A polite question for pretribbers

[stunnedbygrace]

I’m only interested in the answer a pretribber would give me. Those are the only answers I will be listening to or reading. (That doesn’t mean you can’t post another boxing match, just that I won’t read it. Lol) I’ve tried to ask the question in a thread or two but I guess it’s just gotten lost in the brouhaha.

So my question, what I want to hear you lay out for me, is how you fit into your eschatological framework, one particular passage. I’m looking for something I may not have considered in my brain regarding it. I won’t be arguing with you, I just really want to hear what you have to say about it.

Okay, so it says in Revelation that those who come out of the tribulation who did not receive the mark of the beast will be part of the first resurrection. How do you fit that verse into your framework? I’ll bold the parts that I can’t fit into pretrib in my brain.

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

Thank you, by the way, for giving me any thoughts about it I may not have seen.

 

[marks]

First and Second Resurrections are designating 2 resurrections of course, but only two, so if these are two instances of resurrection, we already run into problems because Jesus rose, the two witnesses will arise, various others, and they could be debated, but Jesus Himself, He is the firstfruits, so it's not just a certain resurrection day, it includes Him.

The second resurrection is substantially different from the first, in that John wrote, "I saw the dead . . ." The first resurrection, these lived and reigned with Christ, they are alive, the second are still dead.

I think these aren't simply consecutive resurrections, but are two kinds of resurrection, the Righteous unto life, and the unrighteous unto judgment and eternal death.

So then whether some be raised between Jesus and these martyrs, I don't see that being any issue. It seems to me that the 2 witnesses will have been raised. It may be that those who arose when Jesus died were also transformed into glory. Whether there be the dead and living in Christ to be raised and transformed would include those in their time, same as the OT saints, raised as will be Daniel "on the last day", the 1335th day.

As a pre-tribber, I'm a little different from the classic Calvary Chapel view, but this would be mainstream thinking on this question. And I happen to think it's valid myself, so I'll be happy to answer any questions you might have for me.

Much love!

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Thanks!

 

[Jay Ross]

Okay, so it says in Revelation that those who come out of the tribulation who did not receive the mark of the beast will be part of the first resurrection. How do you fit that verse into your framework? I’ll bold the parts that I can’t fit into pretrib in my brain.

The people who have lost their heads for the sake of the Gospel, have not come through the "Great Tribulation" as referenced in the scripture. They have lost their heads because the Gentiles hate the religion of Israel. At this present time, we are experiencing what is often referred to as the Time of Jacob's troubles. It is my understanding that that the great tribulation is still in our distant future, over 1,000 years in fact in our future.

At this present time what we are observing is the final attempt of the Gentiles to trample God's sanctuary and His earthly hosts, i.e., Israelites which will end with God Judging the heavenly hosts in heaven and the kings of the earth on the earth, and they will be imprisoned in the Bottomless pit to await the time of their punishment. We are told, at this time of judgement, that the kings of the earth will be imprisoned in the Bottomless pit, along with the judged heavenly hosts of Daniel 7:1-12, who are the four beast/winds of heaven, and in Rev. 20:1-3, Satan also is imprisoned in the Bottomless pit.

It is just after this time of the Judged heavenly hosts and the kings of the earth being imprisoned in the bottomless pit that that those who have lost their heads for their beliefs in God/Jesus will be resurrected, in our very near future, e.g., possibly within the next 25 or so years, to become part of the first resurrection. Everyone else will not be resurrected until after the Beast, the False prophet and Satan have been dispatched into the Lake of Fire. It is at this time that Christ will come in all of His Glory descending down out of heaven with all of the heavenly Host to judge the peoples of the earth.

It is at this time that the resurrection of those who are asleep will occur and those who are still alive will rise up to meet Christ in the air. As Daniel tells us in Daniel 12, some to everlasting life and some to everlasting contempt.

The problem seems to me is that many "Christians," timeline is screwed up a tad such that they are unable to perceive what the Scriptures actually teach, and they have come up with their fanciful explanations to justify their newfound beliefs.

Shalom

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Thanks.

 

[Marilyn C]

I’m only interested in the answer a pretribber would give me. Those are the only answers I will be listening to or reading. (That doesn’t mean you can’t post another boxing match, just that I won’t read it. Lol) I’ve tried to ask the question in a thread or two but I guess it’s just gotten lost in the brouhaha.

