Revelation 20:6 "The First Resurrection" Explained

[grafted branch]

Why does it matter when Daniel 12 was written? It involves prophecy, does it not? The fact the NT reveals that there are two comings of Christ, we are to then believe things involving His 2nd coming were not also recorded in the OT except they were hidden in the text until the NT revealed His 2 comings? It's not reasonable that events involving His 2nd coming were not also recorded in the OT, and that God didn't even realize Christ would come twice until it was revealed in the NT. That is far fetched big time if anyone thinks that. And besides, the following alone already proves both comings were recorded in the OT, except the 2nd coming was hidden at the time.

Psalms 110:1 <<A Psalm of David.>> The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

How is this passage even logical unless it involves 2 comings? In order to sit at His right hand, He had to come to the earth first then overcome many things. Then the verse goes on to say---until I make thine enemies thy footstool. And we already know per the NT what all that involves, unless one is a full Preterist or something and is unable to grasp what it means, that it means He has to bodily return in the end of this age. Thus 2 comings recorded in the OT. Except per this verse, the first coming appears to be hidden as well. But even so, that is beside the point.

If I said when the sun goes down, I will call you. You would expect that from the time I made that statement, at the next time the sun went down, I would give you a call, right? Even though the sun goes down every day.

Let’s say we apply the principle that when something is prophesied to take place after an event, that prophesied thing could take place after that event happens the second, third, or fourth time. Using Matthew 24, the fleeing is to take place after the AOD is seen. Applying that principle that would mean the fleeing could take place after the second, third, or fourth time we see the AOD.

I don’t think we can just say Daniel 12:1 could be talking about the second time Michael stands up instead of the next time Michael stands up after that was written.

 

[Davidpt]

I don’t think we can just say Daniel 12:1 could be talking about the second time Michael stands up instead of the next time Michael stands up after that was written.

For one, context helps determine what is meant and when it is meant. Why not rely on context to help us here? Let's look at Daniel 12:1 again. Except I already know you find ways around everything no matter what it is. That's not necessarily always a good thing though, if even at all.

Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

When Michael stands up it has to fit a period of time where all of the following are all true at the time.

1) there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time

2) and at that time(meaning the same time 1) is involving) thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.


And then we need to factor in verse 2.

Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.


When is this meaning? Obviously, when thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

Let's now look at Revelation 12.

Revelation 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.
12 ¶Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.


There is no resurrection event following the war recorded in verse 7. Already this doesn't match Daniel 12:1 since there is a resurrection event that soon follows when Michael stands up. Show me where you see that what is recorded in Daniel 12:2, that it is also recorded in Revelation 12:7-13?

 

[grafted branch]

For one, context helps determine what is meant and when it is meant. Why not rely on context to help us here? Let's look at Daniel 12:1 again. Except I already know you find ways around everything no matter what it is. That's not necessarily always a good thing though, if even at all.

Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

When Michael stands up it has to fit a period of time where all of the following are all true at the time.

1) there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time

2) and at that time(meaning the same time 1) is involving) thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.


And then we need to factor in verse 2.

Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.


When is this meaning? Obviously, when thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

Let's now look at Revelation 12.

Revelation 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.
12 ¶Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.


There is no resurrection event following the war recorded in verse 7. Already this doesn't match Daniel 12:1 since there is a resurrection event that soon follows when Michael stands up. Show me where you see that what is recorded in Daniel 12:2, that it is also recorded in Revelation 12:7-13?

You’re right, no resurrection is recorded in Revelation 12:7-13, but both Daniel 12 and Revelation 12 have to be true concerning Michael.

There is an interpretation that has all things true and correct. I think the problem is that it’s easier to ignore the issue of Michael standing up than it is to modify an entire eschatological view.

An interpretation that has a war in heaven where Michael stands up, a time of trouble not since there was a nation, and a resurrection, would be when Jesus died on the cross, fought the dragon in God’s throne room, which was a time of trouble in that throne room, and a Matthew 27:52-53 resurrection which also happened at that time.

