The Coming of Christ and the Kingdoms — a Clear Chronology of events.

[LoveYeshua]

Why should anyone listen to you "trying" (and I emphasize trying) to explain your doctrine AGAIN? Posting the same thing again and again does not change the error of your opinions! Instead of re-posting the same thing again, why don't you answer the questions presented to you in this thread? I suspect you don't answer because your doctrines cannot be biblically supported because they are based on either what you have been taught or what you think might support your conclusions.

And you what do you believe on all of this matter, I am listening.

 

[rwb]

Revelation Texts shows there are two resurrections. John does not use the exact phrase “second resurrection,” but he makes the contrast very clear by calling the first one blessed and holy, and then showing a later resurrection for the rest of the dead. Let me explain carefully.

In Revelation 20:4–6, John describes the first resurrection. These are the saints who belong to Christ, who are raised and given life to reign with Him for a thousand years. Verse 6 says, “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.” This resurrection is unto life, victory, and blessing.

But then John says in Revelation 20:5, “The rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished.” These are those who were not part of the first resurrection. After the thousand years, they are raised, not to reign with Christ, but to stand before the great white throne for judgment (Revelation 20:11–13). This is the second resurrection, though John does not use those exact words. Yet, the very mention of a “first resurrection” in Revelation 20:6 clearly points to a subsequent one. All whose names are not found in the Book of Life are then cast into the lake of fire, which is called the second death (Revelation 20:14–15).

You imagine two bodily resurrections of mankind because there must be two separate bodily resurrections one thousand years apart to fit your doctrine. But you IGNORE the verses that you've been shown that speak of only one bodily resurrection of mankind in an hour coming when the last trumpet sounds that Christ has come again. Reconcile this contradiction, and if you cannot, you would do well to rethink what you have been taught! Scripture NEVER speaks of two bodily resurrections! We read only of the "first resurrection" and ONE bodily resurrection of ALL the dead in the graves that shall be when Christ comes again.

 

[rwb]

And you what do you believe on all of this matter, I am listening.

Go back and read what I and others have already shown you from the Word of God in this post! Stop ignoring what your doctrines cannot biblically explain.

 

[LoveYeshua]

You imagine two bodily resurrections of mankind because there must be two separate bodily resurrections one thousand years apart to fit your doctrine. But you IGNORE the verses that you've been shown that speak of only one bodily resurrection of mankind in an hour coming when the last trumpet sounds that Christ has come again. Reconcile this contradiction, and if you cannot, you would do well to rethink what you have been taught! Scripture NEVER speaks of two bodily resurrections! We read only of the "first resurrection" and ONE bodily resurrection of ALL the dead in the graves that shall be when Christ comes again.

the contradiction is from Paul not me! it is people's
error to put paul before jesus or the ogirinal apostles but you have not figured this out yet.

I imagine nothing, all is from scripture that you reject specifically the detailed chronology in the book of revelations. well too bad for you.

 

[rwb]

And you what do you believe on all of this matter, I am listening.

You think John alludes to "two" bodily resurrections because he uses the term "first resurrection." You mistakenly think there must be two bodily resurrections separated by one thousand years without a single verse to prove what you assume. Think, why would John write having part in the "first resurrection" is how man is set free of the second death? Since the first resurrection cannot be the physical resurrection of mankind, what or whose resurrection that frees believers from the second death is John speaking of?

 

[rwb]

the contradiction is from paul not me!

That's simply silly! There are no contradictions to be found in Scripture. The only apparent contradictions appear when we have not rightly divided the Word of God.

 

[LoveYeshua]

That's simply silly! There are no contradictions to be found in Scripture. The only apparent contradictions appear when we have not rightly divided the Word of God.

You are a Paulinist through and through I see it now.

 

[rwb]

the contradiction is from Paul not me! it is people's
error to put paul before jesus or the ogirinal apostles but you have not figured this out yet.

I imagine nothing, all is from scripture that you reject specifically the detailed chronology in the book of revelations. well too bad for you.

What are you talking about? Do you think the words Paul writes are not coming from inspiration of the Holy Spirit in Him? I can assure you the words of Paul NEVER contradict the message of Christ.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 (KJV) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[LoveYeshua]

I am not too interested in the book of Revelation. It is an obscure book and everybody interprets it differently. Its "canonicity" was still disputed as late as in the 4th century.

I personally think that, the 99% of it happened in the 1st century, with potentially the 1,000 years beginning in the first century, but spanning across some longer period. But I am not trying to explain all the verses in it. It would be futile with so much ancient symbolism and metaphors and with incomplete historical records.

I agree it is a difficult book and many of it's prophecies are still not yet fully revealed as the time is not set for that.

many Believe what you believe, I did consider but it says that Christ would reign 1000 years and would be visible at his second advent.

 

[Zao is life]

Revelation 20:4–6 clearly shows two groups: those who are raised to reign with Christ a thousand years, and “the rest of the dead” who do not live again until the thousand years are finished. If all were raised at once, John would not have made this distinction. Jesus also spoke of a “resurrection of life” and a “resurrection of condemnation” (John 5:28–29), showing two outcomes, not one single event for all. The first resurrection is not simply Christ’s, but of those who are raised to reign with Him before the thousand years are over.

I agree with the timing - partly because Amillennialists cannot get around the fact that the souls spoken of in Revelation 20:4 are identified by the fact that they did not worship the beast or receive his mark or the number of his name on their right hands or on their foreheads.

I have yet to have an Amillennialist address that fact - without ever answering it, they always divert their answer away from the question, instead speaking about things like "the binding of the strong man" etc.

Your words, "two outcomes, not one single event" just made something which is very confusing make more sense

- except that we are told in Revelation 11:18 that the time of the judging of the dead occurs when the 7th trumpet sounds:

"And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth."

Yet Revelation 19:21 says that "the remnant [loipoy] were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.";

and Revelation 20:5 says that "the rest [loipoy] of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished." and says that this (resurrection of those who had not worshiped the beast) "is the first resurrection [anastasis - which always refers to the resurrection of the body in the New Testament, in all other verses where the word is used].

That agrees with the prophets and saints, and them that fear God's name being rewarded as Revelation 11:18 states will happen when the 7th trumpet has sounded and the kingdoms of this world shall have become the kingdoms of our LORD and of His Christ.

Besides this, there is a lot of scripture speaking about Satan's current activities in this world in his deception of the nations, but there are no scriptures stating that Satan has been bound in terms of his ability to deceive the nations (before eisegesis is employed by Amillennialists to add meaning to texts that isn't there, and isn't implied) .

So the exegetical explanation of the timing for the judgment of the dead is in favor of what you said:​

Revelation 20:4–6 clearly shows two groups: those who are raised to reign with Christ a thousand years, and “the rest of the dead” who do not live again until the thousand years are finished. If all were raised at once, John would not have made this distinction. Jesus also spoke of a “resurrection of life” and a “resurrection of condemnation” (John 5:28–29), showing two outcomes, not one single event for all. The first resurrection is not simply Christ’s, but of those who are raised to reign with Him before the thousand years are over.