The final harvest?

[Timtofly]

Well, that's not why they were killed. They were martyred, Timtofly, because of their witness of Jesus. Yes, they witnessed of Jesus because they were spiritually alive, but they were not killed because of being alive in the spirit. It's right there in the text you quoted.

They were not martyred. No verse claims that. Was Jesus martyred on the Cross, by the Jews and Romans so humans could have salvation?

Was it God's plan even before Genesis 1:1?

It was also God's plan that at a certain point, some humans would choose between their head and the mark.

Both you and the other poster are wrong about their spiritual condition at the point their head was severed from their body. They were never born again. They never reigned with Christ prior to chopping off their head. The beheading was their second birth. They did that in faith. They refused the mark, and chose to loose their head instead.

They had to stand in judgment to determine if they received the first resurrection. They were granted the first resurrection after the judgment, not prior to them physically dying.

You really have to change every Scripture verse in God's Word to make Amil believable.

The first birth is physical. The first death is physical. The first resurrection is physical because it restores life after physical death. That principle cannot be refuted by any means. You have to change reality itself to make it something other than what first means in Scripture.

Jesus flipped the understanding of Nicodemus around, not reality. The second birth was always a reality, but was the faith part of Abraham's spiritual inheritance passed down. The Law was all about the physical aspect of a spiritual type. The second birth is still a type of resurrection but not the resurrection of what is physical.

And yes, all those in Christ in Paradise are seated physically in heavenly places. Just like they have been physically serving in that heavenly temple, day and night, since 30AD. What has not happened is the complete restoration of spirit with soul and body.


Prior to the Cross, the soul was alone in Abraham's bosom, the valley of the shadow of death. No permanent incorruptible physical body. After the Cross the physical resurrection was then an ongoing phenomenon both soul and body enjoying Paradise.

They will be raptured, caught up from Paradise just the same as those on earth, and the meeting place is in the air between heaven and earth. More verses point to their rapture from Paradise than from the living although in death on the earth. The truth of the matter is that those on earth are physically dead, being mortal, more so than those in Paradise.

The final step is the restoration of the spirit. Then Adam will be restored soul, body, and spirit. Now a complete son of God. The Holy Spirit only seals the soul, who we are. This body of death is not sealed. This body returns to dust. The spirit is waiting as part of the heavenly host. If you had your spirit, you would be a son of God, and have no need of salvation. The spirit is not dead. You are spiritually separated from the point of being a son of God.

Your soul born of the second birth is not given life, since it already had life. It is sealed of the Holy Spirit and should be now submitted to the will of the Holy Spirit. It is then at enmity with your physical body. That flesh has to be crucified daily, so in a sense the physical Law of Moses must continue, but without the outward show of the flesh with the sacrifice of bulls and burnt offerings. There is no longer an earthly priest standing between you and God, but Jesus as the high priest as your advocate with the Father.

So at physical death, the soul no longer has to be sealed but is redeemed, and enters the permanent incorruptible physical body in Paradise given by God like the original body came from God on the 6th day. No longer Adam's image of flesh passed down from generation to generation. 2 Corinthians 5:1. That still leaves the restoration of the spirit for the moment of the Second Coming. 1 John 3:2, Revelation 6:11, and 1 Corinthians 15:52-54.

And this is still pre-trib. Based on the point those glorified must wait until all the rest of the living on earth shed Adam's dead corruptible flesh. It states it right there:

"should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled"

This does not mean saved people were left on earth. It means dead people in Adam's dead state still had to shed that dead state to allow them to be fellow servants and brethren. Those in Abraham's bosom had to wait thousands of years for the Cross. They were waiting for their fellowservants and brethren not even born yet. Not in the sense these people were left behind. At the Cross, Paradise was opened, and a permanent incorruptible physical body made available. They have still waited for thousands of years for their fellowservants and brethren. Is that picture of waiting that hard to discern? Now at the Second Coming, they still must wait a little season. The time of Jacob's trouble when Israel is restored as God promised. That restoration has been waiting since 720BC. That is who are the fellowservants and brethren, during this little season, that starts at the 5th Seal.

It is not that souls have been left behind for thousands of years. It is the point that humans on earth still have the opportunity to be redeemed. Those on the earth make up this restoration, so earth can be subdued. The church was already complete, and no one enters the church after the 5th Seal. The church on earth is not relatable, after all things are restored. No one passes sin and death on to the next generation. But all humanity are fellow heirs of the redemption of the Cross. That is the only means of restoring Adam's disobedience.

