Any Post or Non-Tribbers in Here?

[pottersclay]

One Gift is for personal edification and is strictly between God and His son.
There are two exceptions, all of which are at the discretion of the Holy Spirit:
a. when there the LORD wants to speak thru you to Jewish person(s) as a witness beyond the written language
b. when there is someone with the Gift to Interpret present


1 Corinthians 14:1-5
Pursue love, and desire spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy.
For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.
But he who prophesies speaks edification and exhortation and comfort to men. He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.
I wish you all spoke with tongues, but even more that you prophesied; for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues, unless indeed he interprets, that the church may receive edification.

Amen to that....for edification.

 

[pottersclay]

Now Jesus ascends again to the fathers house. Notice he was not taken up but ascends.
Now are we consider second fruits...third no we are first fruits also but were here and he is where? Right hand of the father...in his fathers house. (That where i am you may be also.)
Now Jesus says i come as a thief...but in revelation he comes as what...messiah...the lion of Judea....the redeemer ect but what about the thief? Where is that in the end days and if every eye shall see him he failed as a thief.

Oh boy hear those swords rattling......

But wait Jesus is also a bride groom. And as adam siad...this is bone of my bone. Flesh of my flesh. Jesus said I in you ...you in me. Jesus died for the sins of the world, he took the wrath of God upon himself for you and I and everyone that believes.
So as paul says we are not appointed to wrath...but wrath is coming...revelation is clear on that. Kansas will never be the same.

Jesus siad that not one jot or tittle shall pass till all is fulfilled........so wheres the thief....he said he comes like a thief....
If Jesus is a thief then just like his other titles id think he be a perfect thief....no finger prints.....no foot prints...
Some might say but God doesnt allow robbery......but what if the thief is only taking what is his?

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Now Jesus ascends again to the fathers house. Notice he was not taken up but ascends.

What I think you mean is (correct me if I've misunderstood you), that He was not "raptured / snatched / caught up / harpazo'd [G726]," but rather "[actively] ascend[ed]" at His first ascension ON Firstfruits--His Resurrection Day (and LATER... some "40 days" later, in Acts 1, was 'taken up' on His second [this time, VISIBLE] ascension in Acts 1, per Acts 1:9,22, when they SAW Him "traveling up into Heaven" per v.11).

Overall, I AGREE with the gist of your post... just wanted to make clear that one point. I think we are in basic agreement. = )

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

But now Christ is risen [HAS BEEN RAISED - PERFECT indicative] from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead.
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. [SHALL BE-FUTURE TENSE-made alive]
But [CONJUNCTION--connecting what was JUST said about the FUTURE-tense thing] each [OF MORE THAN TWO] one in his own order [/RANK]:

Christ the firstfruits, [1-"firstfruit Christ" (as one of the "FUTURE" aspect (of more than two), grammatically speaking)]
afterward [epeita - G1899] those who are Christ’s at His coming. [2 - "ONLY THEN [epeita - G1899] they OF CHRIST at the coming of Him"... v.24a goes on to speak of the way later GWTj point in time [#3], 1000 yrs after the #2 aspect]
1 Cor 15:20-23

What are you not understanding here in 1Cor 15:20-23 ???

[ ^ insertions in BLUE mine... to aid with the point I'm making here]

If you don't mind my putting it like this, "What are you not understanding here in 1Cor 15:20-23 ???" I can see clearly what YOU are not "understanding" in this text. = )



Allow me to try to explain (as I have in past posts):

--v.20 is speaking of what has already taken place in the past (Christ's resurrection);


--going forward, in v.22b it tells what about the "FUTURE" (in Christ SHALL all be made alive) and then THAT "FUTURE" aspect / Subject is CONNECTED by means of the CONJUNCTION ("BUT" v.23a) with what follows [we're not backtracking to v.20's PAST event here], in v.23's "BUT [conjunction--speaking of the FUTURE Subject (i.e. FUTURE 'resurrection')] EACH [a word meaning, 'OF MORE THAN TWO'] in his own ORDER / RANK (meaning, there is an ORDER / RANK to it... not that there remains ONLY ONE at one singular point in time);...


