I will raise them on the last day.

[Davidpt]

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.

If Amils agree a bodily resurrection is essential to eternal life, and clearly they do agree, why isn’t it in Revelation 20 at all under their view? If 'the first resurrection' recorded in Revelation 20 is not meaning the bodily resurrection of saints, what resurrection in Revelation 20 is meaning the bodily resurrection of saints?

Can one live forever and ever via a spiritual resurrection alone? Of course not. And of course Amils fully agree. Per Amil then, what is a valid reason that John is not seeing the bodily resurrection of saved saints anywhere in Revelation 20? Why isn't there 3 resurrections depicted in Revelation 20, rather than only 2, assuming Amils are interpreting the first resurrection correctly in ch 20?

If 3 resurrections were depicted in Revelation 20, hmmm...that could maybe support that the first of them is spiritual, the remaining 2 are bodily. It might look like this in Revelation 20. First, saints come alive spiritually, then later bodily. That takes care of 2 resurrections. And that the 3rd resurrection is meaning when the unsaved come to life bodily. Except, unfortunately for Amil, only 2 resurrections are depicted in Revelation 20, not 3.

 

[rwb]

John records only two resurrections, not 3, nor 4, nor 5, etc, 2.

I agree! The two resurrections are the first resurrection that is the physical/bodily resurrection of Christ from the dead to immortal life. The other resurrection found in Rev 20 is the resurrection of the "rest of the dead" that do not live again until after the thousand years are finished as well as ALL of the dead small and great resurrected to stand before the judgment throne of God to give account according to all that is written in the books and the book of life.

In this mortal life man must have part in the resurrection of Christ by being born again of His Spirit. Through Christ's Spirit those who have part in Christ's resurrection life have spiritually entered the Kingdom of God. Their living spirit will be with Christ forever from the moment we have been born again. Through our spirit we live and reign with Christ on this earth until we physically die. Then as I've shown you already, we as spiritual body ascend to heaven as living souls. When the last trumpet sounds, that a thousand years symbolizing TIME from the first advent of Christ to His Second Coming shall expire or shall be no longer.

 

[rwb]

If Amils agree a bodily resurrection is essential to eternal life, and clearly they do agree, why isn’t it in Revelation 20 at all under their view?

Because a bodily resurrection is NOT how man is born again to possess eternal life. Every human body is ordained to die. But to be born again means our spirit (not our body) goes from being "dead in trespasses and sins" to being alive in Christ. Our spirit is not resurrected but quickened to life again.

Through our living spiritual body we have lived and reigned with God in time (a thousand years) or we shall live and reign with God until the last trumpet sounds and our spiritual body is reunited with our immortal body of flesh to live and reign with Christ, not for a thousand symbolic years of time, but FOREVER.

Ephesians 2:1 (KJV) And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

Ephesians 2:4-6 (KJV) But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

 

[rwb]

Amils fully agree. Per Amil then, what is a valid reason that John is not seeing the bodily resurrection of saved saints anywhere in Revelation 20?

John doesn't have to see a physical resurrection of martyred saints to KNOW they have both lived and reigned with Christ in time (symbolized a thousand years) and because they are alive with Christ in heaven after physical death, John also KNOWS they shall also be bodily resurrected immortal when reunited with the spiritual body living and reigning with Christ.

First John shows us those who died in faith who have lived and reigned (past tense) with Christ in time (a thousand years). Then John tells us what shall happen to the rest of the dead, or those who shall die but never live and reign with Christ before they physically die. Finally John writes of ALL the dead who their whole lives remain in unbelief being called before to the Great White Throne Judgment to be cast into the lake of fire that is the second death.

 

[Davidpt]

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.

