, whose souls are waiting in sheol will stand in judgment before God or Jesus someday to be tossed alive into the LOF, the second death.
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
And you and amil company are wrong, because water is the physical, and you all deny a physical body in Paradise. One cannot even enter Paradise unless they have God's permanent incorruptible physical body. That is why they waited as souls in Abraham's bosom. Certainly a soul would have already been in heaven waiting for a body, if you all are correct, no?
They had no physical body, until Jesus came and was the firstborn among the dead. They came out of their graves in physical bodies when Jesus declared it was finished. They were permanently resurrected into heaven on resurrection Sunday when they all ascended physically into Paradise with Jesus and presented as the firstfruits. So if they still have only a soul, then you are denying the water part of this equation:
"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh (water); and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit (Holy Spirit)."
You cannot be redeemed without a physical body. You cannot exist without a physical body, otherwise you are still physically dead. Those in Abraham's bosom were physically dead. They are no longer physically dead, nor in sinful flesh. They do have God's physical body given to the sons of God on the 6th day of creation.
That is what most cannot accept that when Adam disobeyed God, he and Eve left God's incorruptible physical body, and entered the corruptible body of death. That physical body was passed down from generation to generation from all born to a female from Eve, who now experienced pain in childbirth. One has to be physically born to experience the first birth, then the first death, to receive the first resurrection into God's permanent incorruptible physical body. Only those of the second birth can experience the first resurrection, and that is the day of redemption when the soul enters Paradise, and will never taste death, as a soul without a physical body in sheol, the grave. Nor will the soul be in a state of death without a physical body in Paradise, one second.
Being born again of the Holy Spirit, means one will literally never be without a physical body ever. So that "of water" part means one cannot exist in Paradise without a physical body.
Of course if a soul on earth visits Paradise, they cannot take Adam's dead body with them. But if one returns to Adam's body, then they never entered God's, as that would mean a body up there without a soul. No verse claims bodies are up there waiting for a soul, so that is why those who visit don't know if they have a body or not. At least from a Scriptural standpoint. Any one can make up stuff in their mind. Paul was honest that he did not know one way or the other.
Paul did point put that being clothed upon (a physical body) instead of naked was preferred. But many still have the OT view that souls cannot have a physical body in death. Of course not, do you think the grave is just like the top side and all are walking around in physical bodies, under the earth? The body does not move physically down into the earth. But there is a physical place, because the pit will be opened at the 5th Trumpet, and literal physical angels will come out physically to torment humans physically. But no one takes their physical body to the pit. What the soul actually is, is a totally different conversation. Obviously it must mirror physical aspects, even though not physical, as Jesus said they could feel torment in sheol.
ewq1938
Well-Known Member
- Jul 11, 2015
- 7,294
- 1,453
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Well, Jesus is not part of Rev 20's definition at all.
Christ is not the "first resurrection" found in Revelation 20 but he is why it happens.
Rev 20 speaks of two groups of the dead that resurrect/live again.
The first resurrection is the resurrection of this first group of the dead because they resurrect first. The rest have to wait for their resurrection:
"the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished" (Rev 20:5)
This is the last resurrection of those who are dead. One group resurrected and "the rest" or the remaining ones did not resurrect when the others did.
This proves they partake of the second resurrection also known as the last resurrection because no one is still physically dead after they "live again". This proves without a doubt that there are two separate days of resurrections separated by a thousand years.
The first group resurrects before the thousand years begins and the second/last group resurrects after the end of the thousand years.
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Completely false
You can NEVER separate the LORD Jesus Christ from the Resurrection and MOST especially the First Resurrection.
No JESUS, no Resurrection = John 11:25 , 1 Thess 4:13-18
No JESUS no First Resurrection = 1 John 11:25 Cor 15:20-21 , Colossians 1:18 ,Rev 1:5
No JESUS no FIRST Resurrection = Revelation chapters 1 , 6 , 11 , 19 , 20
Revelation chapter 20 is WHAT???
ewq1938
Well-Known Member
- Jul 11, 2015
- 7,294
- 1,453
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
No. "the first resurrection" is solely and only speaking of the first group of the dead to come back to life. Jesus is not part of the definition of "the first resurrection". No one said Jesus wasn't involved in that first group's resurrection. I even mentioned it, "Christ is not the "first resurrection" found in Revelation 20 but he is why it happens."