--the LAST part of v.23 (23c)... after having spoken of the "FUTURE" aspect: "firstfruit Christ" in v.23b [see again passages like 2Cor4:14 and 1Cor12:12 "so also is THE Christ" and Eph5, etc]... v.23c goes on to say, "AFTERWARD / THEN / THEREUPON / ONLY THEN [G1899 - epeita (ep/epi and eita)]," which is a Greek word speaking of time and sequence, and never means something like "nearly 2000-yrs AFTERWARD" or a LONG TIME afterward (the word "eita [G1534]" by contrast, and used in v.24a, DOES ONLY refer to SEQUENCE ONLY with NO TIME-ELEMENT attached with it... but not so the word "epeita [(ep/epi and eita) - G1899]" used here in v.23c, see)






--study out our "IDENTIFICATION with Christ" that we ("the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY" [also being the presently-betrothed "Bride"]) believers have "in this present age [singular]" [not pertaining to the OT saints, nor of the Trib saints, nor of the MK-age saints]... which is disclosed in the epistles (marinate in them for awhile... to see OUR "IDENTIFICATION with Christ"... so that you can come to see 1Cor15:23b's "firstfruit Christ" i.e. the FUTURE aspect of "resurrection," accurately, for what it is)






[next post will LIST out the verses where "G1899 - EPeita" is used, to demonstrate and support my point ^ ]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

^ [CONTINUED from last post... for those desiring to study this ^ out further]


In 1Cor15:23, note the word:

"epeita" - G1899 (from ep [epi] - eita "ONLY then," or "thereupon"...https://biblehub.com/greek/1899.htm ;
distinct from "eita - G1534" which is a SEQUENCE WORD ONLY with no time element attached to it... used in v.24a "THEN [sequentially then] the end" [NOT "THEN [immediately] the end," as the "Amill-teachings" suggest of this verse 24a]);


--epeita - G1899 (16x... in the verses listed below; 15x besides our 1Cor15:23 verse under discussion... check them out; none mean "and then a long time afterward [like, nearly 2000 yrs later...]"):


1) Mark 7:5 -
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/mar/7/5/ss1/s_964005 "THEN [epeita - G1899]"


2) Luke 16:7 -
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/luke/16-7.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"


3) John 11:7 -
https://biblehub.com/text/john/11-7.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"


4) 1 Corinthians 15:6 -
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1co/15/6/ss1/s_1077005 "AFTER THAT / THEREAFTER [epeita - G1899]"


5) 1 Corinthians 15:7 -
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1co/15/7/ss1/s_1077005 "AFTER THAT / THEN [epeita] - G1899]"


6) 1 Corinthians 12:28 -
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/12-28.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"


[7) 1 Corinthians 15:23 - our verse under present discussion]


8) 1 Corinthians 15:46 -
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/15-46.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"


9) Galatians 1:18 -
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/galatians/1-18.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"


10) Galatians 1:21 -
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/galatians/1-21.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"


11) Galatians 2:1 -
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/galatians/2-1.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"


12) 1 Thessalonians 4:17 -
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_thessalonians/4-17.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"


13) Hebrews 7:2 -
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/hebrews/7-2.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"


14) Hebrews 7:27 -
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/hebrews/7-27.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/heb/7/27/ss1/s_1140027 "AND THEN [epeita - G1899]"


15) James 3:17 -
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/james/3-17.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"


16) James 4:14 -
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/james/4-14.htm "THEN [epeita - G1899]"



[NOTE: WHERE do ANY of these *mean* A LONG TIME AFTERWARD, rather than "ONLY THEN"--"properly, only then (emphasizing what precedes is a necessary precursor)."]



[For those who wish to study this further...]

At BibleHub site... under Thayer's Greek Lexicon:

Thayer's Greek Lexicon

STRONGS NT 1899: ἔπειτα

ἔπειτα, adverb (ἐπί, εἶτα), thereupon, thereafter, then, afterward; used a. of time: Mark 7:5 R G; Luke 16:7; Galatians 1:21; James 4:14; μετά τοῦτο is added redundantly in John 11:7 (cf. Meyer at the passage; Winers Grammar, § 65, 2; (Buttmann, 397 (340))); a more definite specification of time is added epexegetically, μετά ἔτη τρία, Galatians 1:18; διά δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν, Galatians 2:1.

b. in enumerations it is used α. of time and order: πρῶτον ... ἔπειτα, 1 Corinthians 15:46; 1 Thessalonians 4:17; πρότερον ... ἔπειτα, Hebrews 7:27; ἀπαρχή ... ἔπειτα, 1 Corinthians 15:23; εἶτα (but T Tr marginal reading WH marginal reading ἔπειτα) ... ἔπειτα, 1 Corinthians 15:5, 6; ἔπειτα ... ἔπειτα, 1 Corinthians 15:7 L marginal reading T Tr marginal reading WH marginal reading β. of order alone: πρῶτον ... ἔπειτα, Hebrews 7:2; τρίτον ... ἔπειτα ... ἔπειτα (R G εἶτα), 1 Corinthians 12:28.







