Ammillennialism's illegitimate redefining and switching around of the meaning of Greek words and biblical concepts

[rwb]

Amils typically argue that if the first resurrection(Revelation 20:4-6) is bodily, then those who are alive and remain at Christ’s return would not have part in it, since they never physically died. Therefore, they conclude the resurrection must be spiritual and applicable to the here and now so that all believers can participate.

Amillennialism believes the "first resurrection" is indeed PHYSICAL! It's the bodily resurrection of Christ that man MUST partake of before we physically die for us to overcome the second death. How does a man have part in the physical resurrection of Christ who btw is the first resurrection to immortal/incorruptible physical life? We MUST be born again! Not resurrected physically but BORN AGAIN! We don't partake of Christ's resurrection life when we are bodily resurrected! We partake of Christ's resurrection (first resurrection) when we are spiritually born again through Christ's Spirit in us. If we have not partaken of the resurrection life through Christ's resurrection from the dead before we physically die, then when we are resurrected physically from the grave, when the last trumpet sounds, it will be to stand before God at the GWTJ to be judged according to what is written in the books and the book of life and be cast into the lake of fire that is the second death.

 

[WPM]

@Hazelelponi Those who love God, love His Word which His inspired prophets and apostles wrote, and seek to fully understand what the authors who penned the scriptures meant in each and every verse.

Do you believe it's important to do that?

I do - because words in the Bible and what the authors who penned the scriptures meant by them are not, and were not ever meant to be defined by abstract extra-biblical statements plucked not out of scripture, but out of the minds of fallible human beings with theological biases.

Statements like these:

In both the LXX and NT:

ζωὴ can denote ordinary creaturely life, not only eternal life.

ζάω can be used figuratively or theologically, not only for bodily animation.

Lexicons define ranges of meaning, not iron rules. Treating ζάω as “always bodily life” and ζωὴ as “always spiritual life” is itself an example of illegitimate semantic restriction, the very error being alleged. ..

etc etc

ALL statements like the above FAIL to ascertain what the authors who penned the Bible meant by words LIKE the words brought up in this thread - and what they meant in each and every verse of scripture where they used the words.

ALL such statements about lexicon etc - derived from outside the Bible - fail, in respect of the words mentioned in this thread to provide a COMPETE list of all the verses using the word zao in the New Testament in order to prove which verses are NOT referring to being alive but rather to the spiritual life [zoe] which is the source of it,

and fail to provide adequate reason for switching the meaning in some verses only - even though the word zao (being alive) never refers (in the verses in the Bible where they appear) to the zoe (life) that is the source of being alive,

and fail to provide a COMPLETE list of all the verses in the New Testament using the word zoe in order to prove which verses using the word are using it NOT in reference to life, but in reference to being alive,

and fail to provide a COMPLETE list of all the verses in the New Testament using the words égersis; anístēmi; and egeírō and anástasis (the words used in reference to the resurrection) (i.e whenever the words are used in reference to the resurrection because the words égersis; anístēmi; and egeírō are not always used in reference to the resurrection: Sometimes they are used for rising up as in "get up!", or being raised up as a leader, or rising from sleep in a normal sense),

but whenever the above words are not being used in a normal sense, they are referring to the resurrection - in each verse.

So statements about lexicon etc that fail to provide a COMPLETE list of all the verses in the New Testament using the words égersis; anístēmi; and egeírō and anástasis where the words are referring to the resurrection, are not derived from the verses where the words appear - hence they are not derived from the Bible

- they are derived from extra-biblical sources produced by the fallible minds of humans and simply accepted and believed by other humans who are not prepared to take the time and effort to search for and read each and every verse and the passage and context in which it was used by the person who penned the scripture.

and so in the same way and for the same reasons, they also fail to provide a COMPLETE list of all the verses in the New Testament using the words zoopoieo and suzōopoiéō and make a comparison between them all in order to prove which verses are NOT referring to the quickening of the human body (but to the quickening of the human spirit instead, as they claim).

It's a complete failure on the part of many churches and theological institutions NOT TO look IN the Bible where those words appear - in each and every verse where those words appear - to see what the authors who penned the scriptures were talking about in those verses / in that passage

- instead of listening to and repeating the intellectual generalizations and definitions created in fallible human minds (which are often based not on what the authors who penned the scriptures were talking about and what they meant by the word) but on extra-biblical theological biases.

