David in NJ
Well-Known Member
SEE Post 294Just trying to get you to admit your true motive for posting those passages, but I see that you're not interested in doing that.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
SEE Post 294Just trying to get you to admit your true motive for posting those passages, but I see that you're not interested in doing that.
You seem to have missed the point. Just because it is translated in English as "many" does not mean that it has to mean "not all". So, the point is not to say that the word always means "all" which is what you seem to be arguing against here. No. The point is that it doesn't have to mean "not all". And that is a fact. Here is an example where that Hebrew word raḇ (Strong's H7227) is used and does not mean "not all".
Genesis 21:34 And Abraham sojourned in the Philistines' land many H7227 days.
So, is this saying that Abraham sojourned in the Philistine's for only some of the days that he sojourned there? No, it's obviously referring to ALL of the days he sojourned there which numbered as "many days". So, the word does not mean "not all" in this verse.
Genesis 30:43 And the man increased exceedingly, and had much H7227 cattle, and maidservants, and menservants, and camels, and asses.
Note: "the man" here is a reference to Jacob. Is this referring to only some of Jacob's cattle, maidservants, etc. or to all of them? Clearly to all of them right? And he had "much" of them. So, the word does not mean "not all" in this verse.
I can give other examples, but I would hope that you see my point by now.
Again, it appears that you have missed the point. My point is NOT that the word is always used to mean "all" rather than "not all". My point is that it is not always used to mean "not all", though it is used that way a majority of the time (which does not prove anything one way or another as it relates to Daniel 12:2).
If it's freely offered to all people then that means all people are called to salvation. That is my point. But, only the ones who accept the offer are chosen/saved.
Where does the New Testament refer to the New Testament age or era as "the day of the Lord"? Certainly not in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 or 2 Peter 3:10-13, so I'm wondering where you are getting this from.
I agree with all of that, but help me understand something here about your overall view. Here is Daniel 12:2 for reference:
Daniel 12:2 (NIV) Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.
You agree that this is talking about the bodily resurrection of the dead, right? And you think it's referring to what is described in Matthew 27:52-53 which obviously happened long ago. Is it your belief that those who were resurrected at that time were changed to have immortal bodies rather than having been resurrected in their mortal bodies? If so, how do you reconcile that with what Paul taught here:
1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.
I hope you realize that this is talking about bodily resurrections unto bodily immortality. Agree? Paul indicated that Christ's resurrection was the first. Next in order are those who belong to Him at His second coming. There's no mention of anyone else being resurrected unto bodily immortality at any other time. So, with that in mind, how could Daniel 12:2 possibly be referring to anything but the resurrection of the dead in Christ at His second coming when it talks about those who will be resurrected to everlasting life?
Does the Bible actually say one way or the other?
"THEY" cannot be the first resurrection
Progressive Born Again Amillennists believe that "a thousand years" is in reference to the Age of God's Grace, beginning on Pentecost until the Day Jesus returns, being manifested from heaven, in all the Glory of His Immortality, in flaming fire. KJV 2 Thes. 1:7-10.Here rule/poimaino is in the FUTURE tense meaning it will happen at some point AFTER the second coming and battle of Armageddon while treadeth/pateo is written in the PRESENT tense meaning it is happening during this second coming. The treading and smiting are happening at Armageddon but not the ruling which proves mortals will be alive after Armageddon is over. This proves the Premill position because indeed there is a future rule of people who were not slain during the second coming that Christ and his saints will rule over.
Amillennialism wouldn't even exist if the first person to teach it bothered to check the verb tenses in Revelation 19.
LOL x100000000000000They are the first resurrection. Rev 20 says so.
Are you allowed to post this???Yes.
The arrival of Christ for the second time accomplishes many things including the vials of wrath and destroying the army of the beast at Armageddon as well as resulting in the beast and false prophet being cast into the LOF. There is one more thing mentioned during the second coming that many do not notice which is the future rule over the nations which proves there are unsaved mortals that are set aside for being ruled over by the rod of iron:
Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite (Aorist tense verb with PRESENT tense meaning) the nations: and he shall rule (FUTURE tense verb) them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth (PRESENT tense verb) the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
![]()
Revelation 19 :: King James Version (KJV)
Revelation 19 - And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.www.blueletterbible.org
Here rule/poimaino is in the FUTURE tense meaning it will happen at some point AFTER the second coming and battle of Armageddon while treadeth/pateo is written in the PRESENT tense meaning it is happening during this second coming. The treading and smiting are happening at Armageddon but not the ruling which proves mortals will be alive after Armageddon is over. This proves the Premill position because indeed there is a future rule of people who were not slain during the second coming that Christ and his saints will rule over.
Amillennialism wouldn't even exist if the first person to teach it bothered to check the verb tenses in Revelation 19.
