I will raise them on the last day.

[Aunty Jane]

Paradise was a special place set aside for the Saints who died in Faith in the Word.

Where does this idea come from? Paradise was Eden....a place that God created for the first humans to not only enjoy, but also as a blueprint for the rest of forever....they were told to “fill the earth “ (not just the garden) with their children and extend the boundaries of their paradise home as the human family grew. They had to tame or “subdue” the land outside of the garden. It was their assignment.

In the beginning, there were no “saints” because these were required only after the sin of Adam and his wife. As part of the solution, Jesus and his elect will rule from heaven over redeemed mankind on earth.

They believed God at His Word, they were forgiven and not deserving of darkness or suffering.
However, they could not enter Heaven until the LORD Jesus Christ died and Rose again.
JESUS is the First Resurrected and Glorified Man = 1 Corinthians ch15

As Jesus was the one through whom mankind would be saved, everything had to wait until God’s rescue plan unfolded, not taking place in earth time, but because the first rebel was not human, this rescue plan was served in universal time, which explains why things have taken so long to work through....

Today, all the Saints who died in Faith are in Heaven waiting to Return with JESUS for the Resurrection at which time they receive their Glorified Bodies = 1 Thess 4:13-18

This I agree with...the saints are now in their places, but not all of them as Paul said.....those who were still alive on earth upon his return, would be instantly transformed in order to join their “brothers” in heaven.

Luke ch23
Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, “If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us.”

40But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, “Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation?
41And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong.” 42Then he said to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.”

43And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”

This has nothing to do with the saints going to heaven.....this man was a late comer, who had a change of heart at the last moment, and asked Jesus to remember him when he came into his Kingdom.

How was Jesus going to remember him? The Jewish hope was an earthly resurrection under Messiah’s Kingdom...so, what did Jesus promise him.....heaven? NO!

As a Jew, this man knew about the resurrection hope, and as his death was immanent, he asked Jesus, as the King of that Kingdom, to remember him.....the only way a Jew understood.....in the resurrection that Jesus promised....(John 5:28-29) This was not the “first resurrection” because that was not even in their thoughts when Jesus walked the earth. All still believed in an earthly establishment of his Kingdom. (Acts 1:6)

Only after his death and resurrection, at Pentecost, did the heavenly hope come into play. (Heb 3:1)
Those chosen for a role in heaven were anointed with God’s spirit....it was God’s choosing.....but the criminal would not be among them.

Jesus said....”Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise”.

In Greek there was no punctuation, or upper and lower case, so these were added later by translators.

Since Jesus and these criminals were both to die on the same day, was Jesus promising the man a place in paradise that day? Since Jesus was in his grave for 3 days and even after his resurrection, he remained on earth for 40 days after his resurrection.....so there is no way that Jesus was promising the man anything that day......all you have to do is move the comma and it changes the meaning of the whole statement.

”Assuredly, I say to you today, you will be with Me in Paradise”.
The promise made that day, was Jesus promise to resurrect this man when he became King of his Kingdom.

 

[Davidpt]

Thinking out loud here. I have mentioned this in the past. There are only two resurrection events recorded in Revelation 20. And that Amils have the most important resurrection of all, 2nd to Christ's, missing from Revelation 20 altogether. Meaning the bodily resurrection of saved saints. Amil insists the first resurrection isn't meaning that. Ok then, what resurrection in Revelation 20 is meaning the bodily resurrection of saved saints?

If Amil argues that it is this one---But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished---Amil then needs to explain how anyone in verse 4 and 6 can also mean any of the rest of the dead who are not resurrected until after the thousand years have expired?