What is possible is this, I guess. All spirits return to God, including the lost. And that everyone's spirit records all the deeds they have done throughout their lives. This is then reviewed in order to determine where to send each spirit until the time of the bodily resurrection. Some get to remain in heaven, others are sent to hell. This is all speculation of course. Nothing I'm even remotely dogmatic about. Yet I see it somewhat making sense if both the saved and lost, that their spirits return to God when they die. How I came up with this initially, I'm not certain? I seem to recall that it just popped into my head out of nowhere all of a sudden like at the time.

 

[rwb]

What is possible is this, I guess. All spirits return to God, including the lost. And that everyone's spirit records all the deeds they have done throughout their lives. This is then reviewed in order to determine where to send each spirit until the time of the bodily resurrection. Some get to remain in heaven, others are sent to hell. This is all speculation of course. Nothing I'm even remotely dogmatic about. Yet I see it somewhat making sense if both the saved and lost, that their spirits return to God when they die. How I came up with this initially, I'm not certain? I seem to recall that it just popped into my head out of nowhere all of a sudden like at the time.

I gave you a couple verses to consider regarding the fate of the spirit that dies in unbelief and the spirit that dies in faith. Though Scripture shows us that all of humanity shall be called to the judgment throne of God, according to John only the dead are judged according to what is written in the books, and their names shall not be found written in the book of life from the foundation of the world.

When we believers stand before the judgment throne it is not for judgment, but for reward of everlasting life with Christ on the new earth. At that time believers are already clothed in the righteousness of Christ already bodily resurrected immortal. Because Christ was judged already for all those who have been part of His resurrection life. That's why Paul writes:

Romans 8:1 (KJV) There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

When believers stand before the judgment throne we shall receive reward and hear Christ saying:

Matthew 25:21 (KJV) His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

 

[Davidpt]

John doesn't have to see a physical resurrection of martyred saints to KNOW they have both lived and reigned with Christ in time (symbolized a thousand years) and because they are alive with Christ in heaven after physical death, John also KNOWS they shall also be bodily resurrected immortal when reunited with the spiritual body living and reigning with Christ.

First John shows us those who died in faith who have lived and reigned (past tense) with Christ in time (a thousand years). Then John tells us what shall happen to the rest of the dead, or those who shall die but never live and reign with Christ before they physically die. Finally John writes of ALL the dead who their whole lives remain in unbelief being called before to the Great White Throne Judgment to be cast into the lake of fire that is the second death.

To be fair, I guess, a spiritual resurrection would imply a bodily resurrection is pending. But if one is an Amil and also holds an NOSAS position, those 2 positions combined clearly contradict Revelation 20:6. Nowhere in that verse does it say nor imply that anyone who has part in the first resurrection, that some of them are not blessed and holy. That on some of them, the 2nd death still has power, therefore, they can and will be cast into the LOF. Therefore, I couldn't be an Amil even if I wanted to be, since I know full well that NOSAS is also Biblical, and that I'm never going to agree that only OSAS is Biblical, NOSAS isn't. No, both are Biblical. And that NOSAS contradicts the first resurrection if the first resurrection is meaning before one falls away, rather than after one falls away. Assuming one falls away. And clearly some do, thus NOSAS.

 

[jeffweeder]

If 'the first resurrection' recorded in Revelation 20 is not meaning the bodily resurrection of saints, what resurrection in Revelation 20 is meaning the bodily resurrection of saints?

We believe our bodily resurrection will happen when Jesus said it would happen =the last day. Its a result of his victory on the cross when he put away sin and of course conquered death for us. We are NOW more than conquerors in his first resurrection, and we reign with him. We will not come under judgment of the second death. Jn 5 and Rev 20

What conqueror has no ability to reign?

 

[rwb]

But if one is an Amil and also holds an NOSAS position, those 2 positions combined clearly contradict Revelation 20:6.

Why would anyone Amillennial or not deny eternal security? Rather than worry about contradiction in Rev 20, would it not be better to have hope being assured in the promises of Christ?