Those who love God, love His Word which His inspired prophets and apostles wrote, and seek to fully understand what the authors who penned the scriptures meant in each and every verse.

Indeed, whoever loves God enough WILL love His inspired Word enough to look for each and every New Testament verse using each word when it comes to these subjects, comparing the verses with one another to ascertain if what the authors who penned the verses were talking about, and what they meant by the words, is what those who have never bothered to do this, SAY the words mean.

Failure to do so = not interested enough in what the authors who penned the scriptures, who were inspired by God to write what they did, meant and were seeking to convey.

Copy @David in NJ

Instead of giving all these evasive repetitive patronizing lectures, and all these evasive cut-and-paste posts, how about actually address all the counter-arguments that refute your claims.

 

[WPM]

Yet you placed a "love" under the post of one of the people who frequent these forums who does exactly that in almost ALL of his posts (@Spiritual Israelite) - only because he was placing it for my OP - which you seem to assume is posted out of a desire to outsmart arrogant people like that.

Please read THIS post which I left for you - because that post will tell you what my motive is - my motive is only to uphold the truth of what those who penned the scriptures wrote, nothing more.

What was your motive for the "Love" you placed under the post of @Spiritual Israelite where he expressed nothing more or less than his usual insults and slurs which have nothing to do with the subject?

I only ask because when I see that "love" that you posted under his post filled with his usual trolling arrogance and insults and false accusations, then something is not adding up here regarding what you claim above about your own motives.

Praise Jesus for your salvation, and God the Father for calling you. May you continue to grow in the knowledge of Jesus and in grace - and in wisdom - because by placing a love under the post of someone who proves all the time by his own choices of words that his motives are the exact motives that you are falsely accusing me of, you either lack discernment, or we need to question what you claim regarding your own motives.

God bless you.

LOL. You are so infantile and petty. Get over it. Grow up.

 

[rwb]

The living are not exempt from resurrection---they undergo it by transformation rather than reanimation.

Your confusing the transformation of mankind who has been born again, with the bodily resurrection of all the dead in the hour that is coming when the last trumpet sounds and time shall be no longer. Man is transformed through spiritual re-birth, not resurrection. And all the dead shall be bodily resurrected either to immortal life or damnation when Christ comes again.

 

[rwb]

Therefore, the claim that the living do not need resurrection is false.

Those still physically alive when Christ comes again only need to be changed from mortal to immortal, and corruptible to incorruptible as Paul tells us when he writes "we shall not all sleep (die) but we shall all be changed". This happens "in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump." "The dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed."

1 Corinthians 15:51-52 (KJV) Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

 

[Zao is life]

Revelation 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

Revelation 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live(zao).

and his deadly wound was healed(verse 3) = and did live(zao)(verse 14)


What should we make of this use of zao?

It's not my "guess" to say that we should make the same of the word zao above as in this verse:

"Now the beast was seized, and along with him the false prophet who had performed the signs on his behalf - signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. Both of them were thrown alive [zao] into the lake of fire burning with sulfur." (Revelation 19:20).

IMO the question to ask is, Is it talking about two individuals represented by the symbolism used in Revelation 13, or about two groups of individuals, each one of which will be cast alive [zao] into the lake of fire?

I believe it's only two individuals - because Revelation 19 says this:

19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive [zao] into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
21 And the remnant (remainder) 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.

The fowls were filled with their flesh closes what was said here:

17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.

Those are "the armies of the beast" who were killed (slain). Their fate is not the same as the fate of the beast and his false prophet.

Also, the beast is spoken of as being one person - and 8th king - in Revelation 17.

So that's my opinion of it.

Fact remains also though that every verse using the word zao in the New Testament is NOT EVER talking about the zoe (life) which is the source of it. zao means "to be alive".

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No brother, that is the label that others created = not me

I didn't create the label Amillennialism, either, but my belief fits that label, generally speaking (not all Amils believe everything the same). The belief that the thousand years occurs after Christ returns is called Premillennialism and that is what you believe. Your gibberish about "-isms" means nothing because no one here invented any of them.

i do not believe in 'isms' except Baptism of the Holy Spirit and if there be any other approved by the Word.