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
You have failed again. The dead were resurrected at the Cross. There has been a 1994 year gap between the first resurrection of the OT out of Abraham's bosom, and even the Second Coming. Can you find any corroborate Scripture that declares Jesus will return in 2,000 years? Was the Cross in the past, last week, or a year from now, or at the Second Coming? There is no Scripture to corroborate that it has been almost 2,000 years since the Cross, so why do you need some Scripture to spell out Revelation 20 other than Revelation 20?
The last day resurrection of those prior to the Cross happened the day of the Cross. No one is still waiting to leave Abraham's bosom as souls waiting for a physical resurrection. So please tell me who in Christ is still in a state of death? What verse says those in Christ will never taste death, but according to Amil will still need a resurrection?
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."
Have you heard that voice, and thus no longer dead? Why would you need a resurrection?
"And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life."
Have you done enough good to save yourself, and give yourself your own Salvation?
Shall we move on to John 8?
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death. Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death."
The second birth is what prevents us from seeing and tasting death. Those of the second birth are not subject to the second death. Not those of the first resurrection.
The OT redeemed experienced the first resurrection by coming out of their graves physically. They would never physically die again. They were taken to heaven and presented to the Father as the firstfruits plural. They were in Christ the firstfruits plural. They were the first in order of those who were made alive with a physical resurrection.
"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet."
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."
Those made alive at the Cross, heard the voice of the Son of God, and they lived. Those beheaded will stand before thrones and live. They do not hear the voice of Jesus. There is a difference. But both will have received the first resurrection, because living means one is no longer physically dead. How can you say the second birth applied to those in Abraham's bosom, who had not even heard of the second birth. How can you assume those beheaded had the second birth prior to being beheaded. You add and assume way too much about certain physically dead people. The second birth is not something applied as "a blanket" covering all from Adam to Armageddon. The second birth allowed for those living in Adam's dead corruptible flesh a way into that heavenly kingdom prior to physical death, but only since the Cross. Those in the OT under the Law could not enjoy that heavenly kingdom, because they had to wait in death without a physical body. They only received a physical body at the Cross. That was their first resurrection. The rest of the dead still wait in death. Those between Noah and Moses did not even have the Law. Those before the Flood did not even have faith, but good works. Enoch and Noah were the only humans said to have faith, because they were righteous doing good works even when no one else did. So there are a lot of dead people without faith and having good works who were never in Abraham's bosom. When do you think God is going to resurrect them if you hijack their resurrection as your own, when you don't even need a resurrection to begin with? You have the second birth and will never taste death. That your soul leaves this body of death is not going to phase you one bit, as you will then be redeemed and enter life. Your soul is not going to wait around in death waiting for a future physical resurrection. No one, since the thief on the cross next to Jesus was promised eternal life in Paradise that day, not a future single hour as you prescribe, will even taste death, or wait somewhere without a physical body. Obviously the thief had never done good in life, else he would not have been on a cross. But if you had your way, that thief would be resurrected to damnation at a future single hour, because of the evil he had done. So tell me at what point did that thief receive the second birth, before Jesus died or after? Did the thief even need a second birth, or were the words and promise of Jesus good enough to redeem that thief as Jesus promised that the thief would be made alive that day when his soul left Adam's dead corruptible flesh?
Last edited:
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
Continued..
Now consider how these future humans are beheaded and when. You claim they were beheaded prior to the first advent, as they were given life during those thousand years you claim have already exceeded 1900+ years. Or they are just symbolic, and not really people, not really dead, not really beheaded, just mere symbolism of all believers in the last 1994 years. Some claim in this thread they are an ongoing phenomenon. That they lived and reigned before even being somehow symbolically beheaded, whatever that means. Is that some form of getting rid of Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Why cannot you not see that they lived after they were beheaded, not that they lived prior to being beheaded for a thousand years?