Like it or not, it all fits together.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Except you leave out the FACT that Daniel 12:1-2 is talking about the people of Daniel. Additionally it says MANY that sleep shall be raised.

Daniel 12:2 does not refer only to the people of Daniel. It refers generally to those who are physically dead being bodily resurrected. And MANY (Hebrew "rab") does NOT mean many, but not all. It just means a large number, which may or may not refer to all of something.

If I referred to all 8 billion people in the world, I could refer to them as being many people. Am I not referring to all people in the world if I say there are many people in the world? No, I am referring to all of them, the number of whom are many. So, your understanding of the word "many" is flawed. You've been shown that several times before, but you refuse to learn anything.

Daniel 12:2 is the same event as this:

John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 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.

There will NOT be two different events when both the righteous and the wicked dead are resurrected. Jesus said a singular hour (one event) is coming when ALL of the dead will be resurrected. Accept what He taught and adjust your understanding of Daniel 12:2 accordingly.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You’re right, no resurrection is recorded in Revelation 12:7-13, but both Daniel 12 and Revelation 12 have to be true concerning Michael.

There is an interpretation that has all things true and correct. I think the problem is that it’s easier to ignore the issue of Michael standing up than it is to modify an entire eschatological view.

There is no direct relation between Daniel 12:1-2 and Revelation 12:7. I don't know why you're trying to insist that there is. A reference to Michael standing up is pretty vague. We can only speculate on what it means for Michael to stand up exactly, but I don't believe it has anything to do with him and his angels battling against Satan and his angels.

An interpretation that has a war in heaven where Michael stands up, a time of trouble not since there was a nation, and a resurrection, would be when Jesus died on the cross, fought the dragon in God’s throne room, which was a time of trouble in that throne room, and a Matthew 27:52-53 resurrection which also happened at that time.

Like it or not, it all fits together.

Matthew 27:52-53 did not involve anyone being resurrected unto "shame and everlasting contempt".

 

[grafted branch]

There is no direct relation between Daniel 12:1-2 and Revelation 12:7. I don't know why you're trying to insist that there is. A reference to Michael standing up is pretty vague. We can only speculate on what it means for Michael to stand up exactly, but I don't believe it has anything to do with him and his angels battling against Satan and his angels.

Well give us an explanation for how Michael didn’t “stand up” in Revelation 12.

<5975> amad

Usage: The Hebrew verb "amad" primarily means "to stand" in a physical sense, but it extends to various contexts, including standing firm, enduring, or taking a position. It can imply a literal standing posture or a figurative stance, such as standing firm in faith or maintaining one's position in a situation. The word is used to describe both physical and metaphorical standing, including standing before God, standing in judgment, or standing in battle.

Matthew 27:52-53 did not involve anyone being resurrected unto "shame and everlasting contempt".

What verses are you using to come to that conclusion?

 

[The Light]

Daniel 12:2 does not refer only to the people of Daniel.

Thy people are Daniels people. Cut and dried Biblical FACT.

It refers generally to those who are physically dead being bodily resurrected.

No, it refers to Daniels people just like it says. I realize that the scripture is not going to agree with your point of view. Just waiting for you to realize it.

Daniel 12
12 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

And MANY (Hebrew "rab") does NOT mean many, but not all. It just means a large number, which may or may not refer to all of something.

MANY MEANS MANY.............just like it says. And "rab" means many just like it says.

I know that Biblical fact proves your position is in error, however, truth is far more important than doctrine.

If I referred to all 8 billion people in the world, I could refer to them as being many people. Am I not referring to all people in the world if I say there are many people in the world? No, I am referring to all of them, the number of whom are many. So, your understanding of the word "many" is flawed. You've been shown that several times before, but you refuse to learn anything.

I think many means many just like it has for all time. If the Word wanted to say all, it would say all. It's simple. You either believe what is written or you don't.

You are only fooling yourself. If you find it necessary to constantly change scripture you should get a clue that what you believe is in error. I have never understood how someone can go to such lengths to fool themselves.