 

[ewq1938]

Well no, but I understand that you think that...


I did. Well, to be more specific, they died, regardless of the reason why they died, and before that had experienced the first ~ the spiritual ~ resurrection... the resurrection of the dead spirit they were born with, as all human beings are.

Yes so you do admit they were spiritually resurrected before they died. This means the next resurrection spoken of is the physical resurrection, called the first resurrection.

Let's look at the verse with your own words inserted:

Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands (regardless of the reason why they died, and before that had experienced the first ~ the spiritual ~ resurrection); and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Clearly the first resurrection is something they experience AFTER BEING DEAD. You already placed their spiritual resurrection before they died. So contextually the mention of the first resurrection is a different resurrection than the spiritual resurrection that happened BEFORE being killed.

 

[PinSeeker]

They were not martyred. No verse claims that.

"Beheaded," Timtofly, in Revelation 20:4, signifies that.

Both you and the other poster are wrong about their spiritual condition at the point their head was severed from their body.

So you think; I understand.

They were never born again.

They were, else they would not have been witnessing (giving testimony) of Jesus and for the Word of God. They were believers, which is an incontrovertible indication of saving faith, which is only possible if one has been born again.

The beheading was their second birth. They did that in faith. They refused the mark, and chose to loose their head instead.

Oh, my Lord.

They had to stand in judgment to determine if they received the first resurrection.

One takes part in the first resurrection as a result of God's mercy and compassion (Romans 9;16). There is no judgement, primarily because the Judgment does not happen until Jesus returns, but also ~ temporally speaking ~ because there is no longer any condemnation sin (Romans 8:1).

They were granted the first resurrection after the judgment, not prior to them physically dying.

So you think; I understand.

You really have to change every Scripture verse in God's Word to make Amil believable.

So you think; I understand, but not so at all. Even your ideas of amillennialism are faulty; many of them are not what amillennialists would assert at all, which I have been ver6 clear on but yet you continue, which is really quite astounding.

The first birth is physical.

And we are born dead in spirit, dead in our sin, so the second birth must be spiritual. But not all experience it, this birth of the Holy Spirit.

The first death is physical.

If one skips (or possibly denies altogether) that he/she is born dead in spirit, dead in his/her sin, and thus in need of new birth by the Spirit... But just on its face, yes, the first death is physical; our bodies indeed die.

The first resurrection is physical because it restores life after physical death. That principle cannot be refuted by any means.

So you think, but no, the first resurrection (Ephesians 2:4-10, 1 Peter 1:3-5) is irrefutably spiritual and occurs before spiritual death. One cannot experience this new birth of the Spirit and this raising to life in Christ after his or her physical death. Jesus's parable in Luke 16 shows us that, among other things.

You have to change reality itself to make it something other than what first means in Scripture.

LOL! One has to apparently change reality itself to make it correspond to... gel with... what you think Scripture is telling us... Case in point, "all those in Christ in Paradise are seated physically in heavenly places" (you apparently believe no one on earth now is saved). I mean there's plenty more... But there are some things ~ some <chuckles> ~ in your... manifesto, here... ...that I am at least close to agreeing with you on. I think I'll leave it at that.

Grace and peace to you, Timtofly.

 

[PinSeeker]

Yes so you do admit they were spiritually resurrected before they died. This means the next resurrection spoken of is the physical resurrection...

Yes. So, in order, the first and the second. One! One resurrection! Two! Two resurrection! AHHHHHH...HAHAHAHAHAHAHHHHHH...!!!

Clearly the first resurrection is something they experience AFTER BEING DEAD.

So you think; I understand. Actually, I agree with the statement itself, but you mean something different that what you actually say here. By "after being dead," you mean after their physical death, but as I have said, we are all spiritually dead, dead in our sin, from birth ~ this is the natural human condition ~ and in need of spiritual life, new life of the spirit in the Holy Spirit, which requires spiritual resurrection from this natural state of being. In that sense, yes, I agree that the first resurrection is something we all experience after being spiritually dead. Again:

"But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ ~ by grace you have been saved ~ and raised us up with Him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus..." (Ephesians 2:4-6)​

​

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to His great mercy, He has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead..." (1 Peter 1:3)​

You already placed their spiritual resurrection before they died.

I did. So it is for all of us Christians. Hebrews 11 is very clear on the fact that we are all ~ all, from Abel on up ~ saved the same way.

So contextually the mention of the first resurrection is a different resurrection than the spiritual resurrection that happened BEFORE being killed.