So my question, what I want to hear you lay out for me, is how you fit into your eschatological framework, one particular passage. I’m looking for something I may not have considered in my brain regarding it. I won’t be arguing with you, I just really want to hear what you have to say about it.

Okay, so it says in Revelation that those who come out of the tribulation who did not receive the mark of the beast will be part of the first resurrection. How do you fit that verse into your framework? I’ll bold the parts that I can’t fit into pretrib in my brain.

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

Thank you, by the way, for giving me any thoughts about it I may not have seen.

Hi stunned by grace,

Very good and important question. Let`s look at God`s word.

`Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth - those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.` (John 5: 28 & 29)

1. Resurrection to life.
2. Resurrection to condemnation.

Two TYPES of resurrections, one to life and the other to condemnation. That is the only types there are, so when someone is resurrected (before the final resurrection) then there is only one of two types that are possible.

We can tend to think of `first,` as first in the order, however God shows that `first,` is the resurrection to life.

Hope that is helpful. Marilyn.

 

[The Light]

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

Thank you, by the way, for giving me any thoughts about it I may not have seen.

The Word says that this is the 1st resurrection. Those that share in the first resurrection, over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

What else does Jesus say? In Revelation 1 we see that the Church, by the blood of Christ, hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father.


Revelation 1
4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;

5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

Here we see that the 24 elders are in heaven with reward crowns. You do not receive reward crowns until Jesus has come.

Revelation 4
4 And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.

Here we see the Church as kings and priests unto God in heaven, and we shall reign on the earth.

Revelation 5
9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;

10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

Here's the bottom line. Those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. But what of the Church. They are not on the earth when the mark of the beast is taking place. They are in heaven as kings and priests that share in the 1st resurrection. The Church are also priests of God that will reign on the earth.

 

[jeffweeder]

I’m only interested in the answer a pretribber would give me.

 

[GISMYS_7]

I’m only interested in the answer a pretribber would give me. Those are the only answers I will be listening to or reading. (That doesn’t mean you can’t post another boxing match, just that I won’t read it. Lol) I’ve tried to ask the question in a thread or two but I guess it’s just gotten lost in the brouhaha.

So my question, what I want to hear you lay out for me, is how you fit into your eschatological framework, one particular passage. I’m looking for something I may not have considered in my brain regarding it. I won’t be arguing with you, I just really want to hear what you have to say about it.

Okay, so it says in Revelation that those who come out of the tribulation who did not receive the mark of the beast will be part of the first resurrection. How do you fit that verse into your framework? I’ll bold the parts that I can’t fit into pretrib in my brain.

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

Thank you, by the way, for giving me any thoughts about it

Just believe God's Word!!

 

[The Light]

Just believe God's Word!!

She is looking for scriptures in God's Word that will help her know what to believe.

 

[GISMYS_7]

BELIEVE IT ALL!!!

 

[Enoch111]

Okay, so it says in Revelation that those who come out of the tribulation who did not receive the mark of the beast will be part of the first resurrection. How do you fit that verse into your framework? I’ll bold the parts that I can’t fit into pretrib in my brain.

Since I am a pre-tribber here is my explanation. "Come out of" can either mean "escaped out of" or "been subjected to". And in this case it is "escaped out of". Since the Great Tribulation (as seen in the Greek it is "the tribulation, the great") is a period of divine judgments on the unbelieving, the ungodly, and the wicked, it does not apply to the Church. Lot and his family are a good example, since Lot is actually called "righteous". So that huge multitude shown in Revelation 7 is the Church. Furthermore, there is nothing in Scripture which says that the whole Church is beheaded by the Antichrist.

Now regarding the Tribulation saints, they were beheaded during the Tribulation (not the Great Tribulation which comes 3 1/2 years after). Those are relatively few saints (probably mostly converted Jews) who refused to take the mark of the Beast. While their resurrection is a part of "the First Resurrection" it is the last part or "gleanings" of the First Resurrection (reserved for the saints). The First Resurrection is represented by a Hebrew harvest with (a) Christ as the first fruits, (b) the saints at the Resurrection/Rapture as the main harvest, and (c) the Tribulation saints as the gleanings.

 

[Tommy Cool]

It is never called a resurrection, because not everybody will be dead.