Daniel 12:2 is the same event as this:

John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 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.

No. John 5:28 is this event. This occurs after the 6th seal coming of Jesus which is the gathering from heaven and earth when many that sleep in the ground are raised.

Revelation 11
18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

There will NOT be two different events when both the righteous and the wicked dead are resurrected. Jesus said a singular hour (one event) is coming when ALL of the dead will be resurrected. Accept what He taught and adjust your understanding of Daniel 12:2 accordingly.

When you have to change scripture so your views will work there is obviously a problem with your views.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Thy people are Daniels people. Cut and dried Biblical FACT.

You made NO attempt to understand what I was saying, so I'll have to spell it out to you.

Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Yes, in verse 1, it refers specifically to "thy people" in relation to Daniel's people in particular. And it says his people would be delivered. But, what I'm saying is that in verse 2 it expands beyond that to talk about all "them that sleep in the dust of the earth". It doesn't say "them of thy people that sleep in the dust of the earth". It's referring to the dead in general there. And it's not just those who are believers being delivered that are resurrected. It also includes those who are resurrected "to shame and everlasting contempt". So, that is referring to the general resurrection of all of the dead that Jesus also referred to in John 5:28-29.

No, it refers to Daniels people just like it says. I realize that the scripture is not going to agree with your point of view. Just waiting for you to realize it.

Verse 1 does, yes. But verse 2 is about the resurrection of more than just Daniel's people. You'll notice it does not refer only to the resurrection of Daniel's people there.

MANY MEANS MANY.............just like it says. And "rab" means many just like it says.

LOL. I agree. Many means many. But, that's a vague thing to say. What does that statement even mean? To you, it means not all. But, if I say there are many people in the world does that mean I'm only referring to some and not all of the people in the world? No! I'm referring to all people in the world and I'm saying there are many of them. That word "rab" can refer to all of something while describing the all as being "many" and does not have to only be used to refer to a large number, but not all of something. I am certain that you can understand what I'm saying here, but because of your extreme doctrinal bias you still want to try to insist that many means "not all".

I think many means many just like it has for all time. If the Word wanted to say all, it would say all. It's simple. You either believe what is written or you don't.

You are not the one to decide what words the Word would choose to use in any given situation. By saying that, you are putting yourself at His level and acting like you yourself are the Word. Humble yourself for once.

When Jesus said "Many are called, but few are chosen" (Matt 22:14) does that mean He was saying not all are called? No! He was simply indicating that the number of those who are called, which is all people, are many. So, what you said here is simply false. Are you going to try to say that not all are called or else Jesus would have said so?

You are only fooling yourself. If you find it necessary to constantly change scripture you should get a clue that what you believe is in error. I have never understood how someone can go to such lengths to fool themselves.

Look in the mirror, buddy. You are describing yourself perfectly. You fool yourself about scripture on a regular basis which is why you interpret some scriptures in a way that literally no one else does. That is pure arrogance and you will not find the truth unless you humble yourself.

No. John 5:28 is this event. This occurs after the 6th seal coming of Jesus which is the gathering from heaven and earth when many that sleep in the ground are raised.

Revelation 11
18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

How is that different from Daniel 12:2? It's not. The idea of righteous and wicked dead being resurrected on more than one occasion simply makes no sense at all and is not taught in scripture.

When you have to change scripture so your views will work there is obviously a problem with your views.

I agree. So, stop doing that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Well give us an explanation for how Michael didn’t “stand up” in Revelation 12.

<5975> amad

Usage: The Hebrew verb "amad" primarily means "to stand" in a physical sense, but it extends to various contexts, including standing firm, enduring, or taking a position. It can imply a literal standing posture or a figurative stance, such as standing firm in faith or maintaining one's position in a situation. The word is used to describe both physical and metaphorical standing, including standing before God, standing in judgment, or standing in battle.