No, contextually, they were reborn of the Spirit and therefore resurrected of the spirit from spiritual death (death in their sin), else they would not have been witnessing of Jesus, and for the word of God. So the first resurrection is the spiritual resurrection that happens before one physically dies (whether he or she is killed or not).

But... we disagree. I'm good with that. What's puzzling to me is why you and Timtofly seem so... well, to put it very, very mildly, so up-in-arms. Actually, I'm not puzzled; I have a pretty good idea why that is, but I'll keep that to myself.

Grace and peace to you, my friend.

 

[Timtofly]

CORRECT: The rest of the dead come to life progressively over the course of the thousand years, and when the thousand years are ended, all of them will have come to life.

INCORRECT: "The thousand years completely expire without any of them having come to life, and then they all do at once."

I would exhort you to think about this, Timtofly, and not reject it outright without doing so.

You added the word "progressively" to the book of Revelation. Have you considered this:

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:"

Being beheaded is not an ongoing phenomenon over the course of thousands of years. Neither is rejecting the mark.

Now to address this progressive resurrection as you call it:

You have them both dying and resurrecting as part of the same action. How does judgment fit in? You claim only one resurrection, one day judgment, yet you refute your own teaching with a progressive judgment and resurrection happening continuously.

INCORRECT: "The thousand years completely expire without any of them having come to life, and then they all do at once."

This is your position, and you say it is incorrect? You teach a single resurrection at the end. John does not write there will be a resurrection after the thousand years, nor states a resurrection at the GWT judgment. That is reading between the lines of what John wrote. Even using other Scripture is not wrong. The point that is wrong is a progressive resurrection you claim is spiritual. Being beheaded is a physical act, not a spiritual act. Putting one's head back on is the first resurrection. Cutting one's head off is not how a spiritual birth happens now, nor would a physical beheading by it's own merit, qualify as a reason to be later resurrected in the sense John is giving us.

If one is spiritually beheaded it would have nothing whatsoever to do with physical death nor being martyred.

In fact you claim they are martyred. Now I don't agree, but you are making it a physical death, because that is the standard accepted definition of being martyred. No one teaches spiritual martyrdom. One is not spiritually martyred so they then need this second birth you call a first resurrection. One is both in a state of physical death and spiritual death at conception. One is not conceived into God's permanent incorruptible physical body. One is conceived into Adam's dead corruptible flesh.

That is why the first birth is always physical. The first death is always physical. The first resurrection is always physical. The soul changes bodies at physical death. The soul is not physically dead at the physical death. The body is physically dead at physical death. The soul is currently in a state of physical death even in this physical body, because of this physical body. Just because this body is death.

Then we consider the spiritual side in distinction from the physical. Not because of some great divide, but because death seperates us from the spiritual. The second birth is the entrance into the spiritual out of death. But has nothing to do with the first resurrection. The first resurrection is our only experience with a physical resurrection.

So during this thousand year period there is no ongoing death and resurrection. The death happened prior to a judgment. The judgment happened prior to the first resurrection, and the first resurrection happened prior to the thousand year period.

We see that, because the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were over. So no ongoing progressive resurrection phenomenon during the thousand years. One group experienced the first resurrection at the start. They lived the entire thousand years. After the thousand years, another group may experience the first resurrection. You agree the first resurrection is not about time or chronological order. The first resurrection has been an ongoing phenomenon since the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. That is the point of:

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."

The first resurrection is not waiting until the end. It has always been available.

Nor does this change the point:

"Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."

Please explain who are still in their graves, a state of death at the GWT? Certainly not the church. Certainly not the sheep nor wheat. And certainly not those beheaded who were given the first resurrection a thousand years before the rest of the dead still in their graves.

Then notice the distinction between coming out and any resurrection:

"And shall come forth"

"And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works."

That "come forth" part is not a resurrection. That is the moment the dead stand in judgment. The first resurrection is not them coming forth. The first resurrection is only one type of sentence rendered at this judgment:

"they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life"

"they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."

Two different types of resurrections here. Neither have been an ongoing phenomenon. Because the dead have been filling up sheol, death, and the sea as the ongoing phenomenon. The first resurrection is not an ongoing phenomenon during the thousand years. The first resurrection was not an ongoing phenomenon prior to the Cross. The first resurrection started at the Cross and was ongoing until the Day of the Lord. At that point, John clearly pointed out no more ongoing phenomenon of a resurrection. Jesus never stated in John 5 it would always continue until that last judgment. Jesus said all still dead would come forth on that last hour. That is in contrast to the ongoing first resurrection phenomenon stated here:

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."

