-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The whole Bible is the perfect law of God
I am not forgetting it but just like temporal thing set aside as Holy in respect to that seen .But putting in in its proper place a shadow. It represents that not seen the eternal. The true Holy Place. The place of the hidden glory of God. We walk by faith not after the temporal things seen.
Rebuilding the temple would be a abomination of designation standing in the Holy place .
We are the temple of the lord he that is Holy dwels in us.
If the verse in Dan 12:2 does not represent the first resurrection when the grave were opened then it must represent the second, the end of the world, the last day
Ezekiel 37:12-13 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves,
Matthew 27:52And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
Many angels witnessed it.
The Amil position works the best.
I messed up when I wrote post #220. Here is the quote from that post:
"You believe Daniel 12: 2 is the first resurrection because of its reference to people rising from the grave. This is just subjective on your part though. Daniel 12: 2 does not tell us it is the first resurrection and it can be easily proven false."
Where it says first resurrection I meant to say GWT judgment. I am amillennial like you Garee and I just mis-typed.
I do believe the first resurrection began at the cross with Jesus being the first fruits and all saints who die during this current age are taking part in that resurrection.
My point to KJV1611 is that he believes the GWT judgment happened at the cross but according to the Rev 20 timeline we see that the GWT is after the first resurrection. They can't both happen at the cross!
Thanks for catching that typo and allowing me to clarify!
Amen brother. I want to correct an error I made in post #220 when I was responding to you. Here is the quote:
Where it says "first resurrection" I meant to type GWT judgment. Hopefully this helps you understand that post better. My point was that the GWT and first resurrection cannot both happen at the cross because of the timeline in Rev 20 that shows the GWT is after the first resurrection.
Sorry for the typo and confusion.
Let me try one more time because I don't think I made the correction in my posts #224 and #225 clear enough. This is what I am trying to say:
Daniel 12: 2 cannot be BOTH the "first resurrection" and the "great white throne judgment" that you are claiming KJV1611. They can't both happen at the cross, at the same time, because Rev 20 tells us the GWT judgment is after the first resurrection.
If Daniel 12: 2 is the first resurrection and happened at the cross, like you claim KJV1611, then the "1,000 years" must follow and then the GWT judgment must be later then the cross.
If Daniel 12: 2 is the great white throne judgment and happened at the cross, like you are also claiming KJV1611, then the "first resurrection" and "1,000 years" of Rev 20 must have taken place in the Old Testament.
This is simply not possible because you can't have saints resurrected and reigning with Christ for 1,000 years in the Old Testament before He even goes to the cross.
This was the point I was trying to clarify to you KJV1611: The first resurrection and GWT judgment can't both happen at the cross.
Hopefully, I made the point I was trying to make clear this time.
Sorry for the confusion. 
Let me try one more time because I don't think I made the correction in my posts #224 and #225 clear enough. This is what I am trying to say:
Daniel 12: 2 cannot be BOTH the "first resurrection" and the "great white throne judgment" that you are claiming KJV1611. They can't both happen at the cross, at the same time, because Rev 20 tells us the GWT judgment is after the first resurrection.
If Daniel 12: 2 is the first resurrection and happened at the cross, like you claim KJV1611, then the "1,000 years" must follow and then the GWT judgment must be later then the cross.
If Daniel 12: 2 is the great white throne judgment and happened at the cross, like you are also claiming KJV1611, then the "first resurrection" and "1,000 years" of Rev 20 must have taken place in the Old Testament.
This is simply not possible because you can't have saints resurrected and reigning with Christ for 1,000 years in the Old Testament before He even goes to the cross.
This was the point I was trying to clarify to you KJV1611: The first resurrection and GWT judgment can't both happen at the cross.
Hopefully, I made the point I was trying to make clear this time.
Thanks I would agree .Its one (1st) or the other(2nd) . From looking at the language in Dan it would seem to represent the last day or the second resurrection the final, the same timing for those who were waiting for the new incorruptible bodies. .Both in the twinkling of the eye
John 11:24Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.
John 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
You have the saints judged with the heathen in your interpretation.
......and after the gt,and the 2 witnesses and the rapture of rev 14,and the return with his saints and after the mil and the devil loosed for the last battle
The judgement has already been decided.
The judgemt on the last day is the execution of those who have no faith to believe. the second death The believers will not come into the final, the second death. No condemnation for those in Christ.
He that "believeth" on him is not condemned: but he that "believeth not" is condemned already, because he hath "not believed" in the name of the only begotten Son of God.John3:18
What happens when we read the entire chapter of Revelation 20? We are given a very clear timeline of events in that chapter.
Rev 20: 4-6, The first resurrection and the saints reigning with Christ for 1,000 years
Rev 20: 7, The "little season" of Satan after the 1,000 years are over.
Rev 20: 11-15, The Great White Throne judgment where "the dead are judged"
We can see by looking at the timeline above that the dead are judged after the first resurrection and 1,000 years.
