Are you serious? All pre-mills have that perspective because all pre-mills believe that the first resurrection refers to a mass bodily resurrection of believers. Can you name one pre-mill who does not have that perspective? Do you not have that perspective? If so, tell me your understanding of how someone has part in the first resurrection.
So you don't accept a physical resurrection? I guess that explains it then.
One does not have to be resurrected at all. Paul was never expected to be resurrected, but alive and remain at the Second Coming.
Amils don't believe in a mass bodily resurrection?
The soul enters God's permanent incorruptible physical body. That is a first resurrection. The soul does not enter another soul. The soul does not enter a spirit. If the soul leaves this current physical body, then the first resurrection is entering a different physical body. The physical body is not resurrected and changed. That body has returned to dust. It no longer exists as a physical body, even if there is a skeleton.
The first resurrection is not that old body coming out of the grave. It is the first physical body the soul enters after leaving this physical body.
The only mass body resurrection happened at the Cross. That was the only mass physical resurrection that will ever happen in history. So it cannot fit the point, another one must happen for there to be a first resurrection. Was there a "must" involved in even that first, first resurrection? Do you even accept there is a physical body involved?
The person who started this thread is not even sure if the first resurrection involves a physical body. Was Jesus born with a physical body, or was it merely spiritual and not physical? That is why I cannot fathom this doctrine that tends to divide creation into spiritual and physical attributes. Adam had a physical body that was spiritual, because it came from God. And it came from physical dirt from God. It was spiritual because it was of God, not God.
Adam lost that physical body and was given a temporal, corruptible body of death. Jesus was born with God's permanent incorruptible physical body, not Adam's dead corruptible temporal flesh. It did not have to die, to change. It was already permanent and incorruptible. It died because death was required of a Lamb sacrifice. His body did not change, but Jesus experienced the first death and first resurrection, because the soul and spirit left the physical body for 3 days as required of proof of death.
Of course we can only take God's Word for it, because they sealed the stone, and no one could see even what happened during those 3 days to that body. So destroying the clear meaning of the first birth, death, and resurrection just to make some nonsensical human theological doctrine is certainly an option. But not the only option. And no, there must not be just one option, obviously. If we could not have any other thoughts, it would never be a debate to begin with.
The first resurrection has been an ongoing phenomenon since the Cross. The blessing is realized already in Paradise. Revelation 20:4 just gives us a glimpse of that last group of souls allowed this permanent incorruptible physical body. This is not a mass bodily resurrection. This is an event where some experience the first resurrection.
Matthew 27 is the only place that declares they came out of their tombs, but it does not define the physical body they had. Most assume they all died again, but why have two first resurrections? Still no pre-mill around that I know of states they must have had a physical body to enjoy that first resurrection.
Although, do you claim they did not have a first resurrection, thereby avoiding the point altogether? Should we now say it is wrong, that people
must have a physical body to have a first birth? Seems like only those claiming the second birth is the first resurrection, are those who turn creation into something it is not. The second birth and death is spiritual. That is because in our condition the spiritual and physical are divided. That does not mean it is divided for those currently in Paradise, nor ever divided for those after physical death. Just because a soul does not have a body, does not mean the physical aspects of creation cease to exist. In fact they still feel and experience a lot of physical attributes of creation. Torment is still torment either physical or spiritual, there is no separation of reality for torment.
The second birth is still typified as a resurrection out of death, but cannot be the first resurrection, as that is physical. The second birth gives you a spiritual standing with God as a son of God. The first resurrection gives you a physical body as a son of God. Being glorified or putting on immortality, which is just a negative way of saying "life", is putting on the spirit. Putting on life is putting on the spirit. Putting on the robe of white in the 5th Seal is putting on the spirit. That is the third aspect of being (of God). The third birth, yet to happen to the church as a whole, if you may. Except it is not a birth, but way more than a resurrection. Being glorified is not the first resurrection nor the second birth. But it is what makes us whole: soul, body, and spirit.