Also in LXX (Greek Septuagint) 1x, ... in Isaiah 16:2... which I only find translated as "THEN [G1899]" (or, AND THEN) in the "Brenton" translation:

"Brenton Septuagint Translation -
"For thou shalt be as a young bird taken away from a bird that has flown: even thou shalt be so, daughter of Moab: and then do thou, O Arnon,"

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

^ bearing in mind what I'd put about BOTH v.23b AND v.23c being the "FUTURE" aspects of "resurrection" i.e. "SHALL BE made alive" (whereas v.20, about Christ HIMSELF is "PAST" [PERFECT indicative])

 

[DavidTree]

[ ^ insertions in BLUE mine... to aid with the point I'm making here]

If you don't mind my putting it like this, "What are you not understanding here in 1Cor 15:20-23 ???" I can see clearly what YOU are not "understanding" in this text. = )



Allow me to try to explain (as I have in past posts):

--v.20 is speaking of what has already taken place in the past (Christ's resurrection);


--going forward, in v.22b it tells what about the "FUTURE" (in Christ SHALL all be made alive) and then THAT "FUTURE" aspect / Subject is CONNECTED by means of the CONJUNCTION ("BUT" v.23a) with what follows [we're not backtracking to v.20's PAST event here], in v.23's "BUT [conjunction--speaking of the FUTURE Subject (i.e. FUTURE 'resurrection')] EACH [a word meaning, 'OF MORE THAN TWO'] in his own ORDER / RANK (meaning, there is an ORDER / RANK to it... not that there remains ONLY ONE at one singular point in time);...


--the LAST part of v.23 (23c)... after having spoken of the "FUTURE" aspect: "firstfruit Christ" in v.23b [see again passages like 2Cor4:14 and 1Cor12:12 "so also is THE Christ" and Eph5, etc]... v.23c goes on to say, "AFTERWARD / THEN / THEREUPON / ONLY THEN [G1899 - epeita (ep/epi and eita)]," which is a Greek word speaking of time and sequence, and never means something like "nearly 2000-yrs AFTERWARD" or a LONG TIME afterward (the word "eita [G1534]" by contrast, and used in v.24a, DOES ONLY refer to SEQUENCE ONLY with NO TIME-ELEMENT attached with it... but not so the word "epeita [(ep/epi and eita) - G1899]" used here in v.23c, see)






--study out our "IDENTIFICATION with Christ" that we ("the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY" [also being the presently-betrothed "Bride"]) believers have "in this present age [singular]" [not pertaining to the OT saints, nor of the Trib saints, nor of the MK-age saints]... which is disclosed in the epistles (marinate in them for awhile... to see OUR "IDENTIFICATION with Christ"... so that you can come to see 1Cor15:23b's "firstfruit Christ" i.e. the FUTURE aspect of "resurrection," accurately, for what it is)






[next post will LIST out the verses where "G1899 - EPeita" is used, to demonstrate and support my point ^ ]

YES, i have the future part down good brother.
Where do you derive the GWTJ from 1 Cor 15:20-23
What specific verse leads you to believe Paul is speaking of the GWTJ?

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Where do you derive the GWTJ from 1 Cor 15:20-23

I didn't.

I said, IN VERSE 24a "THEN [eita - G1534 (SEQUENCE WORD ONLY, here)] the end..."


Read my post [/posts] again, more carefully.

YES, i have the future part down good brother.

Really?

Do you grasp what my point is: that EVERYTHING in v.23 is "FUTURE [resurrection]"... and not back-tracking to the PAST (re: Jesus' OWN Resurrection) ?? So that, "firstfruit Christ" is speaking of "FUTURE [resurrection]" and not Christ's OWN Resurrection (now "PAST" from the perspective in time when Paul wrote this)... and that "ONLY THEN they OF CHRIST" is DISTINCT from that (EACH in his own ORDER / RANK)

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Again, I'd said,


(the word "eita [G1534]" by contrast, and used in v.24a, DOES ONLY refer to SEQUENCE ONLY with NO TIME-ELEMENT attached with it... but not so the word "epeita [(ep/epi and eita) - G1899]" used here in v.23c, see)


[and]

[re: v.23c] [2 - "ONLY THEN [epeita - G1899] they OF CHRIST at the coming of Him"... v.24a goes on to speak of the way later GWTj point in time [#3], 1000 yrs after the #2 aspect]




[V.20 "PAST" (Christ HIMSELF)... whereas vv. 23b ('firstfruit Christ'), 23c ('ONLY THEN they OF Christ at the coming of Him'--distinct from v.24b) and 24a... ALL 3 r "FUTURE"]

 

[DavidTree]

I didn't.

