Consider:
1) 1Cor15:22b-23 "...even so in Christ shall [future tense] all be made alive [future tense]; But [conj] each in his own order [/rank]: firstfruit Christ; afterward [EPeita - 'upon-then'] they that are Christ's in his coming. 24 Then [eita - a word with NO 'time-element' attached to it, as EPeita does] the end..."
I recall we had a thread many months ago where I pressed you, maybe asked you five times like this.
What is your assertion of the difference between eita and epeita based on? Have you studied Greek? Have you done word studies on the word? Do you have a feel for the way these words are used based on the Greek language?
Your 'NO time element' thing doesn't seem to pan out based on usage or Greek dictionaries as far as I can tell, since the words describe one thing that happens sequentially before another.
Honestly, I don't think you really know much about what you are talking about when you talk about Greek.
; Ask yourself why Paul uses the distinct words "EPeita ['upon-then'] and "eita"... and why he feels the need to say, "but each IN HIS OWN ORDER / RANK" if there remains only one at one singular point in time; the "But" connects the contents of verse 23 back to what v.22b had just been talking about: "future" resurrection, not Jesus' past Resurrection (which was what v.20 covered; Verse 23 is not repeating verse 20's info about Jesus);
I don't know what point you are trying to make or what this has to do with the conversation at hand. These verses have to do with the resurrection of Christ and they that are his at His coming. Maybe you should focus on the meaning of 'at his coming' and the word ἐν translated at in that verse. Also, if you want to make a point about different verses, then quote the parts that are of interest so we know what you are talking about. You tell me to 'ask yourself why....' and I have to just guess at whatever idea is in your mind that is supposed to be the answer to the question.
This sort of post doesn't communicate anything. I don't feel like guessing as whatever secret thing you think are in these verses that are supposed to supply some evidence for pre-trib. I've talked with you about this stuff before, and I still don't know what you are getting at.
2) Rev4-5 shows people already wearing "stephanous/crowns"--that which Paul had stated will be awarded "in that day" (not upon his death); and these people are saying "hast redeemed US.... out-of EVERY...." (this is "the Church which His body" having already been caught up, present "before [the face of] God" like 1Th3:13 says--that's the destination that 4:17 is taking us to)... and it is said of them in Rev4-5 that they "shall [future] reign on the earth" and all this is stated BEFORE Jesus will open the first seal that kicks off the 7-year tribulation period (i.e the 70th Week; 2520 days leading up to His Second Coming to the earth), the initial moment of the tribulation period being the ARRIVAL of "the DOTL" with its judgments unfolding upon the earth--i.e the trib;
If you have some actual evidence from scripture that places
John was having this vision in 90-something AD, or whenever (some place it earlier), and saw these elders in his vision. If you see a vision or have a dream of someone located at a certain location, and you wake up or come out of the vision and go talk to that person, they may not have literally and physically have been in that place. I had a couple of dreams about my brother, who was in a situation spiritually, one night. In one dream, he was being held captive and being beaten by dark entities and was afraid to go. Then he was doing something dangerous in our childhood home in another state. But when I woke up, he was there, not in the other state, and not physically being held captive in the house I saw in my dream
Zechariah had a vision of Joshua the High Priest standing before the angel of the LORD. Do you think if he went to talk to the High Priest, that the High Priest would have remembered that conversation? Would he have remembered Satan talking? Or was the vision a message for Zechariah, as opposed to a shared experience with the High Priest?
When Joseph woke up from his dream, where there twelve sheaves of grain laying around? When the butler/wine taster and baker of Pharoah dreamed and woke up, were there grapes laying in the cell? Was there a basket of bread and some birds flying around?
You can show no evidence for two parousia of Jesus after the ascension, no evidence for a pretrib rapture, and then we are supposed to assume that based on John seeing redeemed elders in heaven in a vision?
3) "the resurrection the
first [adj]" is not saying this is the first moment of resurrection (Rev20:4b-5,6). The same adjective is used when Paul says of himself that he is "the chief [
adj] of sinners"... doesn't mean he was
the "first" ever (
time-wise) of sinners, see.
(There is "first"
in time; and then there's "first"
in importance... distinct things.)
As in English with the word first, πρῶτος can mean chief, or something like 'number one', but it can also mean first in order of time. Context is useful. When Jesus called the 'Love the LORD your God...' command as first and great command, we can conclude He wasn't talking about sequence of time.
But let us look at the context of 'first resurrection' and see if the verse has to do with time sequence?
Revelation 20
5 But the rest of the dead did not live again
until the thousand years were finished. This
is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy
is he who has part in the
first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
(NKJV)
Here we have events that occur in a sequence of time. First is the first resurrection, but the rest of the dead aren't raised until a thousand years later. The first resurrection happens first, then the resurrection described later on in the book.
