It's not entirely clear to me what you are meaning here? You might need to expand on this some.
How can Premils possibly be wrong that there is a gap between 1 Cor 15:23 and 1 Cor 15:24?
- Thread starter Davidpt
- Start date
-
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!
It's not entirely clear to me what you are meaning here? You might need to expand on this some.
When Jesus comes in His glory, Jesus said, in Matthew 19:28, “Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
Premils have no answer to the fact that Scripture shows the regeneration of the earth, heavens and elements to occur at Christ’s return, not after some supposed future millennial kingdom blighted with sin and sinners, dying and crying, corruption and crime, war and terror of the Premil scenario, including the pointless slaughter of countless innocent animals during that period.
The fact is: sin, death, disease, Satan, the wicked, wickedness and decay corrupt this current age, but are banished from the age to come at the end with the regeneration of the whole cosmos.
I agree with what Albert Barnes says on “the regeneration" here: “the word also means any great change, or a restoration of things to a former state or to a better state. In this sense it is probably used here. It refers to that great revolution-that restoration of order in the universe-that universal new birth which will occur when the dead shall rise, and all human things shall be changed, and a new order of things shall start up out of the ruins of the old, when the Son of man shall come to judgment. The passage, then, should be read, ‘Ye which have followed me shall, as a reward in the great day of the resurrection of the dead, and of forming the new and eternal order of things-the day of judgment, the regeneration-be signally honored and blessed’.”
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
You said
The things in bold is not at the end of this age
It will be at the end of his millenium kingdom.
So when you base your theory on a belief it is the end of this age,. You are starting on a wrong basis.. which means the rest of your theses may be wrong also..
If nothing else, at least you agree that new Jerusalem is meant by the beloved city in Revelation 20. The majority of Premils disagree that the NJ is meant. Except you have the earth empty during the thousand years, as in no humans dwelling upon it, which then makes nonsense of verse 8-- the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. Where that alone obviously proves that humans are still dwelling on the earth during the thousand years since these in verse 8 just don't appear out of nowhere all of a sudden. Except SDAs think they have the solution, that it is the rest of the dead being resurrected and coming back to life, thus they appearing out of nowhere all of a sudden. Which then contradicts Zechariah 14:16-19, for one, since that passage already proves the earth is not void of humans post the 2nd coming.
What is your position then, as in, Premil, Amil, or Postmil? Are you perhaps Postmil?
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
The fact you are Premil why would you then think that the coming meant in 1 Corinthians 15:23 is not meaning a coming in the end of this age but is meaning a coming after the millennium? Doesn't this contradict the fact that there is a coming of Christ in the end of this age? Maybe you are a SDA, maybe that explains why we are not on the same page here? But if not that, I don't know why you would, as a Premil, take the coming meant in 1 Corinthians 15:23 to not be meaning a coming in the end of this age? That verse only mentions 1 coming of Christ in the future, not multiple comings. Therefore, it has to be meaning the coming of Christ that happens in the end of this present age. That doesn't have to mean that verse 24 must happen immediately after verse 23, though.
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
Because Jesus has not started to rule yet
People will still die after he returns.
No. He comes to set up his kingdom. Not complete it.. That will happen 1000 years later
1 cor 15 24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. 27 For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him,” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. 28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.
Can you tell me where it speaks of Jesus coming in this passage? I do not see this say anything about his coming, but what will happen at the end
The OP has to do with verse 23 in relation to verse 24, though. It is in verse 23 that records a coming, not verse 24. Premils generally argue, as I do as well, that the coming in verse 23 happens in the end of this age and that there is then a gap that follows that before verse 24 is fullfilled. And in this gap that follows the coming in verse 23 it consists of the thousand years, satan's little season, then the great white throne judgment.
In case it's not clear for some reason, I am arguing that this in verse 23---afterward they that are Christ's at his coming---is meaning in the end of this present age, but that verse 24 is not also meaning in the end of this present age since there has to be millennial period first before verse 24 can be fulfilled.
My position would look like such.
they that are Christ's at his coming(1 Corinthians 15:23) = the bodily return of Christ in the end of this present age---followed by the thousand years---followed by satan's little season---followed by the great white throne judgment---followed by 1 Corinthians 15:24 which is also meaning 1 Corinthians 15:28.
For the life of me then, I'm still confused as to what you are having a dispute with per my interpretation of these things since pretty much most Premils, if not all, see it pretty much the same way?
Last edited:
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
First and importantly: as you well know: there is no 1,000 years mentioned (or recognized) in this passage. You have to force it into the sacred text. The reality is: this passage forbids it. The end is indeed the end! This proves that the coming of Christ is climactic and final.
Second, there is no time lapse or gap here. Your theology seems to demand that.