So if the thief on the Cross died and was then redeemed, why is it hard to see that these future people had to chop off their heads and then stand in judgment to be redeemed? And that their reward was having physical life to rule and reign with Jesus a thousand years? The thief was given physical life and has reigned with Christ in Paradise for over 1990 years. No wonder you need that thousand years to be symbolic. You have no specific time frames to even go by in Scripture.
You cannot even accept that those in the OT are not even waiting for a resurrection, because you deny they heard the voice of Jesus and were made alive. Lazarus heard the voice of Jesus. Do you need that quote?
"And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth. And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go."
You really deny that Lazarus experienced the first resurrection? Should he have remained in the grave and never come forth, because he should have waited for Amil's single future hour? Then you make things worse by saying Lazarus died again and has to taste death for who knows how much longer, just to prop up your doctrine that is not even written any where in Scripture.
I agree with Jesus that there is a single hour coming when time will be no more after creation has been handed back to God, where humans who have done good will be given a chance to accept the second birth who never had that chance. I agree with Jesus when He said the hour is coming and now is where all who hear Jesus, can receive that second birth, and don't have to wait until the end of Creation to be made alive.
Obviously you cannot have another thousand years where you banish yourself waiting in death to be made alive, as your eschatology overrides your soteriology. To say there is a premillennial second coming does not destroy soteriology. You will never wait in death for this single hour resurrection you keep preaching about. No one has waited in death since the Cross, once they receive the second birth. Is your second birth not strong enough that you have thus given yourself a relapse back into death, until that single hour arrives?
This is you adding your doctrine to God's Word:
"the hour is coming, in the which all that have died from this moment on are still in their graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”
Many seem to fail to see that those of the second birth are not in their graves at all. Not even the OT have been in their graves post the Cross. Jesus is only referring to those who had never left their graves.
"Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”
Jesus never said every last person would still be in a grave. Jesus never said, no one could leave their graves earlier than that last hour but all had to wait, either. This is the point all you Amil get hung up on. You think that everyone has to be in a grave when the GWT happens. That is ridiculous. Amil literally declare "the Second Birth is unable to prevent one from waiting in a grave somewhere for a last single hour resurrection". That is in direct contradiction that Jesus can make one alive so they never taste death and have to wait in a grave somewhere.
Last edited:
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
The LORD directly Says to us: I am the Resurrection
He only needs to say that once.
However, due to our lack of understanding, HE repeats this Truth throughout the Scriptures.
Why would you infer something that is completely contrary to Truth???
Correct
Therefore (currently) you're statements are contradictory, concerning the Firstfruits/First Resurrection & Revelation ch20.
This opens the door for all kinds of error as the pre-trib and amillianism fall headlong into.
The definition of "the first resurrection" is the LORD Jesus Christ = HE is the Definition
The definition of "the first resurrection" is: IAM the WAY, the TRUTH, the LIFE/Eternal
The definition of this Truth is repeated over and over again throughout the Scriptures.
JESUS is the First Resurrection = 1 Cor 15:20-23
But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man.
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then at His coming, those who belong to Him.
Therefore, it is not necessary to have His Name written in Revelation 20 because it is IMPOSSIBLE that HE is not there,
just as you stated by saying: "He is why it happens"
Why does this matter?
Because you have been given enough Truth so as not to give room to contradict what you already know.
It may seem trivial to you but it is actually a very large disparity from the Gospel all the WAY thru to Rev ch20.
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
It is difficult to get Amil to see that being made alive is having both a soul and physical body.
A soul is dead and in death in Adam's dead corruptible flesh, and also dead not having a physical body. Being physically dead is a soul not having God's permanent incorruptible physical body.
The first resurrection is being in God's permanent incorruptible physical body. And that prevents one from facing the Second Coming. People do not go around sinning and in sin and death with God's permanent incorruptible physical body. They are blessed and will not face the second death.
You, on the other hand, are still dead in Adam's dead corruptible flesh, but with the Second Birth also have a way to escape the second death. Just because you do not have the first resurrection yet, does not mean what you are forcing on others that only the first resurrection prevents the second death. No one is saying only the first resurrection prevents the second death. You are the only one saying that. That is your amil bias changing Scripture to say something it is not saying, evidently to make a false point.
You don't have to change what the first resurrection is, because that is already covered by the second birth, for us alive still in a state of death, where the physical has not been redeemed yet, by the first resurrection.