Rev 11: 18 is the seventh trumpet. Rev 11: 18, "...the time of the dead, that they should be judged..."
People don't get judged twice. We know from the Rev 20 timeline above that people are judged after the 1,000 years.
Therefore, using simple logic, the seventh trumpet is after the first resurrection and 1,000 years of Rev 20.
All premillennialists believe the seventh trumpet happens before the first resurrection and 1,000 years of Rev 20.
Therefore, using simple logic once again, we can determine that all forms of premillennialism, whether pre-trib, mid-trib or post-trib, are not possible according to Scripture.
@ delirious
Just letting you know I’m tied up for a while but will comment as soon as I can. In the meantime I would like add this to our discussion.
Joh 5:25 (KJV) 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.
Joh 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
Joh 5:29 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
Do you think the hour is coming and now is means 2000+ years in the future?
Also keep in mind that shortly after Jesus said those words the Old Testament saints were raised.
Just letting you know I’m tied up for a while but will comment as soon as I can. In the meantime I would like add this to our discussion.
Joh 5:25 (KJV) 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.
Joh 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
Joh 5:29 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
Do you think the hour is coming and now is means 2000+ years in the future?
Also keep in mind that shortly after Jesus said those words the Old Testament saints were raised.
Matthew 8: 21-22, Then another of His disciples said to Him, “Lord, let me first go and bury my father.” But Jesus said to him, “Follow Me, and let the dead bury their own dead.”
Here we have an example of Jesus referring to spiritually dead and physically dead people in the same verse. This is an important observation to make. Jesus used the term interchangeably.
John 5: 24-25, "“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment,but has passed from death into life. Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live."
We should always use context to determine what is being said. Verse 24 gives us the context of verse 25. Jesus is talking about people who believe have passed from "death to life". He is referring to spiritual resurrection. Those that are hearing the gospel preached "the hour is coming, and now is" are being saved. Jesus was preaching NOW and people were getting saved right then in that moment through faith.
John 5: 27-29, "and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation."
Pay special attention to the bold. Once again the context determines what's being said. This is about judgment. Jesus says the hour is coming but it ISN'T NOW like the one in John 5: 25. People "come forth" "from the graves". This is a completely different context.
This is the Great White Throne judgment. All the dead "come forth from their graves" on that day for Jesus to "execute judgment". That hour has not come yet.
John 5: 25 is about spiritual resurrection. John 5: 28-29 is about the physical resurrection of all who have ever lived and died.
I. FIRST, MAY WE CONSIDER THE IMMINENT COMING OF CHRIST.
John 14:1-3 says: 1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. 2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
A. Note in V.3 Jesus says, "I WILL COME AGAIN..."
---This is a present tense used as a future in Greek. In Greek syntax this is an expression of IMMANENCY.
---Webster's Greek Grammar says on p.82, "The present is used for the future to express the certainty of a coming event."
---Webster quotes Vaughn's remarks of the contrast of a future indicative active and the present indicative active used as a future and says it expresses "MORE STRONGLY"..."The certainty, imminence..."
---Danna and Mantey in A manual Grammar of The Greek New Testament, p.185 says: "This use [the Futuristic Present] of the present tense denotes an event which has not yet occurred, but which is regarded as so certain that in thought it may be contemplated as already coming to pass."
---McDonald in his Greek Enchridion, p.20 says the same concerning this meaning immediacy.
---In fact Burton in his Moods and Tenses of The N.T. Greek, p. 10 says that the present used as a future is used "...for the sake of vividness, with reference to a fact still in the future, is recognized by all grammarians."
John 14:1-3 says: 1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. 2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
A. Note in V.3 Jesus says, "I WILL COME AGAIN..."
---This is a present tense used as a future in Greek. In Greek syntax this is an expression of IMMANENCY.
---Webster's Greek Grammar says on p.82, "The present is used for the future to express the certainty of a coming event."
---Webster quotes Vaughn's remarks of the contrast of a future indicative active and the present indicative active used as a future and says it expresses "MORE STRONGLY"..."The certainty, imminence..."
---Danna and Mantey in A manual Grammar of The Greek New Testament, p.185 says: "This use [the Futuristic Present] of the present tense denotes an event which has not yet occurred, but which is regarded as so certain that in thought it may be contemplated as already coming to pass."
---McDonald in his Greek Enchridion, p.20 says the same concerning this meaning immediacy.
---In fact Burton in his Moods and Tenses of The N.T. Greek, p. 10 says that the present used as a future is used "...for the sake of vividness, with reference to a fact still in the future, is recognized by all grammarians."