You believe the same as what is taught in Premillennialism, generally speaking. Obviously, some Premils are dispensationalists and you don't agree with them. But, your view of the thousand years is in line with Premillennialism. The Holy Spirit would never teach that view since it isn't taught in scripture.

i believe JESUS and His Commandments = Matthew 4:4 , Deuteronomy 4:2 , Proverbs 30:5-6 , Revelation 1:3 and 22:18-19

Good for you. Do you think Amils don't believe Jesus and His commandments? Amil beliefs are largely based on things that Jesus taught, such as in Matthew 24:35-39, Matthew 25:31-46, Matthew 28:18, Luke 17:26-37 and John 5:28-29.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yet you placed a "love" under the post of one of the people who frequent these forums who does exactly that in almost ALL of his posts (@Spiritual Israelite) - only because he was placing it for my OP - which you seem to assume is posted out of a desire to outsmart arrogant people like that.

Arrogant people like that, he says. Every one of your posts oozes arrogance. You act like you are the chosen one who has the proper understanding of the words "zao" and "zoe" and no one else here does. You are the one who thinks that everyone else is wrong about what happens when Jesus returns because you have dead people being resurrected and then walking around on the earth for a thousand years after that, which scripture doesn't even come close to teaching. You are the one way up on your high horse who needs to be humbled. You are too prideful and too lacking in self awareness to see that.

Please read THIS post which I left for you - because that post will tell you what my motive is - my motive is only to uphold the truth of what those who penned the scriptures wrote, nothing more.

You're not fooling anyone with this. I could point out many other posts that are full of personal insults without addressing any of the arguments that were presented.

What was your motive for the "Love" you placed under the post of @Spiritual Israelite where he expressed nothing more or less than his usual insults and slurs which have nothing to do with the subject?

LOL. I have gone to GREAT LENGTHS addressing your false claims about scripture, but you naturally only want to focus on the times when you I call out your nonsense.

I only ask because when I see that "love" that you posted under his post filled with his usual trolling arrogance and insults and false accusations, then something is not adding up here regarding what you claim above about your own motives.

What false accusations did I make? None. You made that up. That, in itself, is a false accusation.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Yet you placed a "love" under the post of one of the people who frequent these forums who does exactly that in almost ALL of his posts (@Spiritual Israelite) - only because he was placing it for my OP - which you seem to assume is posted out of a desire to outsmart arrogant people like that.

Please read THIS post which I left for you - because that post will tell you what my motive is - my motive is only to uphold the truth of what those who penned the scriptures wrote, nothing more.

What was your motive for the "Love" you placed under the post of @Spiritual Israelite where he expressed nothing more or less than his usual insults and slurs which have nothing to do with the subject?

I only ask because when I see that "love" that you posted under his post filled with his usual trolling arrogance and insults and false accusations, then something is not adding up here regarding what you claim above about your own motives.

Praise Jesus for your salvation, and God the Father for calling you. May you continue to grow in the knowledge of Jesus and in grace - and in wisdom - because by placing a love under the post of someone who proves all the time by his own choices of words that his motives are the exact motives that you are falsely accusing me of, you either lack discernment, or we need to question what you claim regarding your own motives.

God bless you.

Since it's so popular on this forum then let me be perfectly blunt. You are not my daddy.

I give loves for myriad reasons, everything from support and encouragement in the Lord to just enjoying the Scripture cited to sometimes even full-on agreement with a post.

It is not now, nor will it ever be, your authority I sit under. I already have authority over my head. I owe you no explanation for who I give emojis to or why I might give them.

 

[rwb]

The reason for your confusion (and constant avoidance) is that you do not believe in the total depravity of man. You do not see that man is spiritually dead before salvation and needs spiritually resurrected. This is at the root of your ignorance and false teaching.

I'm not trying to nitpick because I know you believe salvation is our spiritual resurrection. I believe calling new birth our spiritual resurrection adds confusion into the discussion. When we are born again, we have not been resurrected, rather when we believe and we are born again we are already physically alive. I believe that's why Paul does not say you who were dead in trespasses and sins have been "quickened" or made spiritually alive. IOW our spirit alive but spiritually dead needs only be made alive, but does not have to be resurrected which would be the case if the spirit giving our mortal body physical life was without life whatsoever.