 

[rwb]

Nowhere in that verse does it say nor imply that anyone who has part in the first resurrection, that some of them are not blessed and holy. That on some of them, the 2nd death still has power, therefore, they can and will be cast into the LOF. Therefore, I couldn't be an Amil even if I wanted to be, since I know full well that NOSAS is also Biblical, and that I'm never going to agree that only OSAS is Biblical, NOSAS isn't. No, both are Biblical. And that NOSAS contradicts the first resurrection if the first resurrection is meaning before one falls away, rather than after one falls away. Assuming one falls away. And clearly some do, thus NOSAS.

If all who have part in the first resurrection having overcome the second death, why would you believe some of them can and will be cast into the LOF? Amillennialism is not what you really struggle against David! I believe your real struggle is with believing the promises of God. You are still in doubt that the spiritual life we receive when we have been born again is ETERNAL! Since the eternal life we receive when we are born again of the Spirit is having part in the resurrection of Christ, the 'first resurrection' how can we still have part in the LOF? Only those who are not looking to Christ alone for eternal life, have doubts in Christ keeping His promise. Eternal life through Christ cannot be lost or it would not be eternal.

 

[ewq1938]

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

Nope. The first resurrection in Rev 20 is not Christ's resurrection but Christ resurrecting those who belong to him. Rev 20 speaks of a second resurrection much later which is when Christ resurrects all those who do not belong to him.

 

[David in NJ]

Nope. The first resurrection in Rev 20 is not Christ's resurrection but Christ resurrecting those who belong to him. Rev 20 speaks of a second resurrection much later which is when Christ resurrects all those who do not belong to him.

And who denied the obvious???
Of course Christ is the only Man to be resurrected unto Glorification = crystal clear and always stated as the premise of our Resurrection

Rev 20:4-6 is the Resurrection of CHRIST's Body which are in HIM = GOSPEL = 1 Thess 4:13-18 , Hebrews 9:28 , 1 John 3:1-3 , Col 3:1-3

If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God.
Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth.
For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.
When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory.

1 Cor ch15 - 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.
But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming

 

[Davidpt]

If all who have part in the first resurrection having overcome the second death, why would you believe some of them can and will be cast into the LOF? Amillennialism is not what you really struggle against David! I believe your real struggle is with believing the promises of God. You are still in doubt that the spiritual life we receive when we have been born again is ETERNAL! Since the eternal life we receive when we are born again of the Spirit is having part in the resurrection of Christ, the 'first resurrection' how can we still have part in the LOF? Only those who are not looking to Christ alone for eternal life, have doubts in Christ keeping His promise. Eternal life through Christ cannot be lost or it would not be eternal.

Take for example, @Spiritual Israelite. He is both an Amil and holds a NOSAS position. His position implies that one can lose part in the first resurrection since he places the first resurrection taking place before one falls away, rather than after they fall away. No way, regardless how one views the first resurrection, can the first resurrection be divorced from salvation. And if one can lose their salvation, and indeed one can, and that if the first resurrection is applicable before one falls away, what does that imply to any thinking person in regards to Revelation 20:6?

Granted, you don't hold a NOSAS position, yet some Amils do. How is it remotely reasonable, assuming Amil is the correct position, that both OSAS and NOSAS can be compatible with Amil? There is no logic to that. We are then forced to conclude one of the following.

1) Amil is Biblical only if OSAS is Biblical, and that NOSAS isn't.

2) Amil is not Biblical if NOSAS is Biblical.

1) if true, obviously does not contradict Revelation 20:6.

2) does not contradict Revelation 20:6 either, since 2) means Premil not Amil.

Yet, if one holds both an Amil position and an NOSAS position, Revelation 20:6 is contradicted since only NOSAS is true and that Amil isn't. Keeping in mind, both Amil and NOSAS can't be true, and Revelation 20:6, for one, undeniably proves it. And that it is absurd to abandon NOSAS, thus change one's position to OSAS in order to supposedly not contradict Revelation 20:6 per Amil. Yet it does contradict Revelation 20:6 since it is not true that only OSAS is Biblical, but NOSAS isn't. It is equally absurd that one can think NOSAS is somehow compatible with Amil, in light of Revelation 20:6 and what NOSAS implies about that verse if one holds both an Amil and NOSAS position.