That might be like arguing this. There are 12 donuts. John eats 6 of them. The rest of the donuts he saves for another day and eats them later. Therefore, when this another day arrives, and that John eats the rest of these donuts, 6 in this case, rather than eating only 6 remaining donuts, he eats 12 donuts, the 6 he already ate earlier, plus the 6 still remaining. Apparently then, Amils don't grasp what the 'rest of the dead' implies IF any Amils are insisting that Revelation 20:5 and the rest of the dead includes the bodily resurrection of all saved saints. The rest of the dead are not also meaning saved saints, anymore than the rest of the donuts are meaning all of the donuts. If nothing else, use this analogy I provided, to prove me wrong.

 

[Davidpt]

This has nothing to do with the saints going to heaven.....this man was a late comer, who had a change of heart at the last moment, and asked Jesus to remember him when he came into his Kingdom.

I fully agree with you here, the fact Jesus never came into His kingdom upon death, if it is not until His ascension that he is even presented with a kingdom. And that it is not until He returns in the end of this age that He even comes into His kingdom(Luke 19:15).

Let's just face it, some interpreters at times simply disregard details that undeniably prove their interpretations incorrect, therefore, they neglect to interpret Scripture with Scripture. This doesn't mean I agree with soul sleep, yet this doesn't mean soul sleep is not possible simply because I disagree with it. In this case it means I agree with you that this has nothing to do with going to heaven.

 

[David in NJ]

Thinking out loud here. I have mentioned this in the past. There are only two resurrection events recorded in Revelation 20. And that Amils have the most important resurrection of all, 2nd to Christ's, missing from Revelation 20 altogether. Meaning the bodily resurrection of saved saints. Amil insists the first resurrection isn't meaning that. Ok then, what resurrection in Revelation 20 is meaning the bodily resurrection of saved saints?

If Amil argues that it is this one---But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished---Amil then needs to explain how anyone in verse 4 and 6 can also mean any of the rest of the dead who are not resurrected until after the thousand years have expired?

That might be like arguing this. There are 12 donuts. John eats 6 of them. The rest of the donuts he saves for another day and eats them later. Therefore, when this another day arrives, and that John eats the rest of these donuts, 6 in this case, rather than eating only 6 remaining donuts, he eats 12 donuts, the 6 he already ate earlier, plus the 6 still remaining. Apparently then, Amils don't grasp what the 'rest of the dead' implies IF any Amils are insisting that Revelation 20:5 and the rest of the dead includes the bodily resurrection of all saved saints. The rest of the dead are not also meaning saved saints, anymore than the rest of the donuts are meaning all of the donuts. If nothing else, use this analogy I provided, to prove me wrong.

a reminder my brother = the FIRST Resurrection is CHRIST = it is not "2nd to Christ's"

Jesus said to her: "IAM the RESURRECTION"- John ch11

 

[David in NJ]

I fully agree with you here, the fact Jesus never came into His kingdom upon death, if it is not until His ascension that he is even presented with a kingdom. And that it is not until He returns in the end of this age that He even comes into His kingdom(Luke 19:15).

Let's just face it, some interpreters at times simply disregard details that undeniably prove their interpretations incorrect, therefore, they neglect to interpret Scripture with Scripture. This doesn't mean I agree with soul sleep. It means I agree with you that this has nothing to do with going to heaven in this case.

@Aunty Jane

the Kingdom of GOD is CHRIST = Colossians 1:13
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

When JESUS returns = an earthly kingdom is given to CHRIST = Revelation 11:15
Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever.”

Amillenialism misses this most important TRUTH

 

[Davidpt]

a reminder my brother = the FIRST Resurrection is CHRIST = it is not "2nd to Christ's"

Jesus said to her: "IAM the RESURRECTION"- John ch11

So why are you not Amil then? How can you argue that the first resurrection in Revelation 20 is meaning Christ's, thus Amil's position, then argue that the first resurrection in Revelation 20 is meaning the bodily resurrection of saints in the future, thus Premil's position? That sounds contradictory to me.

 

[Davidpt]

@Aunty Jane

the Kingdom of GOD is CHRIST = Colossians 1:13
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

When JESUS returns = an earthly kingdom is given to CHRIST = Revelation 11:15
Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever.”