A second witness to this:
Rev 2:25 But that which ye have already hold fast till I come.
That is the second coming. Everything we read of next comes after the second coming:
Rev 2:26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
After "the end" comes, there is given power over the nations to those that are overcomers which naturally includes those who "are alive and remain" at the second coming. They will be given power over the mortal unsaved nations after Christ has returned not before it.
Compare that wording to these:
Mat_10:22 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.
Mat_24:13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
Mar_13:13 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
These are survivors of the Great Tribulation. Same here:
Mar 13:9 But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.
Mar 13:10 And the gospel must first be published among all nations.
Mar 13:11 But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.
Mar 13:12 Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death.
Mar 13:13 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
Rev 2:26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
Rev 2:27 And he shall rule (FUTURE tense verb) them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
After the second coming and after "the end" will the overcomers be given power over the nations, ruling them with a rod of iron. That proves the rod of iron rule over the nations for a thousand years does not even start until Christ has returned and has given overcomers this power to rule over the nations.
It is impossible to understand what happens at the second coming and what happens AFTER the second coming properly without understanding the verb tenses involved.
Since scripture does not contradict itself, there are no scriptures which state all mortals are slain at the second coming leaving none to be ruled over.
So then, since this is true, that there shall be no more death for the saved, can we say the same for the UNsaved,
KJV Gen. 2The spirit in a person, is eternal.
Notice this verse.... In it God says His wrath is on the unbelievers.
John 3:36
Amen!!!:)This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel:
‘Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,’
Says the Lord of hosts.
So there you have it, there shall be no more death,....ever again, for both the saved and the unsaved
You can be assured that I do comprehend CHRISTianity, but unfortunately CHURCHianity, and what it fabricates, is nothing more than the history of Christ and the Religious history of the Church.Be sure you understand that, because that understanding is the KEY of keys when trying to learn about redemption, the Cross, and the blood of Jesus , and the""" NEW CREATION IN CHRIST"""" = "CHRISTianity.
You can be assured that I do comprehend CHRISTianity, but unfortunately CHURCHianity, and what it fabricates, is nothing more than the history of Christ and the Religious history of the Church.
Every one loves the historical Jesus, but very few love the Spiritual Jesus.
You are still missing my point. I am not saying that he sojourned in the land of the Philistines in all of his days on the earth. That would be a dumb thing to claim, frankly. No, I'm saying that when it talks about him sojourning there for many days it's referring to all of the days he sojourned there rather than just some of the days he sojourned there. Do you understand what I'm saying now?The way I understand Abraham in the land of the Philistines 'many' days, means he did not sojourn there ALL of his days.
Goodness. That was not my point. Do you really think I was saying that Jacob owned literally all cattle, maidservants, etc.? Of course I was not. What I'm saying is that it was referring to all of Jacob's cattle, etc. and not just some of them. Do you see my point now?Abraham was in the land of the Philistines many/much days of his life, but his sojourn upon the earth was not limited to the land of the Philistines.
Jacob had many/much/abundant cattle, maidservants, menservants, camels and asses, but he did not have ALL of them.
It is your assumption that he was saying "only many". But, the word means "a multitude". He was just indicating that there would be a great number of people resurrected. Jesus made it clear in John 5:28-29 that it will be all of the dead that are resurrected. I see no basis whatsoever for seeing Daniel 12:2 as being some other event than John 5:28-29. At no other time have or will both saved and lost dead be resurrected. So, Daniel 12:2 absolutely must be the same event as John 5:28-29 or else Jesus was contradicting Daniel 12:2 when He said what He did in John 5:28-29.Daniel writes 'many' of the 'all' who shall be delivered (vs1) who died before Christ came shall be raised from the graves to everlasting life. Why would Daniel say only 'many' and not all of them shall be raised to everlasting life?
Because at that time only many saints had physically died, not 'all' saints had died when Christ came. They are not bodily raised but spiritually raised to ascend with Christ to heaven after His resurrection.
This is not what Daniel 12:2 is referring to. Daniel 12:2 is clearly referring to bodily resurrection because it's talking about those who "sleep in the dust of the earth" being resurrected. A clear reference to bodily resurrection.Since not all who shall be delivered were even saved at the time of Christ. They shall be spiritually delivered first when they hear the Gospel and believe through the power of the Spirit.
I'm sorry, but I have no idea of what you're trying to say here. How can the gospel be freely offered to all people but not all people are called by the gospel? That does not make any sense.The Gospel is freely offered to all people. That does not mean that all people shall be called by the Gospel. Because few are chosen.
That is correct. So, why did you say that the New Testament referred to the Day of the Lord in terms of being the New Testament age? It never references the day of the Lord in that way.The New Testament Apostles reference the last Day of the Lord, when He shall come again.