Unfortunately, @Spiritual Israelite interprets this to be me pitting Amils against each other when that is not even remotely what I'm doing. How could I be doing that if I don't even agree that Amil and OSAS is valid, let alone Amil and NOSAS?

Not to mention, for example. When Ezekiel's temple is brought up by Amils, I don't side with Premils who view this to mean animal sacrificing resumes after the 2nd coming. I speak out against it. I do not view that as Amils pitting Premils against each other. I'm a little more grown up than that, where I don't need to throw a tantrum and insist Amils are trying to pit Premils against one another here simply because they brought up something that not all Premils agree with each other about.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Nope. The first resurrection in Rev 20 is not Christ's resurrection but Christ resurrecting those who belong to him. Rev 20 speaks of a second resurrection much later which is when Christ resurrects all those who do not belong to him.

Incorrect - the second is for those accepted and rejected who lived during Christs reign on earth. After this death and the grave are removed forever.

 

[jeffweeder]

If Amils agree a bodily resurrection is essential to eternal life, and clearly they do agree, why isn’t it in Revelation 20 at all under their view?

Any believer reading the letter knows what to expect regarding his second coming to raise us bodily.
Jesus clearly tells us it happens at the same time for the unbelieving being sentenced, when he comes a second time to Glorify us.

 

[Davidpt]

Incorrect - the second is for those accepted and rejected who lived during Christs reign on earth. After this death and the grave are removed forever.

Though, I have never thought about it like that, there does appear to be some logic to that since those in Revelation 20:7-9 would have been alive during the millennium, yet not rebelling during the millennium then after the millennium rebelling, therefore leading to their destruction. Except for one detail, the ones in verse 8-9 can't be meaning any of the rest of the dead in verse 5, the fact they are not even dead during the millennium, they are alive during it. In order to live again, one has to be dead first.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Though, I have never thought about it like that, there does appear to be some logic to that since those in Revelation 20:7-9 would have been alive during the millennium, yet not rebelling during the millennium then after the millennium rebelling, therefore leading to their destruction. Except for one detail, the ones in verse 8-9 can't be meaning any of the rest of the dead in verse 5, the fact they are not even dead during the millennium, they are alive during it. In order to live again, one has to be dead first.

Are you referring to Revelation 20:8-9?

 

[Aunty Jane]

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.

I agree up to this point. It is when he returned to heaven that he became the King of God’s Kingdom...(Daniel 7:13-14)...the means that God had implemented to restore all that was lost in the rebellion in Eden.

Christ had played his role as redeemer and in his death all the dead would be granted life....some who died faithful, given an immediate entry, whilst others often through no fault on their part, perhaps being born in the wrong nation or in the wrong era....these will come back to a period of judgment. (John 5:28-29)

And that it is not until He returns in the end of this age that He even comes into His kingdom(Luke 19:15).

Yes, the master’s return is to give a reward to his faithful slaves for doing what he asked them to do with the talents he entrusted to them. Each one according to their ability. But not the same result was demanded from each one. God knows our capabilities and does not demand more than we can do.

But his return is two fold...to reward the faithful, and to pass sentence on those who failed to deliver anything. Knowing the assignment, there is no excuse for sitting on it, and being unproductive.
Then there are the goats....

Paul tells us....in 2 Thess 1:5-10....
“This is a proof of the righteous judgment of God, leading to your being counted worthy of the Kingdom of God, for which you are indeed suffering.

6  This takes into account that it is righteous on God’s part to repay tribulation to those who make tribulation for you. 7  But you who suffer tribulation will be given relief along with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels 8  in a flaming fire, as he brings vengeance on those who do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus. 9  These very ones will undergo the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction from before the Lord and from the glory of his strength, 10  at the time when he comes to be glorified in connection with his holy ones and to be regarded in that day with wonder among all those who exercised faith, because the witness we gave met with faith among you.”