Amillenialism misses this most important TRUTH

My point is this. Scripture indicates that Jesus would be in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights(Matthew 12:40), and that being in the heart of the earth could not possibly be the equivalent of coming into His kingdom nor even going to heaven. And that the thief on His right asked Jesus to remember him when He comes into His kingdom. Therefore, this is a prophecy concerning the future, not something that was fulfilled upon death, in regards to this thief.

Something else to note. Notice that there were two thieves, one on His right, one on His left. Then compare with the sheep and goats judgment, for example. Therefore, the thief on His right represents those allowed access into His kingdom when He returns. And that the thief on the left represents those denied access into His kingdom when He returns.



-----------------
Chatgpt:
Greek Usage and Linguistic Observations
A. “I tell you today” as a Hebrew-style idiom

In Semitic speech patterns (and Luke often preserves Hebrew idioms), phrases like “I tell you today” function as solemn emphases, like saying, “I solemnly declare to you this very day.”

Examples:

Deuteronomy 30:18 (LXX):
“I declare to you today that you shall surely perish…”
(Greek: anaggellō hymin sēmeron…)

Zechariah 9:12: “Even today I declare that I will restore double to you.”

So “I say to you today” is a recognizable Hebraic idiom meaning “I solemnly declare,” not a time indicator for the fulfillment of the promise.
---------------------------------------------------
Therefore, this supports my interpretation of Luke 23:43 even without changing the punctuation in English in the KJV or any versions that place the comma like this. IOW, the placement of the comma is irrelevant.

 

[rwb]

My point is this. Scripture indicates that Jesus would be in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights(Matthew 12:40), and that being in the heart of the earth could not possibly be the equivalent of coming into His kingdom nor even going to heaven. And that the thief on His right asked Jesus to remember him when He comes into His kingdom. Therefore, this is prophecy concerning the future, not something that was fulfilled upon death, in regards to this thief.

But where would the Spirit of Christ go when His body of flesh went into the grave? The same Spirit of Christ that returned to the Father after Christ died, will first descend to the lower parts of the earth (grave/Abraham's bosom) to rescue the Old Covenant elect of God who died waiting for the promised Messiah to come to rescue them from the grave.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 (KJV) Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

Luke 23:46 (KJV) And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

Ephesians 4:8-10 (KJV) Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

That's why Paul tells us that when we (our spirit) is absent from our body of flesh it is present with the Lord in heaven. Because the life we receive through the Spirit of Christ in us is eternal and can never die!

2 Corinthians 5:8 (KJV) We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

Philippians 1:20-24 (KJV) According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death. For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not. For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better: Nevertheless to abide in the flesh is more needful for you.

1 Corinthians 15:35 (KJV) But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?

1 Corinthians 15:44-50 (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. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

 

[David in NJ]

So why are you not Amil then? How can you argue that the first resurrection in Revelation 20 is meaning Christ's, thus Amil's position, then argue that the first resurrection in Revelation 20 is meaning the bodily resurrection of saints in the future, thus Premil's position? That sounds contradictory to me.

Simple TRUTH for His Sons = there is only One Resurrection for the JUST = Gospel and 1 Corinthians chapter 15

GOSPEL = JESUS = "IAM the RESURRECTION"

But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead.
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive = FIRST Resurrection = Rev 20:4-6
But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.

amills like to equate the 'Born-Again/Above" as the first resurrection.

In Truth, when we are Born-Again/Above our spirit is delivered from spiritual death = only our spirit, the body remains under death

This is not the physical Resurrection that Christ speaks of about His 2nd Coming

Christ/Gospel , 1 Thess 4:13-18 and 1 Corinthians are Crystal CLEAR on who and when the FIRST Resurrection takes place

All religions have their own "contradictory" conclusions

 

[David in NJ]

My point is this. Scripture indicates that Jesus would be in the heart of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights(Matthew 12:40), and that being in the heart of the earth could not possibly be the equivalent of coming into His kingdom nor even going to heaven. And that the thief on His right asked Jesus to remember him when He comes into His kingdom. Therefore, this is a prophecy concerning the future, not something that was fulfilled upon death, in regards to this thief.