I said, IN VERSE 24a "THEN [eita - G1534 (SEQUENCE WORD ONLY, here)] the end..."


Read my post [/posts] again, more carefully.






Really?

Do you grasp what my point is: that EVERYTHING in v.23 is "FUTURE [resurrection]"... and not back-tracking to the PAST (re: Jesus' OWN Resurrection) ?? So that, "firstfruit Christ" is speaking of "FUTURE [resurrection]" and not Christ's OWN Resurrection (now "PAST" from the perspective in time when Paul wrote this)... and that "ONLY THEN they OF CHRIST" is DISTINCT from that (EACH in his own ORDER / RANK)

That would be incorrect.
1 Cor 15 is in fact speaking of Christ's Resurrection that occurred and then FUTURE Resurrection of those who are His at His Coming.

verses 20-22 corrects your assumption of Christ the firstfruit as a Future occurrence.

Not only does 1 Cor ch15 correct that assumption but so also does 1 Thess & 2 Thess and Heb ch9 and 1 John

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

That would be incorrect.
1 Cor 15 is in fact speaking of Christ's Resurrection that occurred and then FUTURE Resurrection of those who are His at His Coming.

verses 20-22 corrects your assumption of Christ the firstfruit as a Future occurrence.

Not only does 1 Cor ch15 correct that assumption but so also does 1 Thess & 2 Thess and Heb ch9 and 1 John

You are not reading my post very carefully.

Verse 20 is "PAST TENSE" (PERFECT indicative).




Verse 22b "SHALL ALL BE MADE ALIVE [FUTURE TENSE]"

[CONNECTS WITH (by means of the CONJUNCTION "BUT" in v.23a]

Verse 23a "BUT [speaking of the SAME "FUTURE" ASPECT that v.22b JUST SPOKE OF... CONNECTING THESE, grammatically] EACH... (i.e. EACH of those "FUTURE" ASPECTS [re: resurrection]) "IN HIS OWN ORDER / RANK" (not speaking at all of the "PAST" like v.20 was, alone!)





[all you're doing is looking at the word "firstfruit" (2x in this text) and ASSUMING things about it(assuming INCORRECT things about it), whilst completely DISREGARDING the "timing / SEQUENCE" issues spelled out grammatically in this text, which I am pointing out to you]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

^ So, please read again (more carefully) my Post #804... because it is vv.22b and 23a that CORRECTS *your notion* that v.23b ("firstfruit Christ") is speaking of the "PAST" event that v.20 ALONE is speaking to (... IT DOESN'T!!)









[again, for the readers: note James 1:18's "a KIND of firstfruit" (i.e. there's more than ONE "KIND") and Lev23's TWO DISTINCT mentions of "firstfruit," the LATTER of which, in v.17 (re: WHEAT harvest) connects with Rev14:4 re: the 144,000 (FUTURE to us--and who are not us), and where Lev23:17 speaks of "TWO loaves" and "baken WITH LEAVEN"<--that / those AIN'T US!]

 

[DavidTree]

^ So, please read again (more carefully) my Post #804... because it is vv.22b and 23a that CORRECTS *your notion* that v.23b ("firstfruit Christ") is speaking of the "PAST" event that v.20 ALONE is speaking to (... IT DOESN'T!!)

[again, for the readers: note James 1:18's "a KIND of firstfruit" and Lev23's TWO DISTINCT mentions of "firstfruit," the LATTER of which, in v.17 (re: WHEAT harvest) connects with Rev14:4 re: the 144,000 (FUTURE to us), and where Lev23:17 speaks of "TWO loaves" and "baken WITH LEAVEN"<--that AIN'T US!]