Only two categories of people will fail at the judgment....those who “do not know God”, because they don’t want to know him....and those who “do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus”. God doesn’t really care about labels.....Jesus will be judging all individually.

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.

There are a multitude of opinions among many scholars, but only the one opinion is correct.....not because God made it confusing, but because the devil planted a crop of “weeds”, all masquerading as “wheat”.

The “wheat” are still there, but satan has made sure that he has painted them in the worst light, so that no one will take them seriously. Look what he did to the son of God! The Pharisees said he was a fraud and got his power from the devil.....sadly the majority of the Jews believed them....and rejected their own Messiah.

He painted Noah like he was a nutter....yet they all believed him in the end...but too late.
God gives all ample opportunity to come to know him. (John 17:3)

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.

The Bible promotes soul sleep, not immortality of the soul. Jews never believed in an afterlife directly after death because their Scripture never mentioned it.....all hope of living again was by means of a resurrection.
This was a return to life on earth in the flesh, whereas the future resurrection planned for the saints/elect was a spiritual one, being given a new body to rule with Christ in heaven.....the place he went to prepare for them coming after him.

For the chosen ones (saints/elect) it means sleeping in death until Christ’s return, when the Kingdom will be made ready to take over rulership of the whole world. Daniel told us what to expect.....

Speaking of the last ruling kings of this world system, which is the time we are living in now, he said...
“In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever”.

This is God eliminating every last vestige of satan’s rulership and replacing it with his own. It will be the permanent solution to all of mankind’s troubles.....all traced back to the original rebellion.

Unless we know what this Kingdom is for, how can we tell others about it? (Matt 24:14)

Look what Jesus said about Lazarus....
“After he said these things, he added: “Lazʹa·rus our friend has fallen asleep, but I am traveling there to awaken him.” 12  The disciples then said to him: “Lord, if he is sleeping, he will get well.” 13  Jesus, however, had spoken about his death. But they imagined he was speaking about taking rest in sleep. 14  Then Jesus said to them plainly: “Lazʹa·rus has died”. (John 11:11-14)

Paul also spoke about those who were “asleep”. (1 Thess 4:13-17) He said that they “will rise first”....when Christ returns....a furure event from his time.

 

[Hiddenthings]

There are a multitude of opinions among many scholars, but only the one opinion is correct.....not because God made it confusing, but because the devil planted a crop of “weeds”, all masquerading as “wheat”.

The “wheat” are still there, but satan has made sure that he has painted them in the worst light, so that no one will take them seriously. Look what he did to the son of God! The Pharisees said he was a fraud and got his power from the devil.....sadly the majority of the Jews believed them....and rejected their own Messiah.

Wow so misled Jane

The reapers are the angels – Ministers to heirs of salvation Hebrews 1:14; Genesis 48:16. They will be present at judgement Luke 12:8–9.

Those that sow the tares are the wicked men (and women) of this world like the Pharisees who endeavor to corrupt the Gospel with all their traditions.

False accusers are everywhere in the world but none of them are Angels.

When will you learn?

 

[Hiddenthings]

Though, I have never thought about it like that, there does appear to be some logic to that since those in Revelation 20:7-9 would have been alive during the millennium, yet not rebelling during the millennium then after the millennium rebelling, therefore leading to their destruction. Except for one detail, the ones in verse 8-9 can't be meaning any of the rest of the dead in verse 5, the fact they are not even dead during the millennium, they are alive during it. In order to live again, one has to be dead first.

If you are referring to “Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle,” this event occurs after Christ’s return and the judgment of God’s house. It is Christ and the saints who deliver Jerusalem from their enemies (King of the North), and it happens before the beginning of Christ’s reign on earth. The second resurrection takes place after the final rebellion when sin and death are swallowed up for good.