I don't get what you're saying here at all. In my mind, the day of the Lord is the day Christ will return, as written about in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12. In the Old Testament there are references to a day of the Lord, but I see the New Testament era as something that can be referred to as "the last days" because we see that the last days had begun already by the day of Pentecost (see Acts 2:16-21) and they lead up to the return of Christ (2 Peter 3:3-4).Where the Old Testament prophets write of all that would come to pass during this time they write as the Day of the Lord. The Day of the Lord coming, and the last Day of the Lord are not two, but one and the same coming that began when Christ came to earth a man and will end when He returns the second time.
I'm honestly just baffled as to how you are interpreting some of these things. I've never seen anyone try to claim that Matthew 27:52-53 is not referring to a physical, bodily resurrection. It very clearly is. It's talking about people coming out of their tombs and going into the city. Where else is that type of language used to describe a spiritual resurrection? Nowhere that I'm aware of.Daniel writes first of the spiritual resurrection of saints who had died in faith waiting for the promised Messiah to come. Matthew 27:52-53 is NOT a physical resurrection that shall come when the last trumpet sounds. It's a depiction of graves symbolically being opened and living (spiritual bodies) souls, (not physical bodies) being awakened and ascending to heaven with the Lord after His resurrection. None could spiritually go to heaven before Christ came and defeated both sin and death.
Not unto bodily immortality. I don't believe the ones who were bodily resurrected, as described in Matthew 27:52-53, were resurrected with immortal bodies, but rather in their mortal bodies. Like Lazarus.None shall be bodily resurrected until the hour coming, when the last trump sounds, and time for this earth shall be no more.
No one has a spiritual body yet except for Christ. That will not happen until the last trumpet. Read this carefully:In 1Cor 15 Paul writes not only of the physical bodily resurrection to immortality and incorruption, he also writes of where our eternal spirit goes when our physical body is dead and buried. Remember Christ promises that whosoever lives and believes in Him shall NEVER die. That's why Paul longed to be out of his body of death and corruption to ascend a spiritual body to heaven to be with the Lord which is far better. Paul through assurance and faith tells us that when we are absent from our bodies we shall be present with the Lord.
No, not in death. That is not what Paul taught. He said this will happen at the last trumpet. He very clearly taught that, so I'm baffled as to how you are missing it. This change of our bodies from being natural, dishonorable, weak, and mortal to spiritual, glorious, powerful and immortal will not happen until the last trumpet sounds at Christ's return.In life we are the image of natural man, of the earth. In death we shall be the image of the Lord from heaven, a spiritual body as are the angels of God in heaven.
Continue reading from there! He goes on to make it clear that this will happen at the last trumpet. Why are you interpreting this passage in isolation from 1 Corinthians 15:50-54?1 Corinthians 15:44-49 (KJV) It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
Not just immortal and incorruptible, but powerful and glorious. You are missing that Paul was contrasting our current bodies which are natural, weak, dishonorable, corruptible and mortal with the change of our bodies to being spiritual, powerful, glorious, incorruptible and immortal at the last trumpet when Christ returns. Notice in Revelation 6:9-11 and Revelation 20:4 that John wrote about seeing the souls of the dead in Christ. He did not see bodies, he saw their souls. That is because no one but Christ yet has an immortal spiritual body.Finally Paul writes of what we shall be when the last trumpet sounds and our physical body is resurrected immortal and incorruptible.
Makes sense. Thank you.Since scripture does not contradict itself, there are no scriptures which state all mortals are slain at the second coming leaving none to be ruled over.
Dying in this world is not even remotely the same as being damned to Hell for ETERNITY. Discernment brother, come on.How many children died in the flood, or in Sodom?
Luke 17
It does? So, how does it line up with passages like the following exactly?Are you allowed to post this???
It follows the pattern of Truth set forth by the LORD in His word and is easily understood................................
Pretty sure you are still in Adam's dead corruptible flesh, and the Holy Spirit just keeps your soul sealed until your physical body is dead.P
I have heard of that concept before, but for we who are born again Christians, the biological clock of "time" is internal, being only within the mortality of our being and is nowhere else in eternity. Time does not exist of itself, only within us and what we assign it to. God operates in the reverse of that, when He speaks to us using time.
Each of us who do have the Spirit of Christ now, have had our internal bio-clock turned off.
We now have the eternity of God Himself within us, who is Christ. So, in essence, we no longer live in "the box" of our biological clock. John 11:26, 1 John 5:12-13.
There is no future, another 1000 year period of "The Millennium" to come!! All of that has been fabricated and hatched through "the wisdom of men", the "mind" of their Flesh, "the natural man", aka "the man of sin".
Yes, in the mind of this body of death, the natural man, you are correct. But, as we both know, by being born again we now have the mind of Christ, who is Eternal.Pretty sure you are still in Adam's dead corruptible flesh, and the Holy Spirit just keeps your soul sealed until your physical body is dead.