During the last 2 millennia, those in Christ received the redemption of the flesh when the soul left Adam's dead corruptible flesh, and experienced the first resurrection into God's permanent incorruptible physical body. They all received a physical resurrection because Christ was the first to rise from the dead. And no one gives themselves a first resurrection. Lazarus was called out of his grave, the first resurrection, because Jesus was already the Resurrection and the Life, and did not have to die on the Cross to become the Resurrection and the Life.
Why does Amil bias think that Jesus had to physically die and resurrect first, to become the Resurrection and the Life? Jesus already explained that to Martha and Mary, when Lazarus was given the first resurrection, days before the Cross.
You don't have to force the first resurrection to be the second birth, as both prevent one from the second death equally not that one is more powerful than the other.
But then all seem to be confused, who these beheaded even are. They are not ones having the second birth in life. They chop off their heads to avoid the mark. There is no second birth option to humans when these people are beheaded. The second birth is only an option between the Cross and the Second Coming. These people are beheaded after the Second Coming, and the final harvest is over. But your Amil bias prevents you from even making a distinction between good works and the blood of the Lamb when it comes to redemption of the soul itself. What verse declares the second birth was an option under the Law of Moses? Was there a certain sacrifice count where after reaching, one was given the second birth? Do you understand Romans 5:12-18?
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."
Do you not see all that in parenthesis?
All are in sin and death because of Adam. At times sin is not imputed, but all still physically die, because all are in a state of physical death. No one had the second birth until the Cross, and then even physical death was changed for those of the second birth. You think that death is still your enemy for some reason. You have added to the second birth, by demanding the first resurrection also cover your physical body, while you are still alive. You did not get a new physical body upon second birth, so sorry. And you don't have to wait until the GWT to obtain the first resurrection, so sorry again, you are wrong.
You ignore John 5:24-25 and stuck on the GWT mentioned in John 5:28-29. You will never stand at the GWT, so John 5:28-29 cannot apply to you since you are covered by John 5:24-25.
The Second Birth is covered in verses 24-25. The first resurrection is covered in verses 28-29. If you see a difference in the verses why do you still conflate the second birth with the first resurrection? The first resurrection at the GWT is only for those in their graves who never received the second birth, but were morally good, and who still have to deny God face to face.
Just like in Adam all are dead. In Christ all have been placed in the Lamb's book of life. At the Second Coming billions will be removed from the Lamb's book of life. That is Jacob's trouble and the final harvest that all post trib people deny Jesus is on the earth for. Jesus is present face to face with those removed from the Lamb's book of life. They are tossed alive into the LOF at that point. The final harvest is the Prince to come part in Daniel 9. All made dead by Adam were named in the Lamb's book of life. God was not biased nor selective in whom the blood covered. The elect were all placed in the Lamb's book of life prior to creation. All of humanity was elect, before Adam even disobeyed God.
That is why Romans 5 comes into play. At times sin was not imputed, even though death was. But I guess that gets lost in the argument over dispensations of God.
Amil interpret all Scripture with a one track mindset claiming even those in Paradise made alive are still "the dead" in Revelation 20:12. That is a ridiculous bias. People made alive are not the dead. That would be an impossibility with God. People made alive do not even have to stand in judgment facing the second death. What is the point?
"Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power."
Why would they have to even stand at the GWT?
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
This is totally misrepresenting premil, even if almost every premil believes this. You all seem to believe this as well, so worse than premil.
All premil states, as a simple single basic principle; is that Jesus is announced King over all nation's at the 7th Trumpet, and will continue to reign during the Day of the Lord, the Millennial Sabbath.
Premil seem to be in error over what that Day of the Lord entails. Amil raise objections over interpretation and human imagination, that have nothing to do with actual Scripture as it is written.