In pointing out the ignorance and false teaching regarding the "first resurrection" and when man has part in it, would be less confusing if we start calling the way we are eternally saved is not by being spiritually resurrected, but when our living spirit dead to the Spirit of God in trespasses and sins must be BORN AGAIN, not resurrected.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Those still physically alive when Christ comes again only need to be changed from mortal to immortal, and corruptible to incorruptible as Paul tells us when he writes "we shall not all sleep (die) but we shall all be changed". This happens "in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump." "The dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed."

1 Corinthians 15:51-52 (KJV) Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Right. Being changed is not the same as being resurrected. He is coming up with the idea that even those who are alive and remain until the second coming of Christ have part in the first resurrection as a way to try to reconcile his view with what it says in Revelation 20:6. But, no one can reconcile Premillennialism with Revelation 20:6. It is only those who have part in the first resurrection who are considered blessed and holy and of whom can be said that the second death has no power over them. Being bodily resurrected is not a requirement for having part in the first resurrection and being made a priest of God the Father and Christ with the second death having no power over you. If that was the case, then those who are alive and remain until the coming of Christ would not have part in the first resurrection (since they will not be dead and have a need to be resurrected) and would not be considered blessed and holy, would not be priests of God and Christ and would not avoid the second death.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Since it's so popular on this forum then let me be perfectly blunt. You are not my daddy.

I give loves for myriad reasons, everything from support and encouragement in the Lord to just enjoying the Scripture cited to sometimes even full-on agreement with a post.

He's just jealous. He's very childish, as you can see.

It is not now, nor will it ever be, your authority I sit under. I already have authority over my head. I owe you no explanation for who I give emojis to or why I might give them.

Amen.

 

[Zao is life]

LOL. You are so infantile and petty. Get over it. Grow up.

@Hazelelponi by placing a love under that remark even after I messaged you directly about motives you have shown your claim below up to be not worth more than the bytes of electronic data it took to store them:

I’m not here to compete, posture, or “outsmart” anyone. I’m here because my hope is in Jesus Christ alone, and I believe that hope is worth sharing.

Sure. Does the Lord Jesus Christ fully believe you about your first sentence above and how perfectly good your motives are?

 

[Zao is life]

Since it's so popular on this forum then let me be perfectly blunt. You are not my daddy.

I give loves for myriad reasons, everything from support and encouragement in the Lord to just enjoying the Scripture cited to sometimes even full-on agreement with a post.

It is not now, nor will it ever be, your authority I sit under. I already have authority over my head. I owe you no explanation for who I give emojis to or why I might give them.

You are arrogant. Not much fruit of the Spirit coming out of your mouth, lately. Something wrong with your motives today? Or are your words always like this?

I was pointing you to the authority of the Word of God in all my posts - referring back to the scriptures - unlike those whose posts you love, who place the "authority" of their own personal opinions and interpretations above the Word of God, whose posts are almost always so full of pride and arrogance and troll language.

Just in case you thought you were my teacher. Sorry but - you are not the apostles who penned the New Testament. You can't even teach yourself much and can't help but cover up your own arrogance and bad motives with appeals to your condition. I have known plenty who have worse conditions who never seem to lack humility and do not display the kind of pride and arrogance you do.

 

[Davidpt]

Amillennialism believes the "first resurrection" is indeed PHYSICAL! It's the bodily resurrection of Christ that man MUST partake of before we physically die for us to overcome the second death. How does a man have part in the physical resurrection of Christ who btw is the first resurrection to immortal/incorruptible physical life? We MUST be born again! Not resurrected physically but BORN AGAIN! We don't partake of Christ's resurrection life when we are bodily resurrected! We partake of Christ's resurrection (first resurrection) when we are spiritually born again through Christ's Spirit in us. If we have not partaken of the resurrection life through Christ's resurrection from the dead before we physically die, then when we are resurrected physically from the grave, when the last trumpet sounds, it will be to stand before God at the GWTJ to be judged according to what is written in the books and the book of life and be cast into the lake of fire that is the second death.

That's fine. Except not all Amils believe only OSAS is Biblical, and that NOSAS isn't. Some Amils believe NOSAS is also Biblical. You then end up with a false teaching in regards to Revelation 20:6. Even though the text plainly says that those that have part in the first resurrection are blessed and holy, that on such the 2nd death has no power, Amil combined with NOSAS just made John out to be a liar. Amil combined with NOSAS just made verse 6 conditional when there is no such conditions being implied.