I'm not going to keep wasting time on this. I see no direct relation between Daniel 12:1 and Revelation 12:7. As David pointed out, there is no resurrection following Revelation 12:7, so that should be enough to show you that the two verses are not directly related.

What verses are you using to come to that conclusion?

Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

How does this line up with Matthew 27:52-53 which only refers to the resurrection of believers? And even in their case, it doesn't say they rise "to everlasting life", so I see no direct connection between Daniel 12:1-2 and Matthew 27:52-53.

 

[grafted branch]

I'm not going to keep wasting time on this. I see no direct relation between Daniel 12:1 and Revelation 12:7. As David pointed out, there is no resurrection following Revelation 12:7, so that should be enough to show you that the two verses are not directly related.

Ok, I do because in both verses Michael is a key figure. If you choose to ignore that then fine, whatever.

Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

How does this line up with Matthew 27:52-53 which only refers to the resurrection of believers? And even in their case, it doesn't say they rise "to everlasting life", so I see no direct connection between Daniel 12:1-2 and Matthew 27:52-53.

Matthew 27:52-53 uses the word “saints”. In Deuteronomy 33:1-3 Moses blessed the children of Israel, all of them, and called them collectively saints.

Some of the children of Israel (saints) will see shame and everlasting contempt while others everlasting life.

 

[The Light]

You made NO attempt to understand what I was saying, so I'll have to spell it out to you.

I've been down this road with you before so I am fully aware of your need to change the meaning of words so your doctrine will work.

Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Yes, in verse 1, it refers specifically to "thy people" in relation to Daniel's people in particular. And it says his people would be delivered. But, what I'm saying is that in verse 2 it expands beyond that to talk about all "them that sleep in the dust of the earth". It doesn't say "them of thy people that sleep in the dust of the earth". It's referring to the dead in general there. And it's not just those who are believers being delivered that are resurrected. It also includes those who are resurrected "to shame and everlasting contempt". So, that is referring to the general resurrection of all of the dead that Jesus also referred to in John 5:28-29.

Actually, many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth, does not say ALL of them that sleep in the ground. Since you are unaware that there is a harvest of Daniels people at the 6th seal this would not make much sense to you.

Note.............I don't need to change meaning of the Word ALL to make the truth work.

I have never seen anyone that finds it necessary to change the Word have a correct understanding of scripture.

Verse 1 does, yes. But verse 2 is about the resurrection of more than just Daniel's people. You'll notice it does not refer only to the resurrection of Daniel's people there.

It is the people of Daniel that are raised at the 6th seal at the gathering of heaven and earth which we see in Matthew 24. The reason that all the people that sleep in the ground are not raised at this point because many of them is referring to Daniels people.

LOL. I agree. Many means many. But, that's a vague thing to say. What does that statement even mean? To you, it means not all. But, if I say there are many people in the world does that mean I'm only referring to some and not all of the people in the world? No! I'm referring to all people in the world and I'm saying there are many of them. That word "rab" can refer to all of something while describing the all as being "many" and does not have to only be used to refer to a large number, but not all of something. I am certain that you can understand what I'm saying here, but because of your extreme doctrinal bias you still want to try to insist that many means "not all".

Doctrinal bias. LOL. My doctrine is based on what the Word of God says. I don't change scripture to make my doctrine work, I just need to read what it says. Playing word game when there is a "qualifier"..........THEM..........is only fooling yourself. Many of them that sleep in the ground is NOT........ALL of them, no matter what word games you find necessary for your doctrine to work.

You are not the one to decide what words the Word would choose to use in any given situation. By saying that, you are putting yourself at His level and acting like you yourself are the Word. Humble yourself for once.

If you want to fool yourself and lead others from the truth that is on you. Not the path I am interested in. You know in your heart that I am right.

When Jesus said "Many are called, but few are chosen" (Matt 22:14) does that mean He was saying not all are called? No! He was simply indicating that the number of those who are called, which is all people, are many. So, what you said here is simply false. Are you going to try to say that not all are called or else Jesus would have said so?

All are not called. You are mistaken.

