Isaiah 26, Daniel 12 and Ezekiel 37 aren't LIKE a resurrection, they are THE RESURRECTION and they have nothing to do with Romans 11.
Other Gods have had dominion over Israel, [...]
https://www.blueletterbible.org/audio_video/popPlayer.cfm?id=3547&rel=missler_chuck/RevWrong, the New Heaven And Earth.
Revelation 21 King James Version (KJV)
21 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
Dan 12:6 And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?[shortening your post to make sure there's room enough here... not sure how long this will be]
[for this post] try to recall what I already said about "the dust of the earth" and their being "scattered" [another word used is "sown" unto the earth]...
Then notice more than just vv.1-2 in Daniel 12 (for I pointed out vv.1-4,10... where vv.3-4[10] tell WHAT THEY GO ON *TO DO* following said event! [this is not "formerly(-physically)-DEAD" people! (V.13 IS, when later speaking of Daniel's death and resurrection, but NOT here in vv.1-4,10!)])
This post was directed to @cv5 but I would like to see how any dispensationalist can explain how the simultaneous resurrection of the just and the unjust in Daniel lines up with the 1000 year separated resurrections in Revelation 20:5 from the dispensationalist view. Specifically I would like to see how @Nehemiah6 handles this but all are welcome to give your views.Explain this to me. In Daniel 12:2, at the time of Jacob's trouble, some of the people were raised to everlasting life AT THE SAME TIME that some of the people were raised to everlasting contempt. Emphasis on both the just and the unjust were raised AT THE SAME TIME. Now read Revelation 20:4-5.
(Rev 20:4) And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
One group was raised BEFORE the 1000 year reign but the second group is raised AFTER the 1000 year reign. How does that fit your view of Daniel 12 and the resurrection during the time of Jacob's trouble?
Dan 12:6 And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?
Did you miss verse 6? "How long shall it be to THE END of these WONDERS". He's talking about the visions that he just saw and that includes the resurrection at the time of Jacob's trouble.
[...]
Verse 13, Go your way Daniel for you are GOING TO DIE before this happens. When it happens, you will BE RAISED up from the grave to inherit your inheritance.
I'm gonna make this short and wait for your response.![]()
Which part of Acts says David IS DEAD and IN HIS TOMB to this day.... NOWHERE. This is where you and I vary greatly TDW. I believe every word exactly as written. And from experience with dealing with God through the scripture, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that David wasn't in that tomb. This is a classic concealment method that God uses over and over throughout the bible.Remember when the "MANY bodies of the saints... arose" and "went into the holy city, and appeared unto many" [meanwhile Jesus did His "I ascend [active]" thing (that very day, ON FIRSFRUIT), that He told MM to go tell the disciples about], well, if David had been amongst those who "went into the holy city," that day, why would you think Peter's LATER point [after Jesus' Acts 1 (second, and VISIBLE ascension, some "40 days" LATER... so even AFTER THAT)] has him [Peter] saying THIS:
24 But God raised Him from the dead, releasing Him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for Him to be held in its clutches.
25 David says about Him:
‘I saw the Lord always before me;
because He is at my right hand, I will not be shaken.
26 Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices;
my body also will dwell in hope,
27 because You will not abandon my soul to Hades,
nor will You let Your Holy One see decay.
28 You have made known to me the paths of life;
You will fill me with joy in Your presence.’
29 Brothers, I can tell you with confidence that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that He would place one of his descendants on his throne. 31 Foreseeing this, David spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that He was not abandoned to Hades, nor did His body see decay. 32 God has raised this Jesus to life, to which we are all witnesses. [see also v.34]
Here, 1) Peter is making the contrast between Jesus and David evident; 2) This would have been an opportune time to say, 'oh yeah, AND we saw DAVID walking around the holy city on FF/that same day,' but INSTEAD he emphasizes "and his [David's] tomb is with us TO THIS DAY"... no need to say that if David was resurrected WITH "MANY BODIES of the saints... arose" and was walking around "in the holy city" when the others DID.
[and you may recall my making the point that I believe the text tells us specifically that THEY "went into the holy city, and appeared unto many" to CONTRAST this with what JESUS DID that very day (John 20:17--told to MM; and Himself fulfilling "Firstfruit" per Lev23:10-12 [1Cor15:20], and that He took OTHERS there in a LEGAL / POSITIONAL sense [we are told about all thru the epistles], and not in a PHYSICAL[/literal] sense... instead of who you suggest He took there at that time. IOW, I believe we are told what THEY DID ['went into the holy city, and appeared unto many'], that day, specifically so that we would not confuse it with what HE DID, that day [fulfill FF/Lev23:10-23]--and I only say that b/c the later epistles tell us what they tell us, about that!])
I'm not a dispensationalist and I'm also not a covenantalist. There is however no doubt whatsoever that the Bible teaches elements of both.This post was directed to @cv5 but I would like to see how any dispensationalist can explain how the simultaneous resurrection of the just and the unjust in Daniel lines up with the 1000 year separated resurrections in Revelation 20:5 from the dispensationalist view. Specifically I would like to see how @Nehemiah6 handles this but all are welcome to give your views.