Third, when it says "as in Adam all die" it is talking about a current ongoing process of death that came upon all men as a consequence of sin. When it states "Christ the firstfruits" it is talking about who Christ is now. He will never be divested of this honour. These are current standings it is describing. Whilst these are fruit of past events, they are actually referring to the fruit instead of an historic event. So your insertions are unnecessary and wrong. Let the text speak for itself! Whatever way you alter the text there still isn't (and never will be) a sin-cursed semi-cursed/semi-glorious millennium in the text.
So where is any mention of or allusion to a millennium in this? It is not there! The coming of Christ is shown to be the end. That is if you take a literal reading of it.
What this is saying is that Christ has become the firstfruits. This is an ongoing condition not only a historic event. So, there is no 2,000 yrs parenthesis in the read, neither is there a future millennium. Some can try and force it into the reading, but they argue only from silence.
Some attempt to restrict the phrase “the firstfruits” (mentioned a couple of times in 1 Corinthians 15) to the actual event of the Lord’s resurrection rather than to the eternal reality of who and what He is. They argue such in order to support your belief that “the end” doesn’t really mean “the end” and thus justify their insertion of a thousand-year millennial period after the end.
Whilst no sensible theologian would deny that Christ was the firstfruits from the grave at His resurrection and that it was through this act that He secured this title, this didn’t mean that it was a description that would terminate or would be restricted to an historic event. No, Christ is still the firstfruits reigning from heaven today, just like He will be the firstfruits at His glorious Second Advent. In short, Christ is the eternal firstfruits, a position that is ongoing and unending. The same applies to His position as Saviour, whilst this title relates primarily to the cross it also describes who Christ is. It is an ongoing active title that describes Christ.
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
No, Paul is not talking about an order to those dying. This is not about ongoing death. This section of the chapter is the order of those made alive.
That is your problem, that all you see is ongoing death, when Paul was telling us of an order to those made alive. Billions of dead souls will never be made alive, but they were all dead because of Adam, not because of what they did.
The word resurrection is not even used between verse 23 and 28. Have you not been made alive in Christ with the Second Birth, or will you receive the Second Birth at physical death?
Being made alive is the ongoing phenomenon Paul is specifically addressing. That is not just being resurrected. Those physically alive at the Second Coming will still be made alive. The church currently in Paradise has been made alive. Your doctrine keeps the church in Paradise in a state of death, even though death is not even part of heaven, but the bondage placed on the earth. The OT redeemed could not enter Paradise nor heaven until the Cross. They were made alive physically as they were already spiritualiy alive in Abraham's bosom. They were not going around in Abraham's bosom committing wicked acts of sin, but neither were made alive until the Cross. We physically die not because it is natural, but because God set a time limit for humanity living in their sins. Before Adam's disobedience, death was not even part of creation much less natural. We think it is natural, but it is only a curse and the bondage punishment placed on creation.
But your doctrine dictates no one has yet been made alive period, and all humanity, even the redeemed, are still in a state of death. Because you force a resurrection into these verses and replace what it even means to be made alive. The only resurrection mentioned is represented by the word "firstfruits". The OT were resurrected and made alive at the Cross. Paradise was opened wide for full physical enjoyment. That was the first order of being made alive. The next order is the Second Coming. All whom Jesus chooses will be made alive in the final harvest. The earth is made alive, but death is still an enemy until creation is subdued. Not dead creation subdued. The made alive creation at the Second Coming needs to be subdued, brought under subjection. The first Adam failed at subduing the Garden of Eden. A huge chunk of the earth probably 1200 miles square. They did not even get more than 4 humans, and some would only argue 2 humans to subdue the Garden of Eden.
You claim Jesus hands God a burnt to a crisp creation. Paul says Jesus must reign until all of creation is brought under subjection, not burnt into nothingness. You think you have power in your gospel, and you don't even accept the entire church has been made alive and currently physically enjoying Paradise. Being made alive is the ongoing phenomenon. Jesus said those in Christ would not taste death, after His resurrection. The church cannot see death at all, even though they physically pass from this body of death immediately into God's permanent incorruptible physical body in Paradise. Jesus told the thief, he would enter Paradise that day, not after your "millennium" of undetermined length. That was being made alive. The church will not be on the earth during the Millennium. But the final harvest after the Second Coming, will be redeemed and live without sin and death.
Death is still the enemy because disobedience to God is still available for those born during the Millennium. Not because people are born sinners or into a sin nature, but because there will still be laws, that free will choice will allow to be broken, even though they should not be broken. An iron rod rule of Christ as King on the earth, will result in instant death, removal from society. These people will not be mourned but considered cursed. Your iron rod rule just removes all currently alive, instantly. But a rule is not instant. Paul pointed out Christ must rule, until. If the iron rod rule was in effect now, no one could even be born. We are all born in a state of death. But the Millennium will not be about a state of death. It will be about a state of made alive, but having obedience to God.