Something else to note. Notice that there were two thieves, one on His right, one on His left. Then compare with the sheep and goats judgment, for example. Therefore, the thief on His right represents those allowed access into His kingdom when He returns. And that the thief on the left represents those denied access into His kingdom when He returns.

Greek Usage and Linguistic Observations
A. “I tell you today” as a Hebrew-style idiom

In Semitic speech patterns (and Luke often preserves Hebrew idioms), phrases like “I tell you today” function as solemn emphases, like saying, “I solemnly declare to you this very day.”

Examples:

Deuteronomy 30:18 (LXX):
“I declare to you today that you shall surely perish…”
(Greek: anaggellō hymin sēmeron…)

Zechariah 9:12: “Even today I declare that I will restore double to you.”

So “I say to you today” is a recognizable Hebraic idiom meaning “I solemnly declare,” not a time indicator for the fulfillment of the promise.

This supports my interpretation of Luke 23:43 even without changing the punctuation in English in the KJV or any versions that place the comma like this. IOW, the placement of the comma is irrelevant.

The thief who received JESUS received the MOST IMPORTANT part of the KINGDOM = which is CHRIST

Without CHRIST, no one will be part of either the Eternal or the earthly Kingdom of Christ = Revelation 11:15

"The Kingdom" is a Consummation of Prophecy

"Consummation refers to the act of completing or perfecting something, often used in the context of Marriage to describe the first act of sexual intercourse that officially completes the marriage. It can also mean the completion of a contract or agreement."

There are TWO distinct Consumming powers = CHRIST and Satan = Righteousness and Sin
#1 - CHRIST/Salvation = Psalm 40:7 - Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,

#2 - Wrath = Psalm 59:13 - Consume them in wrath; consume them till they are no more, so it may be known to the ends of the earth that God rules over Jacob. Selah


JESUS Spoke of these Two Distinct Consumations in His Gospel = Matthew 13:36 -43

Then Jesus sent the multitude away and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him, saying, “Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.”

37He answered and said to them: “He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons of the wicked one. 39The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels. 40Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age. 41The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, 42and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.
He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

@amigo de christo

 

[Davidpt]

a reminder my brother = the FIRST Resurrection is CHRIST = it is not "2nd to Christ's"

Jesus said to her: "IAM the RESURRECTION"- John ch11

Note what I initially said, a first resurrection aside--"There are only two resurrection events recorded in Revelation 20. And that Amils have the most important resurrection of all, 2nd to Christ's, missing from Revelation 20 altogether. Meaning the bodily resurrection of saved saints"

What was incorrect about what I stated? Is it untrue that the the most important resurrection of all, 2nd to Christ's, is the bodily resurrection of saved saints? Then I argued that Amils have this resurrection missing from Revelation 20 altogether, since they argue that the first reurrection meant in Revelation 20 is not meaning the bodily resurrection of the saved saints in the future. Then I argued, using an analogy to do so, that the rest of the dead when they rise, can't be including anyone who has part in the first resurrection. I also argued that Revelation 20 only records 2 resurrection events. The point being, that it is absurd, if Revelation 20 records only 2 resurrection events, that not even at least one of them is involving the bodily resurrection of saved saints.

IMO, the best way to understand a first resurrection is that it involves the resurrection of the just, and that it precedes the 2nd resurrection, the resurrection of the unjust. Therefore, including Christ, all the saved have part in the first resurrection, the resurrection of the just. And that all of the unsaved have part in the 2nd resurrection, the resurrection of the unjust. It doesn't matter how many stages are involved since not one 'unjust' person is going to be resurrected until all 'just' people have been resurrected first. Therefore, when you look at it like this, Christ was indeed the first one resurrected unto bodily immortality. Except that Christ is not the only one that has part in the first resurrection, the resurrection of the 'just'. He was the beginning of the first resurrection, not the ending of the first resurrection.