Romans 8
28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Look in the mirror, buddy. You are describing yourself perfectly. You fool yourself about scripture on a regular basis which is why you interpret some scriptures in a way that literally no one else does. That is pure arrogance and you will not find the truth unless you humble yourself.

I'm not the one changing the meaning of words.

I remember your words when you said it was hard to debate me because I just believe what is written. Pretty hard to argue against the Word when nothing is changed.

How is that different from Daniel 12:2? It's not. The idea of righteous and wicked dead being resurrected on more than one occasion simply makes no sense at all and is not taught in scripture.

Here is the harvest that occurs at the 6th seal. It is when Lord comes for the seed of the woman, the twelve tribes across the earth. The reason there is a harvest of the twelve tribes across the earth is because there are 144,000 first fruits from the 12 tribes.

Revelation 14
14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.

15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.

16 And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.

17 And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.

18 And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.

19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.

 

[Davidpt]

Matthew 27:52-53 uses the word “saints”. In Deuteronomy 33:1-3 Moses blessed the children of Israel, all of them, and called them collectively saints.

Some of the children of Israel (saints) will see shame and everlasting contempt while others everlasting life.

Even so, nothing pertaining to Matthew 27:52-53 involved anyone at the time rising to shame and everlasting contempt. If you disagree then point out which ones in particular in Matthew 27:52-53 are pertaining to someone that rose to shame and everlasting contempt at the time? Instead of always trying to find a way around everything no matter what it is, why can't you focus more on trying to agree with the Bible for a change, not change what it says and means instead?

 

[grafted branch]

Even so, nothing pertaining to Matthew 27:52-53 involved anyone at the time rising to shame and everlasting contempt. If you disagree then point out which ones in particular in Matthew 27:52-53 are pertaining to someone that rose to shame and everlasting contempt at the time? Instead of always trying to find a way around everything no matter what it is, why can't you focus more on trying to agree with the Bible for a change, not change what it says and means instead?

Matthew 27:52-53 doesn’t give much information on exactly who those individuals were that came out of the graves. We know they were “saints” and they went into the holy city and appeared unto many.

I’m trying to get the verses we are discussing to all be true and agree, including the timing of when Michael stands up. If you have another view that can show how these verses can all agree with each other then present your view so we can examine it. Michael standing up should be part of how these verses agree with each other.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Ok, I do because in both verses Michael is a key figure. If you choose to ignore that then fine, whatever.

LOL. Yes, he is obviously a key figure in both verses. How does that mean that both verses relate to the same event? That's quite a stretch. Again, there is no resurrection that occurs after what is described in Revelation 12:7, but there is after what is described in Daniel 12:1.

Matthew 27:52-53 uses the word “saints”. In Deuteronomy 33:1-3 Moses blessed the children of Israel, all of them, and called them collectively saints.

Some of the children of Israel (saints) will see shame and everlasting contempt while others everlasting life.

Nonsense. Matthew 27:52-53 gives no indication whatsoever of anyone being resurrected to "shame and everlasting contempt".

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Even so, nothing pertaining to Matthew 27:52-53 involved anyone at the time rising to shame and everlasting contempt. If you disagree then point out which ones in particular in Matthew 27:52-53 are pertaining to someone that rose to shame and everlasting contempt at the time? Instead of always trying to find a way around everything no matter what it is, why can't you focus more on trying to agree with the Bible for a change, not change what it says and means instead?

I think there's only one person here (not you) who manipulates scripture to say what he wants it to say more than he does. It's sad to see.

 

[ewq1938]

The main problem with the Amil view of Rev 20 is that the beheaded people experienced a "spiritual resurrection" being born again while they were alive, long before the tribulation where they refused the mark and were killed.

The only resurrection left for dead saved Christians is a physical resurrection. That's the first mass bodily resurrection, and is the first of two in Rev 20.

 

[The Light]

I think there's only one person here (not you) who manipulates scripture to say what he wants it to say more than he does. It's sad to see.