Early Church Fathers on the Pre-Trib Rapture
https://beginningandend.com/what-did-ancient-church-fathers-believe-about-the-rapture/
https://www.raptureready.com/2015/08/30/ancient-church-fathers-believed-matt-ward/
Seems to be a consensus similar to what the Pre-Trib Rapture folks believe today.
https://beginningandend.com/what-did-ancient-church-fathers-believe-about-the-rapture/
https://www.raptureready.com/2015/08/30/ancient-church-fathers-believed-matt-ward/
Seems to be a consensus similar to what the Pre-Trib Rapture folks believe today.
I don’t see how you can spiritualize this away. I mean I see how death and resurrection can both have a spiritual meaning but you said:
“Jesus is talking about people who believe have passed from "death to life". He is referring to spiritual resurrection. “
Now apply that to verse 29.
Joh 5:29 (KJV) 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.
In your spiritualization you have people who have done good as being raised from the spiritual grave into spiritual life and that’s all well and good but you stopped right there.
So continuing on with your spiritualization, what is the resurrection of damnation for those who have done evil?
John 5: 24-25 is talking about spiritual resurrection through faith in Christ. That hour was "now" because Jesus was preaching and people were believing in Him. That's the context of those verses. The new birth which is spiritual.
John 5: 27-29 is talking about physical resurrection. The context is completely different. He says they "come forth...from the graves". He doesn't mention "graves" and "coming forth" in verses 24 and 25. He also says the hour is in the future, NOT NOW, like verses 24 and 25.
We can to disagree on what these verses mean. I'm okay with that.
Verses 24 and 25 are talking about spiritual life. They don't mention any condemnation. Verse 28 and 29 do mention condemnation because it is the physical resurrection of all dead where the wicked are thrown into the Lake of Fire and the righteous enter the new heavens and earth.
You still haven't addressed the timeline problem from Rev 20. The first resurrection and GWT can't both happen at the cross. It's only one or the other. They are separated by more than "1,000 years" in Rev 20 so they can't be at the same time like you are claiming.
This makes your interpretation of them both happening at the cross impossible.
An excellent analysis of John 5. I concur, this conclusion is quite inescapable.John 5: 24-25 is talking about spiritual resurrection through faith in Christ. That hour was "now" because Jesus was preaching and people were believing in Him. That's the context of those verses. The new birth which is spiritual.
John 5: 27-29 is talking about physical resurrection. The context is completely different. He says they "come forth...from the graves". He doesn't mention "graves" and "coming forth" in verses 24 and 25. He also says the hour is in the future, NOT NOW, like verses 24 and 25.
We can to disagree on what these verses mean. I'm okay with that.
Verses 24 and 25 are talking about spiritual life. They don't mention any condemnation. Verse 28 and 29 do mention condemnation because it is the physical resurrection of all dead where the wicked are thrown into the Lake of Fire and the righteous enter the new heavens and earth.
You still haven't addressed the timeline problem from Rev 20. The first resurrection and GWT can't both happen at the cross. It's only one or the other. They are separated by more than "1,000 years" in Rev 20 so they can't be at the same time like you are claiming.
This makes your interpretation of them both happening at the cross impossible.
We’ll agree to disagree on those verses but that stops our discussion on the resurrection GWT both happening at the cross because you believe there’s only one part to the resurrection and judgement and I believe there are two parts to both.John 5: 24-25 is talking about spiritual resurrection through faith in Christ. That hour was "now" because Jesus was preaching and people were believing in Him. That's the context of those verses. The new birth which is spiritual.
John 5: 27-29 is talking about physical resurrection. The context is completely different. He says they "come forth...from the graves". He doesn't mention "graves" and "coming forth" in verses 24 and 25. He also says the hour is in the future, NOT NOW, like verses 24 and 25.
We can to disagree on what these verses mean. I'm okay with that.
Verses 24 and 25 are talking about spiritual life. They don't mention any condemnation. Verse 28 and 29 do mention condemnation because it is the physical resurrection of all dead where the wicked are thrown into the Lake of Fire and the righteous enter the new heavens and earth.
You still haven't addressed the timeline problem from Rev 20. The first resurrection and GWT can't both happen at the cross. It's only one or the other. They are separated by more than "1,000 years" in Rev 20 so they can't be at the same time like you are claiming.
This makes your interpretation of them both happening at the cross impossible.
I think we both agree that Jesus is the first fruits. The first born among the dead.
I think you view the "first resurrection" as Jesus and the saints that were raised at His crucifixion as the only people that took part in that. I see the "first resurrection" as something that happens to all believers after death during this current age. It is a spiritual resurrection and they live on with Christ. So we see that a little differently.
I think we can both agree that there are two resurrections. Rev 20 makes that clear. The second resurrection is physical and happens at the GWT judgment. I think we both agree on that.
Where we disagree is the GWT judgment happening in "two parts". There is no scriptural justification for that. It can't happen at the cross for the timeline reasons contained in Rev 20 that I already shared with you.
So you are saying the "second part of the GWT judgment" happens at the GWT judgment in Rev 20. So I have to ask you this question:
When does the "first part" happen?