 

[Davidpt]

But where would the Spirit of Christ go when His body of flesh went into the grave? The same Spirit of Christ that returned to the Father after Christ died, will first descend to the lower parts of the earth (grave/Abraham's bosom) to rescue the Old Covenant elect of God who died waiting for the promised Messiah to come to rescue them from the grave.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 (KJV) Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

Luke 23:46 (KJV) And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

Ephesians 4:8-10 (KJV) Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

That's why Paul tells us that when we (our spirit) is absent from our body of flesh it is present with the Lord in heaven. Because the life we receive through the Spirit of Christ in us is eternal and can never die!

2 Corinthians 5:8 (KJV) We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

Philippians 1:20-24 (KJV) According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death. For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not. For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better: Nevertheless to abide in the flesh is more needful for you.

1 Corinthians 15:35 (KJV) But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?

1 Corinthians 15:44-50 (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. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

Apparently, all spirits return to God who gave it, including the spirits of both the saved and lost. The way I interpret it, it simply means the breath of life returned to God, as if He inhaled, where initially He exhaled(Genesis 2:7). IOW, we have to think outside the box here.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.


IOW, it would be cherry picking to apply this to both the saved and lost---Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was---and then apply this---and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it---to only that of the saved. And since it makes zero sense that the spirits of the lost go to heaven upon death, this means we need to understand these things in another sense. That it means that God initially supplies the breath of life so that even the lost can live and be alive. But when one dies, whether they be the saved or the unsaved, this is because the breath has left the body, thus no longer having the ability to breathe. If one can no longer breathe, they obviously can't remain alive, thus be living, at the same time.

 

[David in NJ]

Note what I initially said, a first resurrection aside--"There are only two resurrection events recorded in Revelation 20. And that Amils have the most important resurrection of all, 2nd to Christ's, missing from Revelation 20 altogether. Meaning the bodily resurrection of saved saints"

What was incorrect about what I stated? Is it untrue that the the most important resurrection of all, 2nd to Christ's, is the bodily resurrection of saved saints? Then I argued that Amils have this resurrection missing from Revelation 20 altogether, since they argue that the first reurrection meant in Revelation 20 is not meaning the bodily resurrection of the saved saints in the future. Then I argued, using an analogy to do so, that the rest of the dead when they rise, can't be including anyone who has part in the first resurrection. I also argued that Revelation 20 only records 2 resurrection events. The point being, that it is absurd, if Revelation 20 records only 2 resurrection events, that not even at least one of them is involving the bodily resurrection of saved saints.

in Salvation there is no such thing as "2nd to Christ's"; for HE is the First Resurrection

the only 2nd resurrection is that unto the Second Death = Revelation 20:11-15

The point being, that it is absurd, if Revelation 20 records only 2 resurrection events, that not even at least one of them is involving the bodily resurrection of saved saints.

100% POINT ON = TRUTH = thank you @Davidpt

 

[jeffweeder]

Note what I initially said, a first resurrection aside--"There are only two resurrection events recorded in Revelation 20. And that Amils have the most important resurrection of all, 2nd to Christ's, missing from Revelation 20 altogether. Meaning the bodily resurrection of saved saints"

All those who have part in Christ will NOT come into judgment but have now passed from death to life.
That is the most important step.