No doubt. Your buddy.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No doubt. Your buddy.

Thanks for responding. Now, I remember that there are actually two people who manipulate scripture to make it say what they want it to say more than he does and not just one. You and the other person I had in mind.

 

[The Light]

Thanks for responding. Now, I remember that there are actually two people who manipulate scripture to make it say what they want it to say more than he does and not just one. You and the other person I had in mind.

Please show just one single instance where I changed the scripture like your buddy did?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I've been down this road with you before so I am fully aware of your need to change the meaning of words so your doctrine will work.

I defer to your expertise in that area since you have so much practice.

Actually, many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth, does not say ALL of them that sleep in the ground.

Hello? Are you reading anything I'm saying? It does not have to say ALL. As I've pointed out and as you have apparently ignored, many does not mean not all. If I say that there are many people in the world am I not referring to all people in the world?

Since you are unaware that there is a harvest of Daniels people at the 6th seal this would not make much sense to you.

Nothing you say is going to make any sense to me. I already know this.

Note.............I don't need to change meaning of the Word ALL to make the truth work.

Where did I change the meaning of the word ALL? Nowhere. I have shown you the meaning of the word many, which does not mean not all.

I have never seen anyone that finds it necessary to change the Word have a correct understanding of scripture.

I see that every time I read one of your posts.

Doctrinal bias. LOL. My doctrine is based on what the Word of God says. I don't change scripture to make my doctrine work, I just need to read what it says. Playing word game when there is a "qualifier"..........THEM..........is only fooling yourself. Many of them that sleep in the ground is NOT........ALL of them, no matter what word games you find necessary for your doctrine to work.

Many are called, but few are chosen. Does that mean not all are called or that the number of those who are called, which is all people, is "many"?

If you want to fool yourself and lead others from the truth that is on you.

Of course I don't want to do that. Thankfully, I don't. You, on the other hand...

Not the path I am interested in. You know in your heart that I am right.

LOL. Are you a comedian for a living or just on the side?

All are not called. You are mistaken.

Yes, they are. That verse has to do with the call to salvation and all people are called to salvation while relatively few are chosen. Do you not think that God wants all people to be saved (1 Timothy 2:3-6)? Do you not think that God has offered salvation to all people (Titus 2:11)? You are the one who is mistaken.

It's clear that no matter what example I give that talks about all of something and refers to the number of all as "many", you will try to get around it. That's what you do.

Romans 8
28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

This has a different context than Matthew 22:1-14, but it's not surprising that you are unable to recognize that. Matthew 22:1-14 is talking about the offer of salvation that all people must choose to accept or reject and that is not the context of Romans 8:28-30.

I'm not the one changing the meaning of words.

Neither am I. It's a FACT that the word many does NOT mean not all. It can be used to refer to all of something or to some of something. Depends on the context. In the context of Daniel 12:2, it's referring to the number of all of the dead being resurrected, which will be "many".

I remember your words when you said it was hard to debate me because I just believe what is written.

I have never said such a thing. Why are you lying? Do you have no conscience? We all believe what is written. But, we don't all agree on what is literal, what is symbolic, etc.

Pretty hard to argue against the Word when nothing is changed.

Agree. Good thing I don't do that. And, good thing I recognize that not everything should be interpreted in a wooden literal fashion since not all scripture is written that way.

Here is the harvest that occurs at the 6th seal. It is when Lord comes for the seed of the woman, the twelve tribes across the earth. The reason there is a harvest of the twelve tribes across the earth is because there are 144,000 first fruits from the 12 tribes.

Revelation 14
14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.

15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.

16 And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.

17 And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.

18 And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.

19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.

Interesting how Paul seemed to have no knowledge of these multiple harvests that you believe in. He indicated that the dead in Christ will all be resurrected and gathered at the same time when Jesus comes (1 Thess 4:14-17, 1 Cor 15:22-23) and did not indicate that any dead in Christ would ever be resurrected and gathered at any other time. But, maybe you don't think Paul knew what he was talking about.