David is not in his tomb? Would you have us believe that all Christians are no longer in their graves either but have already been resurrected to a glorious body? I suggest that you can easily test your theory, and shouldn't do so to remove all doubt.Which part of Acts says David IS DEAD and IN HIS TOMB to this day.... NOWHERE. This is where you and I vary greatly TDW. I believe every word exactly as written. And from experience with dealing with God through the scripture, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that David wasn't in that tomb. This is a classic concealment method that God uses over and over throughout the bible.
So this is proof to you that David was still in his tomb even though Peter never said that. Peters words were chosen carefully by God to do exactly what you have fallen for. If you could have shown me where Peter said that David was still dead and in that tomb, I would believe you but it's not there.
TDW why would the Old Testament saints be raised and then left to die again? Can't you see that Christ redeemed them, there was absolutely no reason for them not to "enter into their lot". In your opinion, where are they now and why were they denied access to heaven?
Do you have an explanation for simultaneous versus the 1000 year separated resurrections?I'm not a dispensationalist and I'm also not a covenantalist. There is however no doubt whatsoever that the Bible teaches elements of both.
I assume you're talking about John being alive in the 90s and writing the book of Revelation at that time.I definitely read it carefully to not just assume. But the account towards John from Irenaeus is also a similar account to that which John's own Disciple Polycarp gave. Therefore, it was not just assuming, but having 2 direct accounts of the same event makes it more reliable. Much like the 4 Gospels in that same respects in giving us the life of Christ while on Earth.
I never said New Testament saints aren't in their graves, they are in their graves. The bodies of the Old Testament saints, for whatever reason, I don't know why, had to be raised. Probably as a witness against the Jews I suppose.David is not in his tomb? Would you have us believe that all Christians are no longer in their graves either but have already been resurrected to a glorious body? I suggest that you can easily test your theory, and shouldn't do so to remove all doubt.
Which part of Acts says David IS DEAD and IN HIS TOMB to this day.... NOWHERE. This is where you and I vary greatly TDW. I believe every word exactly as written. And from experience with dealing with God through the scripture, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that David wasn't in that tomb. This is a classic concealment method that God uses over and over throughout the bible.
So this is proof to you that David was still in his tomb even though Peter never said that. Peters words were chosen carefully by God to do exactly what you have fallen for. If you could have shown me where Peter said that David was still dead and in that tomb, I would believe you but it's not there.
TDW why would the Old Testament saints be raised and then left to die again? Can't you see that Christ redeemed them, there was absolutely no reason for them not to "enter into their lot". In your opinion, where are they now and why were they denied access to heaven?
what's your understanding of this passage?"Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit." Jesus
The offspring of Abraham are those who believe, not those born of a certain race biologically.
Israel as a nation is barely mention in the book except that the city Jerusalem is described as extremely wicked, the most wicked city in the world and God destroys it. The remnant of jews, those who believed are redeemed because they believed and washed their robes white in the blood of the lamb.
Towards the end of the book is the marriage of the lamb. The bride is NOT the Jews, but the believers from all nations.
"For the Lord our Godb the Almighty reigns.
7Let us rejoice and be glad
and give Him the glory.
For the marriage of the Lamb has come,
and His bride has made herself ready.
8She was given clothing of fine linen,
bright and pure.”
For the fine linen she wears is the righteous acts of the saints."
No redeemed Israel as a nation. No wife of God anymore. She has been divorced where she could have been and was in a smaller way pivotal in the Kingdom of God.
God took Israel back and took her back and she was unfaithful again and he took her back but he will never take her back as the bride. Now all the sons of Abraham are those who believe, the sons and daughters of the man are the believers, not those of one race.
False claim in Left field, the 1,000 yearPreterist friends @cv5 just helped me figure out exactly what the 1000 year reign is! It is the lifespan of the believer.
No such thing as a kingdom for 1,000 years on this earth, where Jesus Christ Is present hanging out with humans.https://www.blueletterbible.org/audio_video/popPlayer.cfm?id=3547&rel=missler_chuck/Rev
The millennium is certain. I would listen to the entire Revelation series, and everyone else on this board. You say you want to know? Then do it.
You can say it but you can't prove it. On the other hand the posters on this thread have proved the millennium beyond all the shadow of a doubt.False claim in Left field, the 1,000 year
No such thing as a kingdom for 1,000 years on this earth, where Jesus Christ Is present hanging out with humans.
A Big Fairy Tale!
Hey John146.How do you interpret the followin...
29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Is this not speaking of the body of Christ vs the body of David?
Well what is the 1000 years then?False claim in Left field, the 1,000 year
No such thing as a kingdom for 1,000 years on this earth, where Jesus Christ Is present hanging out with humans.
A Big Fairy Tale!
1. Daniel was simply giving us an overview. God wanted Israel to know that there would be a resurrection unto life (the resurrection of the just) and a resurrection unto damnation (the resurrection of the unjust) . So Daniel simply summed that up: 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. [Note "everlasting contempt = damnation]I would like to see how any dispensationalist can explain how the simultaneous resurrection of the just and the unjust in Daniel lines up with the 1000 year separated resurrections in Revelation 20:5 from the dispensationalist view.