Jesus said,
Jn5
24 “I assure you and most solemnly say to you, the person who hears My word [the one who heeds My message], and believes and trusts in Him who sent Me, has (possesses now) eternal life [that is, eternal life actually begins—the believer is transformed], and does not come into judgment and condemnation, but has passed [over] from death into life.
25 I assure you and most solemnly say to you, a time is coming and is [here] now, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear it will live

It is written that this Bodily resurrection will occur on the last day for all bodies in physical death

Jesus continues,
27 And He has given Him authority to execute judgment, because He is a Son of Man [sinless humanity, qualifying Him to sit in judgment over mankind].
28 Do not be surprised at this; for a time is coming when all those who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29 and they will come out—those who did good things [will come out] to a resurrection of [new] life, but those who did evil things [will come out] to a resurrection of judgment [that is, to be sentenced].


Jn 12
48 Whoever rejects Me and refuses to accept My teachings, has one who judges him; the very word that I spoke will judge and condemn him on the last day.

 

[Davidpt]

All those who have part in Christ will NOT come into judgment but have now passed from death to life.
That is the most important step.


Jesus said,
Jn5
24 “I assure you and most solemnly say to you, the person who hears My word [the one who heeds My message], and believes and trusts in Him who sent Me, has (possesses now) eternal life [that is, eternal life actually begins—the believer is transformed], and does not come into judgment and condemnation, but has passed [over] from death into life.
25 I assure you and most solemnly say to you, a time is coming and is [here] now, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear it will live

It is written that this Bodily resurrection will occur on the last day for all bodies in physical death

Jesus continues,
27 And He has given Him authority to execute judgment, because He is a Son of Man [sinless humanity, qualifying Him to sit in judgment over mankind].
28 Do not be surprised at this; for a time is coming when all those who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29 and they will come out—those who did good things [will come out] to a resurrection of [new] life, but those who did evil things [will come out] to a resurrection of judgment [that is, to be sentenced].


Jn 12
48 Whoever rejects Me and refuses to accept My teachings, has one who judges him; the very word that I spoke will judge and condemn him on the last day.

Amils and apparently some Premils are missing the point I’m making. None of us deny that other passages teach a bodily resurrection of believers at the end of the age--we all agree about that. The question is what John saw in Revelation 20:4-6.

John records only two resurrections, not 3, nor 4, nor 5, etc, 2. If the first resurrection is merely spiritual (conversion or regeneration), then the central hope of bodily resurrection for the righteous is completely absent from this vision. Yet the contrast in verse 5--the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished---demands that both resurrections be of the same kind. Otherwise John would be mixing spiritual and bodily categories in the same sentence.

The simpler, more natural reading is that the first resurrection refers to the bodily resurrection of those who came to life and reigned with Christ, while the rest of the dead refers to unbelievers who remain dead until the thousand years end. That preserves the consistent Biblical pattern: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are His at His coming (1 Corinthians 15:23).

 

[David in NJ]

The simpler, more natural reading is that the first resurrection refers to the bodily resurrection of those who came to life and reigned with Christ, while the rest of the dead refers to unbelievers who remain dead until the thousand years end. That preserves the consistent Biblical pattern: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are His at His coming (1 Corinthians 15:23).

Exactly what was stated to you in my posts = CHRIST is the First Resurrection = All who are in CHRIST

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive = FIRST Resurrection = Rev 20:4-6

 

[Davidpt]

I submitted the following to Chatgpt.

Me:

Some Amils, if not all Amils, argue this. Verse 4 used this Greek word---zao---and that verse 5 used this Greek word---anazao. Therefore, lived again can't be meant in verse 4. Because if it meant lived again in verse 4, anazao would have been used instead.
-------

Chatgpt:

Excellent — that’s a **classic Amillennial argument**, and you’re absolutely right to examine it carefully. Their claim goes like this:

> Because Revelation 20:4 uses *zao* (“they lived”) and Revelation 20:5 uses *anazao* (“lived again”), John must be distinguishing two different kinds of “life.” Therefore, verse 4 can’t describe a *bodily* resurrection.

It sounds plausible at first — but when you look at the **Greek usage**, **context**, and **biblical parallels**, that argument doesn’t actually hold up. Let’s unpack it carefully and textually.