Those who are of the Second Birth never die, so the first resurrection is automatically experienced when the soul leaves this body of death, for the body of life from God in Paradise. That stops at that first resurrection in Revelation 20:4. There is no death to be resurrected out of during the Day of the Lord. No one will physically die of natural causes. If one disobeys Jesus, they will be placed in Death to stand as dead at the GWT. That is found in Isaiah 65.

So then we see according to John that at the GWT the vast majority receive the resurrection to damnation. Yet Jesus also pointed out the dead may also receive the resurrection of life.

You all state an ongoing first resurrection, but merely spiritual and still condemn even the redeemed to a state of death, without a resurrection to life, in contradiction to the first resurrection you state is progressive and ongoing.

Those in Christ leave death behind the instant they leave Adam's dead corruptible flesh. That is the first resurrection without judgment, as judgment was sentenced on the Cross. Those beheaded in contrast are not sentenced at the Cross, but stand before judgment prior to the thousand years. Being beheaded is physical and the point of the second birth, but judgment is passed after the 42 months are over. Then we see the rest of the dead are still in a state of death, until the thousand years are over. Then they stand, still as dead, to be judged and sentenced. Two outcomes await those dead, as they never realized either outcome, prior to physical death. Once again, the first resurrection, physical, to eternal life, or the second death as they are still physically dead and only resurrected to remain in an eternal state of the second death. Thus John 5 overrules total annihilation. The point of resurrection in the case of eternal damnation is clearly stated.

Yet many Amil change the wording in Revelation 20:5

"But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection."

You have explained there is a progressive ongoing dying and resurrecting during this period of time. You all have to make this a physical phenomenon. How can humans be dying spiritually and spiritually resurrecting as an ongoing phenomenon? Spiritual death is not an ongoing phenomenon. That is the only state at conception. There is no experience prior to conception of a soul. We are born into death, and have to be physically resurrected out of death, an ongoing phenomenon, and spiritually born into God's family, an ongoing phenomenon.

 

[Timtofly]

You're conflating to very different things, Timtofly

BTW, I am not ewq1938.

 

[Timtofly]

"Beheaded," Timtofly, in Revelation 20:4, signifies that.

Beheaded does not signify anything else but that they physically died because they had their head chopped off.

They were not martyred. They did not physically die because of being born from above.


They were born from above in the very act of being beheaded. It was their spiritual birth into God's family, and also their last act in the physical world.

They were, else they would not have been witnessing (giving testimony) of Jesus and for the Word of God. They were believers, which is an incontrovertible indication of saving faith, which is only possible if one has been born again.

The point of beheading was their testimony. Not anything they did prior to being beheaded.

One takes part in the first resurrection as a result of God's mercy and compassion (Romans 9;16). There is no judgement, primarily because the Judgment does not happen until Jesus returns, but also ~ temporally speaking ~ because there is no longer any condemnation sin (Romans 8:1).

"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded"

This is not the Cross. This will be a one time judgment only for those beheaded.

Not about the church at all, unless it was the church sitting on those thrones.

So you think; I understand, but not so at all. Even your ideas of amillennialism are faulty; many of them are not what amillennialists would assert at all, which I have been very clear on but yet you continue, which is really quite astounding.

And we are born dead in spirit, dead in our sin, so the second birth must be spiritual. But not all experience it, this birth of the Holy Spirit.

I think it is Amil who claim the first resurrection is the second birth, when Scripture teaches they are two distinct actions.

The first resurrection is a physical resurrection when the soul leaves Adam's physical body for God's physical body. The second birth is adoption into the family of God. Or as Paul put it, grafted into Jesus Christ. The second birth is spiritual. The first resurrection is physical.

If one skips (or possibly denies altogether) that he/she is born dead in spirit, dead in his/her sin, and thus in need of new birth by the Spirit... But just on its face, yes, the first death is physical; our bodies indeed die.


So you think, but no, the first resurrection (Ephesians 2:4-10, 1 Peter 1:3-5) is irrefutably spiritual and occurs before spiritual death. One cannot experience this new birth of the Spirit and this raising to life in Christ after his or her physical death. Jesus's parable in Luke 16 shows us that, among other things.

How does a resurrection work prior to death? Seems backwards.

If one does not exist, one cannot be nor do anything.

LOL! One has to apparently change reality itself to make it correspond to... gel with... what you think Scripture is telling us... Case in point, "all those in Christ in Paradise are seated physically in heavenly places" (you apparently believe no one on earth now is saved). I mean there's plenty more... But there are some things ~ some <chuckles> ~ in your... manifesto, here... ...that I am at least close to agreeing with you on. I think I'll leave it at that.