Amil do not even accept those in Paradise have a physical body already experiencing the first resurrection, because Amil don't even understand that the first resurrection is physical and not symbolic. Amil conflate the first resurrection as the second birth, which it is not. The first resurrection was experienced by Lazarus before Jesus went to the Cross. Stephen experienced the first resurrection as Jesus stood welcoming him into Paradise and a permanent incorruptible physical body. The thief on the Cross experienced the first resurrection when his soul entered God's permanent incorruptible physical body that day. Jesus promised him the second birth and the first resurrection within hours of each other. The second birth was available after the Cross, but was not available for Lazarus, who was personally called out of his grave covering both the hour that had started and the hour that was to come. Lazarus is not waiting for the GWT for either the second birth, nor the first resurrection. Lazarus fulfilled all of John 5:24-29, when he came physically out of his grave. The OT waiting in Abraham's bosom all experienced both the second birth and the first resurrection immediately when Jesus declared it was finished. Death was defeated for them that moment, not that they have to wait for the GWT Judgment event.
That is why Amil are wrong and have a one track mind, thinking they are waiting for the GWT Judgment event, themselves.
You have the second birth, but you will not have physical redemption or the first resurrection, until your soul leaves Adam's dead corruptible flesh, and enters God's permanent incorruptible physical body. You all can wait for thousands of years, but thank God, He does not hold you all hostage to your erroneous beliefs.
"For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven: If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked."
Or dead as you put it, a soul without a physical body wandering around naked in Paradise. That word "dissolved" means "in union with". While in Adam's flesh we are in union with death. Once the soul leaves this body, it is no more in union with death, but made alive and in union with God's permanent incorruptible physical body.
Why would Amil teach any other spiritual truth, especially not found in Scripture? You claim you have the backing of Scripture, no? The verses you use, do not even say what you think they say. You are stuck in human imagination and indoctrination. Do you not accept 2 Corinthians 5:1-3?
The first resurrection is true for all those made alive currently in Paradise. It is not applicable while in Adam's dead corruptible flesh. The second birth does not change the physical body. The first death, physical has to happen before the first resurrection, which is physical.
The whole Amil paradigm that you espouse in your post is only predicated on your interpretation of John 5:28-29 which is not even what those verses actually say.
The second birth is not based on people doing good, but on the Lamb slain as written in Revelation. So your verse does not even apply to those of the second birth.
"And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life."
Doing good is not the second birth. Those under the Law would understand what Jesus was meaning. Nor would Jesus contradict what was written in Daniel 12. Jesus is not talking about those of the second birth who were already covered as an ongoing phenomenon per verses 24-25. The interpretation of Amil is what is erroneous. Amil imply this is merely a physical resurrection for both good and bad people, or the "saved" and "lost". It is not a simple physical resurrection. It is not even a second resurrection. This is the dead standing before God, dumped out of sheol, death, and the sea.
But evangelicals seem to think no one is redeemed at the GWT. But they had to have been previously redeemed in another life. The claim no one gets a second chance at the GWT. That may or may not be true, but certainly no redeemed are standing as the dead as Amil describe the event. There will be some who are still found in the Lamb's book of life, thus elect, but having no redemption at that point, because they are still dead, waiting to be made alive. Both Daniel and Jesus points out, that indeed, some will be given both the second birth and the first resurrection, as they will be granted eternal life, and will remain named in the Lamb's book of life, and they will be judged by their works to see if they be good or bad.
That is what Jesus said: those who have done good....
Daniel wrote, "some to everlasting life."
That does not mean they were worthy of nor redeemed in life, but they are spared the second death, because they are allowed the second birth and first resurrection at that event, to avoid the second death. That is even what John wrote:
"But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection."
John was not saying all would live again. John was pointing out some in death would be able to live again, but not until after this creation had ended. "Lived not" is a negative connotation meaning that many would not live again, even after the thousand years were over. In fact John never wrote that any lived again, but seemingly all were cast into the LOF. But we know from Jesus and Daniel that some are granted eternal life.
People do not inact their own redemption. That is only through the Blood of the Lamb. People cannot even birth themselves into the second birth. But the choice to receive redemption and the second birth is on an individual level and not corporate. Under the Law, Paul said they were natural branches until they were cut off in unbelief. But the NT Covenant is not automatic. One has to decide to let the Holy Spirit take full control.