---

## The Greek Words in Question

### **Revelation 20:4**

> *καὶ ἔζησαν καὶ ἐβασίλευσαν μετὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ χίλια ἔτη*
> “And they **lived** (*ezēsan*, from *zaō*) and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”

### **Revelation 20:5**

> *οἱ λοιποὶ τῶν νεκρῶν οὐκ ἔζησαν ἄχρι τελεσθῇ τὰ χίλια ἔτη*
> “But the rest of the dead **lived not again** (*ouk ezēsan*) until the thousand years were finished.”

**Important observation:** verse 5 actually **does not contain the verb *anazaō*** at all in the oldest Greek manuscripts.
Both verses use the same root verb **ζάω (*zaō*)**, meaning *to live*.
The “again” in “lived again” is an **English translator’s addition**, not part of the Greek word itself.

So, the entire Amil argument built on *zaō vs anazaō* collapses linguistically — the text doesn’t contrast two different verbs.

---

## Lexical Range of *Zaō* (ζάω)

*Zaō* simply means *to live, to come to life, to be alive*.
Its nuance depends entirely on context:

* **Romans 14:9:** “Christ died and **lived again** (*ezēsen*).” — here it clearly means *was resurrected*.
* **Revelation 2:8:** “These are the words of the First and the Last, who was dead and **came to life** (*ezēsen*).”
* **Revelation 13:14:** speaks of the beast “that was wounded by the sword and **lived** (*ezēsen*).” — again, *came back to life*.

So *zaō* by itself easily carries the sense of **resurrection**; it doesn’t require the prefix *ana-* to express “living again.”

Therefore, in Revelation 20:4–5, the natural reading is:

> “They came to life and reigned with Christ… but the rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were finished.”

---

## Why *Ana-zao* Doesn’t Help the Amil Case Anyway

The compound *anazaō* (“to live again”) appears **only once** in the New Testament — **Romans 7:9**:

> “When the commandment came, sin *revived* (*anēzēsen*) and I died.”

There it means “to come alive again” metaphorically (sin revived). It’s never used for resurrection in the New Testament or Septuagint.

So if John had used *anazaō* in Revelation 20, it actually would have made the sentence *less* natural for describing resurrection. *Zaō* is the standard resurrection verb throughout the book.

---

## ️ The Context Demands the Same Type of “Life”

Both clauses use *ezēsan* in **identical syntactical positions**:

| Verse | Subject | Verb | Complement |
| ----- | ---------------------------------- | ------------ | ------------------------------------------ |
| 20:4 | Those who were beheaded for Christ | *ezēsan* | “and reigned with Christ a thousand years” |
| 20:5 | The rest of the dead | *ouk ezēsan* | “until the thousand years were finished” |

That’s a clear **parallel contrast**:

> those who came to life → the rest of the dead did not come to life.

If you make the first “came to life” spiritual and the second bodily, you destroy John’s parallelism. Both must refer to the same kind of event — **bodily life** after death.

---

## Linguistic and Contextual Summary

| Claim | Evidence | Result |
| ------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------ | ------------------------------ |
| *Verse 4 uses zaō; verse 5 uses anazaō* | False — both use *zaō* | The Amil distinction collapses |
| *Zaō cannot mean “live again”* | Contradicted by Romans 14:9; Rev 2:8 | *Zaō* often means resurrection |
| *Context distinguishes spiritual vs. bodily life* | Both clauses parallel each other | Both must be bodily |

---

 

[jeffweeder]

Amils and apparently some Premils are missing the point I’m making. None of us deny that other passages teach a bodily resurrection of believers at the end of the age--we all agree about that. The question is what John saw in Revelation 20:4-6.

John records only two resurrections, not 3, nor 4, nor 5, etc, 2. If the first resurrection is merely spiritual (conversion or regeneration), then the central hope of bodily resurrection for the righteous is completely absent from this vision. Yet the contrast in verse 5--the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished---demands that both resurrections be of the same kind. Otherwise John would be mixing spiritual and bodily categories in the same sentence.