Does this mean that the solution is, abandon NOSAS, now there is no conflict with Amil's interpretation of Revelation 20:6? No, that is not the solution since one would be denying something Biblical, that NOSAS is also true. The solution is Premil, since Premil has no issues like this. Premil does not need to add or take away from the text like Amil combined with NOSAS needs to.

Per Premil no one could possibly have part in the first resurrection then lose it the next minute, such as Amil combined with NOSAS falsely teaches. And the reason is simple. Those that fall away, fall away before the first resurrection, not after it. Therefore, they never have part in the first resurrection to begin with, and that it is not reasonable, that after having put on bodily immortality that one can somehow lose that bodily immortality. @Zao is life might disagree with that, though. I'm not certain. His position in regards to some of that is not entirely clear to me. At least not yet anyway.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

@Hazelelponi by placing a love under that remark even after I messaged you directly about motives you have shown your claim below up to be not worth more than the bytes of electronic data it took to store them:

You are infantile and petty, as WPM said. He stated a fact. What is wrong with that?

 

[David in NJ]

I didn't create the label Amillennialism, either, but my belief fits that label, generally speaking (not all Amils believe everything the same). The belief that the thousand years occurs after Christ returns is called Premillennialism and that is what you believe. Your gibberish about "-isms" means nothing because no one here invented any of them.


You believe the same as what is taught in Premillennialism, generally speaking. Obviously, some Premils are dispensationalists and you don't agree with them. But, your view of the thousand years is in line with Premillennialism. The Holy Spirit would never teach that view since it isn't taught in scripture.


Good for you. Do you think Amils don't believe Jesus and His commandments? Amil beliefs are largely based on things that Jesus taught, such as in Matthew 24:35-39, Matthew 25:31-46, Matthew 28:18, Luke 17:26-37 and John 5:28-29.

Correction = i am not against you or anyone for we are in Christ and HE is for us.

'isms' separate us

i believe and desire to be Blessed by every word that proceeds from the Mouth of GOD

REJECT amillinelism , premillenialism, catholicism, protestism and especially ecumenicalism

Let us encourage each other daily to "Love the LORD GOD with all our heart soul mind and strength."

The One 'ism' we must Believe and seek is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit = John chapter 4 , John 14:15-17 , Acts 1:1-5

 

[Zao is life]

Satan really hates this thread. Too much truth. The ministers of his corruptions of the Word of God are out with all their fiery arrows of sulphur, full of his words again

Here's a for @Spiritual Israelite and another for @WPM to place under this post and a for @Hazelelponi regarding their wars on behalf of those who corrupt the scriptures (in case y'all can't find the buttons in your haste).

@David in NJ @Davidpt I'm only answering you guys' posts in this thread now (if you answer or comment on or disagree with any more of my posts in this thread) because not one of the others can support their false claims regarding Revelation 20:4 - so I'm ignoring them all because that sulphur kind of smells.

I haven't answered @Lizbeth 's first post (though she seems in the same camp as the others) only because I hadn't got to do so yet, but I think I will give it a miss.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Instead of giving all these evasive repetitive patronizing lectures, and all these evasive cut-and-paste posts, how about actually address all the counter-arguments that refute your claims.

Because he likes to use all of the whining about our motives and so on to divert attention away from the fact that he has nothing to refute our arguments.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Correction = i am not against you or anyone for we are in Christ and HE is for us.

'isms' separate us

i believe and desire to be Blessed by every word that proceeds from the Mouth of GOD

REJECT amillinelism , premillenialism, catholicism, protestism and especially ecumenicalism

Let us encourage each other daily to "Love the LORD GOD with all our heart soul mind and strength."

The One 'ism' we must Believe and seek is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit = John chapter 4 , John 14:15-17 , Acts 1:1-5

I'm going to be honest with you here. This is not the forum for you. You should spend time on a forum discussing Christian behavior. This is an end times forum where end times scriptures are discussed and debated. You don't debate at all. You just make claims and act like that's enough. You don't exegete any scripture or make any coherent arguments at all to support your claims.

This forum is a place where beliefs that equate with what labels or "isms" like amillennialism and premillennialism teach. You act like these labels or "isms" are evil or something. No, they just provide an easier way of describing what someone believes in a general sense. Of course, not all Amils believe everything the same and not all Premils believe everything the same. But, those labels tell you some things about what someone believes, such as their understanding of the timing of the thousand years in Revelation 20. There's nothing wrong with using labels for that purpose.