It is called …. Our gathering together unto Him, The coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, The departure, The day of redemption, Our hope, The day of Jesus Christ …and a few more

And while 1Th 4:16 does make reference to “the dead in Christ shall rise first” the word rise is the 3rd person plural form of the verb (anistēmi) it’s meaning is different from that of resurrection in Rev 20:5 which employs the nominative singular feminine noun (anastasis)

It is interesting that the verb (anistēmi) from 1Th 4:16 is future tense (which indicates future action, and sometimes a command - you will do this or that), its voice is middle (which indicates that the subject performs the action, and that commonly upon himself or for his benefit), and its mood is indicative (which describes a situation that actually is — as opposed to a situation that might be, is wished for, or is commanded to be)

 

[ewq1938]

And while 1Th 4:16 does make reference to “the dead in Christ shall rise first” the word rise is the 3rd person plural form of the verb (anistēmi) it’s meaning is different from that of resurrection in Rev 20:5 which employs the nominative singular feminine noun (anastasis)

The meaning isn't different, it's just a different way to say the same thing which is common in all languages.

"the dead in Christ rise first" which is linguistically related to "the first resurrection". Both are speaking of the same event.


1Th_4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:


"Rise first" is literally the same as "first resurrection" found here:

Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

first/G4413 resurrection/G386 is "protos anastasis"
Rise/G450 first/G4412 is "anistemi proton"

Proton and protos are related words that both mean "first". Proton is the neuter of the word protos. They are synonyms and are directly related words.

anastasis was created from it's root word, anistemi. They are synonyms and are directly related words.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

First and Second Resurrections are designating 2 resurrections of course, but only two, so if these are two instances of resurrection, we already run into problems because Jesus rose, the two witnesses will arise, various others, and they could be debated, but Jesus Himself, He is the firstfruits, so it's not just a certain resurrection day, it includes Him.

Thanks again for answering me.
I think this is a pretty strong answer.
Of course, I also see one might say the various others you mention shouldn’t be included because returned from the dead and risen with a new body seem slightly different things. And also, that would put the widows son (and various others) as first fruits before Jesus. Receiving your dead back to physical life seems a little different than resurrected with a new body. But then you already considered that as you said those could be debatable.

Your mind also goes to that odd verse about how they “saw many of their dead walking around,” doesn’t it? It gives me the impression that they didn’t so much talk to them but just saw them walking around, but it doesn’t specifically state that either way.

I‘ve thought also about first fruits, main harvest and gleaning. I definitely can see a case being made for the gleaning at the very end with those who helped/gave a cup of water/received a prophet. These are they the church can’t seem to see or fit into their rigid systematic framework.

I really can comfortably see first fruits as before the two larger harvests/2 resurrections.

A lot of big mysteries and curiosities.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

The people who have lost their heads for the sake of the Gospel, have not come through the "Great Tribulation" as referenced in the scripture.

I see this part too. I can also see a case for a repeat of them seeing many of their dead walking around when Jesus rose to the “come up here” of the two witnesses and others rising also then in a main harvest.

But I’m not sure we were meant to be able to figure out the exact time, and I find I can’t. I see it could happen anytime before the wrath of God and the Lamb. I lean now toward before wrath more than before trib, but then that would be knowing the time, which it says no one knows. Then again, [that day won’t come on you unawares] may come into play as in no one knows the day becoming won’t take you unawares. A “knowledge will increase” thing.
not sure I made myself clear on that last part.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

I’m only interested in the answer a pretribber would give me. Those are the only answers I will be listening to or reading. (That doesn’t mean you can’t post another boxing match, just that I won’t read it. Lol) I’ve tried to ask the question in a thread or two but I guess it’s just gotten lost in the brouhaha.

So my question, what I want to hear you lay out for me, is how you fit into your eschatological framework, one particular passage. I’m looking for something I may not have considered in my brain regarding it. I won’t be arguing with you, I just really want to hear what you have to say about it.

Okay, so it says in Revelation that those who come out of the tribulation who did not receive the mark of the beast will be part of the first resurrection. How do you fit that verse into your framework? I’ll bold the parts that I can’t fit into pretrib in my brain.

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

Thank you, by the way, for giving me any thoughts about it I may not have seen.

This isn't really hard tbh, people overthink things that God sees as simple as 1 and 2. The Righteous vs. the Wicked.

If you have a weekend with two baseball games between New York and L.A. and you go to the first game, it doesn't matter if you show up in the first inning or 9th inning, you still went to the first game.