The simpler, more natural reading is that the first resurrection refers to the bodily resurrection of those who came to life and reigned with Christ, while the rest of the dead refers to unbelievers who remain dead until the thousand years end. That preserves the consistent Biblical pattern: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are His at His coming (1 Corinthians 15:23).

Jn 5 teaches believers in Jesus, pass from death to life the moment they believe. We have the assurance of not coming into judgment of condemnation of the second death lake of fire NOW.
Your interpretation of Rev20 makes a mockery of that truth by suggesting that a physical resurrection brings about that assurance.

We are physically raised the last day, while those who reject salvation are condemned the last day. JN 6 and JN 12.

Paul confirms this...,
2Thess 1
6 For after all it is only just for God to repay with distress those who distress you, 7 and to give relief to you who are so distressed and to us as well when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in a flame of fire, 8 dealing out [full and complete] vengeance to those who do not [seek to] know God and to those who ignore and refuse to obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus [by choosing not to respond to Him]. 9 These people will pay the penalty and endure the punishment of everlasting destruction, banished from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes to be glorified in His saints on that day , and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed and trusted.

 

[David in NJ]

Jn 5 teaches believers in Jesus, pass from death to life the moment they believe. We have the assurance of not coming into judgment of condemnation of the second death lake of fire NOW.
Your interpretation of Rev20 makes a mockery of that truth by suggesting that a physical resurrection brings about that assurance.

We are physically raised the last day, while those who reject salvation are condemned the last day. JN 6 and JN 12.

Paul confirms this...,
2Thess 1
6 For after all it is only just for God to repay with distress those who distress you, 7 and to give relief to you who are so distressed and to us as well when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in a flame of fire, 8 dealing out [full and complete] vengeance to those who do not [seek to] know God and to those who ignore and refuse to obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus [by choosing not to respond to Him]. 9 These people will pay the penalty and endure the punishment of everlasting destruction, banished from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes to be glorified in His saints on that day , and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed and trusted.

Our spirit is "resurrected" in the NEW Birth = John 3:1-10 , Ephesians 2:1-10

Our physical bodies must wait until the 2nd Coming for THE RESURRECTION = Gospel , 1 Thess 4:13-18 , 1 Cor ch15

 

[rwb]

Apparently, all spirits return to God who gave it, including the spirits of both the saved and lost. The way I interpret it, it simply means the breath of life returned to God, as if He inhaled, where initially He exhaled(Genesis 2:7). IOW, we have to think outside the box here.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.


IOW, it would be cherry picking to apply this to both the saved and lost---Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was---and then apply this---and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it---to only that of the saved. And since it makes zero sense that the spirits of the lost go to heaven upon death, this means we need to understand these things in another sense. That it means that God initially supplies the breath of life so that even the lost can live and be alive. But when one dies, whether they be the saved or the unsaved, this is because the breath has left the body, thus no longer having the ability to breathe. If one can no longer breathe, they obviously can't remain alive, thus be living, at the same time.

The difference between the spirit that returns to God in unbelief is that spirit is simply said to be among the dead without life, in silence in the grave. But the spirit that returns to God in faith, is alive through the Spirit of Christ in us. Christ says the Spirit will not leave us until believers receive our resurrected immortal body raised to life again.

Ephesians 1:13-14 (KJV) In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Psalm 115:17-18 (KJV) The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence. But we will bless the LORD from this time forth and for evermore. Praise the LORD.

It is the living spirit of man that returns with Christ when the last trumpet sounds to return the breath of life to our bodies changed to immortal and incorruptible. We live with the Lord as spiritual body after physical death, and when our spirit gives life again to our body we will once again be complete man with body + spirit (breath of life) together complete living souls fit for everlasting life on the new earth.

1 Thessalonians 4:14 (KJV) For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.