Jesus promised even in the first century just prior to the Cross, that some would escape the second death, even standing as the dead before the GWT. But Amil are wrong in stating that the redeemed will be those standing as the dead at the GWT. Those dead will only receive redemption at that point, not that they had redemption while physically alive. All have the ability to be redeemed, until their name is removed from the Lamb's book of life. Death was their state before physical birth, just as much as after physical death, just because they were in Adam. Life was offered as long as their name was written in the Lamb's book of Life. And God did not purposely leave any name out as many have been taught from human understanding.
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
You have the wrong description of physical death for those of the second birth, even though many think Paul meant those asleep are still physically dead. No, no one in Christ is still physically dead in Paradise. Nor do they "sleep", as why would a permanent incorruptible physical body need to sleep?
Death in the OT economy was a soul waiting in Abraham's bosom to be made alive so one could enter Paradise that was banned to most all but a few humans. Moses and Elijah did not seem banned from being made alive nor from Paradise. They appeared on the mount of Transfiguration. In my opinion, Elijah was Enoch sent back to earth several times as necessary. Enoch was translated out of death, the same way those raptured will be translated out of death. Enoch was changed and they never found his dead body. Moses was changed on Mount Sinai so he could meat God face to face. They never found that body either, and Satan got neither bodies of either of those individuals in death.
You cannot apply the events of Revelation 20 to the entire church community. You can apply the term "first resurrection", which is defined in Revelation 20. Can you not see the difference between the actual events, and what is being defined?
The first resurrection involves receiving a permanent incorruptible physical body, and is physical. It is the physical part of being made alive joining soul to a permanent incorruptible physical body.
Paul never called it the first resurrection. But wrote about it in 2 Corinthians 5:1. John did not explain it other than they lived again. Meaning they had lived. They physically died, and then stood before thrones and were allowed to live again. Paul explained the first resurrection this way:
"For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens."
Yes, Jesus was talking about the first resurrection. Those in Paradise are like the angels, they don't become angels.
In God's permanent incorruptible physical body, people will not procreate. They are not in Paradise making thousands of babies up there. People in Paradise are born on earth in death, and then redeemed out of death and made alive. That is how Paradise is being filled daily to become the innumerable multitude in Revelation 7. Nor are humans walking around as ethereal spirits without a physical body. Once again, Jesus did not say humans become angels as spirit. Jesus said once in Paradise people do not marry nor given in marriage as that would indicate procreation. The angels do not procreate to create more angels. They were the stars created and placed in the firmament on the 4th day of creation, and have never multiplied in number. A third of them were deceived by Satan, and were bound in chains of darkness until the 5th Trumpet allows them to be set free as the first woe placed upon humans, because these angels will now torment humans for at least 5 months.
We know that when angels come to earth they appear in human form to blend in. But humans in Paradise do not take on the form of an angel or star to blend in. They do cease from procreation, like the angels and that was true since the OT redeemed entered Paradise with the first resurrection. Humans in Paradise are still a soul inside of a physical body as that is how they were created on the 6th day.
Humans do not stop being human in heaven. They stop being dead and are made alive, restored to their original form before Adam disobeyed God. Adam had a physical body of life before he disobeyed. After he disobeyed, he was given a physical body of death.
That is why Paul said all would be changed. But Paul never said at the same time at the end of time.
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
These verses not only apply to ages, but the resurrection as well. The resurrection is not limited to ages as Amil imply. There are also different ages and there is no such thing as an eternal age. Paul stated:
"That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus."
"Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen."
"Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:"
"Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;"
Paul clearly did not claim one age from Adam to the Second Coming. You have a totally different take on ages than Paul would on what Jesus was saying.
Ages have a beginning and ending and by definition are not eternal. Having eternal or everlasting life does not make an age eternal. It means the life of a human will live throughout multiple ages without physical death.
Living is not the hard nor impossible part. Being obedient to God seems to be what humans struggle with. At the time of the Flood, God took away periods of human longevity because they struggled with obedience.
Nothing from creation can enter eternity. Only God can exist in eternity. What Christians refer to as the Trinity is God manifesting Himself into His creation. There is no mechanism whereby creation can manifest itself into eternity. The next creation will also have a beginning and an end. That is implied into the definition of creation.
Even Jesus declared He was the alpha and omega, the beginning and the end. Creation can never be eternity. Because creation is what comes between the beginning and the end.
Similar threads