But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have died. = Past Tense/Risen & Firstfruit
For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. = Past Tense
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. = Future Tense
But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits (Past/Present) afterward those who are Christ’s at His Coming. = FUTURE

There is no future tense of Christ becoming the firstfruit - HE already is the Firstfruit unto the Father.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

--epeita - G1899 (16x... in the verses listed below; 15x besides our 1Cor15:23 verse under discussion... check them out; none mean "and then a long time afterward [like, nearly 2000 yrs later...]"):

Guys, maybe we should think OUT OF THE BOX. There's a hypothesis of "simulation theory", that God and the angels operate the cosmos of "time-space continuum" in a spitirual realm. When we die, we go into that spiritual realm and therefore no longer bound by time and space any more. So if 1000 years with the Lord is like one day, then the length of time from our perspective is irrelevant, while the sequence still does.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Guys, maybe we should think OUT OF THE BOX. There's a hypothesis of "simulation theory", that God and the angels operate the cosmos of "time-space continuum" in a spitirual realm. When we die, we go into that spiritual realm and therefore no longer bound by time and space any more. So if 1000 years with the Lord is like one day, then the length of time from our perspective is irrelevant, while the sequence still does.

But what I am setting forth is that "epeita [G1899]" in v.23c, is set in contradistinction to the use of "eita [G1534]" in v.24a.

The former (used in v.23c) is never used to refer to a period of time of GREAT LENGTH / DURATION (whereas the latter (used in v.24a) can and does--speaking of SEQUENCE ONLY, with NO time-element attached with it).

Paul uses these purposely, in this text.





The overall Subject of this context being "resurrection" (which means, "TO STAND AGAIN [on the earth]"--that is, bodily)

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have died. = Past Tense/Risen & Firstfruit
For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. = Past Tense
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. = Future Tense
But [CONJUNCTION--continuing the 'FUTURE' Subject] each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits (Past/Present) afterward those who are Christ’s at His Coming. = FUTURE

There is no future tense of Christ becoming the firstfruit - HE already is the Firstfruit unto the Father.

That's what I said v.20 is covering.


V.22b (FUTURE tense) is CONNECTED TO v.23 by means of the CONJUNCTION "BUT" (SO THAT v.23 in its entirety is speaking SOLELY of the "FUTURE" aspect [of 'resurrection'] that v.22b JUST SPOKE OF / LED UP TO;... NOT of the "PAST TENSE" one in v.20!!)

 

[DavidTree]

But what I am setting forth is that "epeita" in v.23c, is set in contradistinction to the use of "eita" in v.24a.

The former is never used to refer to a period of time of GREAT LENGTH / DURATION (whereas the latter can and does--speaking of SEQUENCE ONLY, with NO time-element attached with it).

Paul uses these purposely, in this text.

The overall Subject of this context being "resurrection" (which means, "TO STAND AGAIN [on the earth]"--that is, bodily)

The Time Sequence is clarified, without any doubt, to be at His Coming.

The LORD, the Apostles Paul and John, Hebrews ch9, the Prophets all speak of His Second Coming as a climatic but sudden event,
upon which His Elect are waiting and longing for with full expectancy.
No secret appearance or multiple back and forths.
Just One Coming/Return of the LORD.

 

[DavidTree]

Guys, maybe we should think OUT OF THE BOX. There's a hypothesis of "simulation theory", that God and the angels operate the cosmos of "time-space continuum" in a spitirual realm. When we die, we go into that spiritual realm and therefore no longer bound by time and space any more. So if 1000 years with the Lord is like one day, then the length of time from our perspective is irrelevant, while the sequence still does.

Maybe, since the Father/Son/Holy Spirit are Eternal.

However, we are not instructed in that path of thought from scripture - unless you see something that i have not.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

The Time Sequence is clarified, without any doubt, to be at His Coming.

Study again the word "epeita" (v.23c) [showing relation between "firstfruit Christ [also 'FUTURE']" and "they [plural] OF Christ at the coming of Him"]...

...which "epeita" word NEVER is used to refer to a GREAT SPANS of time, like some near-2000-years (like the DISTINCT word "eita" can speak to--v.24a).



I LISTED them out.

In Post #805.

Did you even examine them to see how that word is used?? It doesn't appear that you have.

 

[DavidTree]

Study again the word "epeita" (v.23c) [showing relation between "firstfruit Christ [also 'FUTURE']" and "they [plural] OF Christ at the coming of Him"]...

...which "epeita" word NEVER is used to refer to a GREAT SPANS of time, like some near-2000-years (like the DISTINCT word "eita" can speak to--v.24a).



I LISTED them out.

In Post #805.

Did you even examine them to see how that word is used?? It doesn't appear that you have.

Yes, i see the two forms used by Paul and that is why we have eita for use concerning 'the end' in verse 24