You don't understand any of your 4 points.
No, that would be you who doesn't understand. I have verses included that SAY what the point is.
But, go ahead and try to refute my points by exegeting the verses to show they DON'T mean what they say. Or that they mean something totally different.
John put a title on a resurrection and you imagine it is a one time event, when in truth it covers Jesus' resurrection as the firstfruits, and then all the other resurrections of the righteous over time.
lol. There is NOT ANY verse that says that resurrecrtions are over time. That's just your own OPINION. Which I'm not interested in.
I gave 4 verses that PROVE there is only 1 resurrection of the saved and they are unambiguous.
For example, there is a time for the resurrection of those "In Christ."
I challenge you to quote that verse. Oh, right. There isn't one. 1 Cor 15:23 says "those who belong to Him". I've already shared the verses that blow your theory out of the water. Do you ever read my posts?
Act 15:16-17
16 “ ‘After this I will return and rebuild David’s fallen tent. Its ruins I will rebuild, and I will restore it,
17 that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, even all the Gentiles who bear my name, says the Lord, who does these things’ —
Go ahead and try to tell me that "all the Gentiles who bear My name" can't be included in the phrase "those who belong to Him".
Rom 10:18-20
18 But I ask: Did they not hear? Of course they did: “Their voice has gone out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.”
19 Again I ask: Did Israel not understand? First, Moses says, “I will make you envious by those who are not a nation; I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding.”
20 And Isaiah boldly says, “I was found by those who did not seek me; I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me.”
So don't tell me "those who belong to Him" doesn't include believers from Adam on.
Only a fool would try to make that argument. Paul NEVER talked about a resurrection that was just for those "in Christ".
There is yet another resurrection for the Two Witnesses.
Only if you can prove these witnesses were given resurrection bodies. Which you can't, of course.
Further, the FIRST resurrection is at the end of the Trib. So says Rev 20:5. So you can't be right.
There is one for the Beheaded, and one for the Old Testament saints.
Where is Scripture for the OT saints? I don't believe you. The one for the beheaded is the FIRST resurrection, and that doesn't mean the first one of the several beheaded ones. That would be quite stupid.
You lump them all together ignoring other scriptures that show us they are separate.
What a joke. I've shown the verses that clearly indicate there is ONLY ONE. It's the Bible that "lumps them all together".\
How can I "ignore other Scriptures that show us that they are separate" when you HAVEN'T SHOWN me ANY verses that shows separate resurrections?
You imagine Jesus' resurrection must be something different because His resurrection does not fit your theory.
Again, a very wrong conclusion, as usual.
The reason Paul described Jesus' resurrection separately and called it "firstfruits" is because of:
Acts 26:23 - that the Messiah would suffer and, as
the first to rise from the dead, would bring the message of light to his own people and to the Gentiles.”
If you are able to comprehend language, you will KNOW that Jesus' resurrection is the FIRST one, separated by the description "firstfruits".
Do you understand what this means? It means Lazarus, the widow's son and all the others that Jesus raised from the dead while He was on earth BEFORE His own resurrection did NOT receive resurrection bodies. This is also true of the 2 witnesses, because the Bible does NOT SAY they received glorified bodies. Good luck trying to prove they did.
You are mistaken on 1 Cor. 15:23, that states that resurrection is for those born again, which agrees with 1 Thes. 4: those "in Christ." Since that does not fit your theory, you have to have all the Old Testament saints "in Christ" when that is impossible.
Go ahead and argue against Scripture all you want. That's not by business. But the verses are clear enough that you have NO EXCUSE for your rebellion and rejection of God's Word
The second Advent, but its very title is speaking of the SECOND time He will come
No kidding!
but you ignore that He comes the second time ONLY TO THE AIR.
You haven't proved that. Please stop sharing your unsubstantiated opinions. When you make a claim, please provide verses that say what you opine.
Since that don't fit your theory, you ad lib his coming all the way to the ground, forcing two comings into one.
You've NEVER shown from Scripture that Jesus takes raptured believers to heaven, so I reject that as just your unsubstantiated opinion.
Only IF you ever find a verse that shows Jesus taking raptured believers to heaven will I believe it. But I know that the Bible doesn't teach that.
The truth is, His second coming is only to the air.
No proof, no evidence. Only your unsubstantiated opinion. Which I reject.
From there He will take us to the homes he has prepared,
Once again, Jesus told that to His disciples, BEFORE He died and went to heaven. He was assurring them that they had a place prepared for them when they died. And where do you think those 11 disciples have been living in heaven for the past 2,000+ years?????
Finally, the "first" resurrection is first in HONOR, not in timing. John did not write in English.
I've researched the Greek word, and it INCLUDES timing. So you are wrong on ALL points.