Paradise and heaven has no free will, or the ability to disobey God. That reality has already been ongoing since the Cross. Paradise is your age to come, because physical death means instantly being made alive in heaven. 2 Corinthians 5:1
"For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens."
Why do many declare they don't know, and are waiting for some future resurrection? It has been almost 2,000 years since the OT redeemed have been made alive. Every year since then the NT church has been made alive. Those physically alive at the Second Coming will be made alive. Then the earth will be made alive, and after the Millennium, Jesus hands back a perfect creation to God. Death itself being the last enemy tossed into the LOF.
Neither Paul nor John were allowed to set a date for the Second Coming. That point alone should indicate the "a thousand" years is after the Second Coming. What is the point in setting a figurative/symbolic date?
Timtofly
Well-Known Member
A point obviously brushed to the side, as if the thought, "each in their own order", did not even matter.
To Amil those words don't even exist. Paul should have just said:
"In Adam all have been made dead, but at the end, all will be made alive who are in Christ. As Jesus will be reigning to that end, waiting on the firstfruits to be made alive at the very end."
That word "firstfruits" is plural for a reason, showing all are in Christ. According to Amil, only Christ needed to be made alive. Then in the far distant future, the rest of mankind will be made alive.
Jesus was already the Resurrection and the Life prior to the Cross. Jesus was not made alive at the Cross. The whole point Paul was making was the order of those made alive in Christ after being made dead in Adam.
One would not be a firstfruits outside of Christ. If only Christ was in Christ, Paul would have pointed out Christ the only firstborn firstfruit, as some have argued. Being made alive is way more than a physical resurrection. Jesus was already alive from birth. Being made alive is the total removal of death. Even the earth needs made alive, not a resurrection.
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
ok, I misunderstood. I thought you were bashing pre-mil. I read everything wrong..
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
This is again not true.
We are looking at two events. (the coming of Christ, and the end of the world per say)
It says nothing of how long or how short the time inbetween it is, You have to go elswhere in scripture and see if you can find it.
There most certainly is, You can see it in the words..
When it talks about first fruits. it speaks of the resurrection. Jesus rose first. those who will rise after are the rest. No one has resurrected yet. That is a future event.
What we have here is a person who does not want to see. So he will not see..
I'm... not even sure what you mean by this, but, well, by that same token, Premills apparently don't think Christ is King...
To answer what you say here, though, Christ is certainly capable and worthy of reigning over this fallen world... and is doing so even in the midst of all manner of opposition from the evil one and those who are still of him.
God could have made it to be a number of ways, certainly, but He chose to do things this way, to glorify Himself.
Yes, but...
...not at all; I'm at a loss in understanding how you come to this perception...
Gotta shake my head at that...
What "things"? All things will be fulfilled in the fullness of time; all God's promises have their 'yes' and 'amen' in Christ...Ah, "things," again...
What "things," David?Grace and peace to you.
Matthew 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Some apply 'in the regeneration' to the here and now while some apply it to the future, thus when Christ returns. Except it does not matter what this portion of the text is pertaining to---in the regeneration. If that's applicable to the here and now, or whether that is only applicable after Christ returns, does not change the fact that this portion---when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel--is not applicable until this is fulfilled first---When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory(Matthew 24:31)
It is then a matter of, once Matthew 24:31 is fulfilled, which then leads to the fulfilling of this in Matthew 19:28---ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel---is that meaning before 1 Corinthians 15:24 and verse 28 are fulfilled? Or is that meaning even after 1 Corinthians 15:24 and verse 28 are fulfilled, they continue doing this---sitting upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel---thus for forever since there would be no period of time that has a beginning and an ending post that of the fulfilling of 1 Corinthians 15:24 and verse 28 preventing it from continuing in that manner for forever.
It seems to me then, it is far more reasonable to take this part---ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel--to only be meaning up until 1 Corinthians 15:24 and verse 28 are fulfilled. Which then begs the question, does it sound reasonable that the same day they begin doing this, that very same day they quit doing it altogether?
And then there is this as well.
Luke 22:30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom---that they only get to do this for 24 hours or less. That alone is laughable, no doubt. Clearly then, thus undeniably, eating and drinking at His table in His kingdom is paralleling when they sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And that it is not remotely reasonable that the same day they begin eating and drinking at His table in His kingdom, is the same day they quit doing that altogether.
Last edited:
Ah, "things," again...
For one, what I just posted per post #38.
There is nothing to rebut here, apart from you denying a plain reading of the text, and forcing 1000 years into the text where it does not exist. Premils have to do that with numerous passages. That is because the second coming is the end. This passage forbids your doctrine. You have no justification for your position.
Similar threads