The fact that those in Rev. 20:4 are resurrected AFTER Jesus' Second Coming/Advent tells us all we need to know, we see human being in Heaven in Rev. 4, 5, 7, and 19, who then return with Jesus. It is obvious the Righteous are Resurrected FIRST...........Then 1000 years later, after Jesus' 1000 year reign the Wicked are resurrected.

NOTICE, only those who died whilst the Beast LIVED (a small 3.5 year period) LIVE & REIGN with Jesus for his 1000 year reign, thus they are resurrected after Jesus returns, his bride is raised before the 70th week. The Bride, IMHO, goes back to heaven to help build the New Jerusalem, thus as New Jerusalem descends it is called "The Bride of Christ" and cities are not called inanimate objects like that per se, the Bride descends in New Jerusalem, IMHO.

When things do not fit in your mind, always use the simplest method to solve the problem. That would be that there are only two Resurrection, The Righteous and the Wicked. Meanwhile, those in Rev. 20:4 CAN NOT BE Resurrected at the same time as the Bride of Christ. It is not possible. Problem solved.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Hi stunned by grace,

Very good and important question. Let`s look at God`s word.

`Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth - those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.` (John 5: 28 & 29)

1. Resurrection to life.
2. Resurrection to condemnation.

Two TYPES of resurrections, one to life and the other to condemnation. That is the only types there are, so when someone is resurrected (before the final resurrection) then there is only one of two types that are possible.

We can tend to think of `first,` as first in the order, however God shows that `first,` is the resurrection to life.

Hope that is helpful. Marilyn.

I see this as too rigid and as approaching some danger. I see that some may be gleaned in the second resurrection. Those who gave a cup/helped His body. Those who accepted a prophet.
I think it’s important to not judge those outside the body because there is enough in many places to suggest that what we’ve been taught is incomplete and leads us to the danger of doing the thing we were warned not to do.
But I’ve read enough of your posts to think you probably will vociferously disagree. And that’s okay. You can’t see what you don’t see.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Since I am a pre-tribber here is my explanation. "Come out of" can either mean "escaped out of" or "been subjected to". And in this case it is "escaped out of". Since the Great Tribulation (as seen in the Greek it is "the tribulation, the great") is a period of divine judgments on the unbelieving, the ungodly, and the wicked, it does not apply to the Church. Lot and his family are a good example, since Lot is actually called "righteous". So that huge multitude shown in Revelation 7 is the Church. Furthermore, there is nothing in Scripture which says that the whole Church is beheaded by the Antichrist.

Now regarding the Tribulation saints, they were beheaded during the Tribulation (not the Great Tribulation which comes 3 1/2 years after). Those are relatively few saints (probably mostly converted Jews) who refused to take the mark of the Beast. While their resurrection is a part of "the First Resurrection" it is the last part or "gleanings" of the First Resurrection (reserved for the saints). The First Resurrection is represented by a Hebrew harvest with (a) Christ as the first fruits, (b) the saints at the Resurrection/Rapture as the main harvest, and (c) the Tribulation saints as the gleanings.

I do see a great difference in the first and second halves. I think probably when those witnesses are taken back up, Gods long suffering has…well, “plucked His last nerve” sounds pretty apt. And THEN is when “I will destroy the righteous along with the wicked” makes sense to me. Not in a completely rigid way as concerns the second resurrection judgement but in a rigid way as concerns physical death. That might take more explanation to show my mind on it, I don’t know.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

It is never called a resurrection, because not everybody will be dead.

It is called …. Our gathering together unto Him, The coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, The departure, The day of redemption, Our hope, The day of Jesus Christ …and a few more

And while 1Th 4:16 does make reference to “the dead in Christ shall rise first” the word rise is the 3rd person plural form of the verb (anistēmi) it’s meaning is different from that of resurrection in Rev 20:5 which employs the nominative singular feminine noun (anastasis)

It is interesting that the verb (anistēmi) from 1Th 4:16 is future tense (which indicates future action, and sometimes a command - you will do this or that), its voice is middle (which indicates that the subject performs the action, and that commonly upon himself or for his benefit), and its mood is indicative (which describes a situation that actually is — as opposed to a situation that might be, is wished for, or is commanded to be)

Oh my brain, my brain! I can’t. Can you put that in English for me?