Grace and peace to you, Timtofly.

I never claimed no one on earth is unsaved. You state one can only sit in heaven spiritually. Sitting is a physical act along with a physical birth, physical growth, physical experience, and yes even physical death and resurrection.

Not until we physically leave earth, can we physically sit in heavenly places. You are the one selling this experience short, not me. You cannot even allow yourself the experience. You can only put that experience in black and white on a page of text, and call it spiritual. You are certainly not experiencing that phenomenon. While your spiritual birth in Christ affords that experience, your state of death is still binding you to the physical. Not until physical death will you experience the first resurrection, and then you will no longer be Amil at that point. Contrary to popular opinion, Amil is only a physical thought process of the soul.

 

[ewq1938]

Yes.

The rest of your post belies this though. You know the beheaded saints had their spiritual resurrection before they were killed so this means the next resurrection they experience is the physical resurrection. That is fully Premill. You at least know the beheaded saints had their spiritual resurrection before they were killed. Most Amills do not understand that. Hopefully that seed will grow in you.

 

[PinSeeker]

The rest of your post belies this though.

Well no. it just belies your current understanding of things, EWQ, but that's a good thing.

You know the beheaded saints had their spiritual resurrection before they were killed so this means the next resurrection they experience is the physical resurrection.

Sure. I've said this many times.

That is fully Premill.

Not necessarily, no.

You at least know the beheaded saints had their spiritual resurrection before they were killed. Most Amills do not understand that.

Well if they don't, then that makes them not amillennial...

Hopefully that seed will grow in you.

Grace and peace to you, EWQ.

 

[ewq1938]

Sure. I've said this many times.


Not necessarily, no.

If the beheaded saints of Rev 20:4 had a spiritual resurrection before they were physically killed, then that is Premill because it would make their participation in the first resurrection as their physical resurrection from physical death. Amill does not interpret it that way as they believe the beheading is symbolic and not a literal method of death and thus believe the first resurrection is a spiritual resurrection while still physically alive. You are closer to Premill on this issue than you are to Amill, and that is a good thing we can build upon.

 

[PinSeeker]

You added the word "progressively" to the book of Revelation.

No, I was just explaining the Revelation 20:1-6 says that the events described therein happen over the course of ~ progressively during ~ the millennium. I didn't add anything to the Word of God. That's a ridiculous accusation and therefore dismissed.

Being beheaded is not an ongoing phenomenon over the course of thousands of years. Neither is rejecting the mark.

Yeah, not what I said. My goodness. Your reading comprehension skills seem very questionable, Timtofly.

You have them both dying and resurrecting as part of the same action.

What? LOL! No...

How does judgment fit in?

As if I haven't been very clear on that several times, both here and in other threads...

You claim only one resurrection, one day judgment, yet you refute your own teaching with a progressive judgment and resurrection happening continuously.

This statement is a conflation of two very different things, Timtofly. Again, your reading comprehension skills... wow. Okay, one more time:

The first resurrection

• described in Revelation 20:4-6
• spiritual, individual to and experienced by/shared in only to/by God's elect
• occurs, over the course of the millennium prior to Christ's return

Second resurrection

• has just taken place after the close of the millennium and on Christ's return and prior to the final Judgment described in Revelation 20;11-15
• physical/bodily
• general to all, believers as well as unbelievers (the former bodily resurrected to eternal life and the latter bodily resurrected to judgment/eternal punishment ~ John 5:28-29)

PinSeeker: INCORRECT: "The thousand years completely expire without any of them having come to life, and then they all do at once."​

This is your position, and you say it is incorrect?

No, I was specifying that as incorrect and therefore not my position; what you said here my position is not my position at all. Wow.

You teach a single resurrection at the end.

Well, one physical resurrection, yes. I wouldn't say I teach it, but I do assert that, yes, because, well, Scripture does.

John does not write there will be a resurrection after the thousand years...

Yes he does... See above.

...nor states a resurrection at the GWT judgment.

Well, just prior to. On Christ's return. At the close of the millennium. See above.

The point that is wrong is a progressive resurrection you claim is spiritual.

I'm fully aware of your position on this Timtofly. I say your rebuttal of this point is wrong. We will agree to disagree.

Being beheaded is a physical act, not a spiritual act.

Yes, but you're reading John's vision in a way that it should not be read... very, very "wooden," and far to literalistic. Some martyrs were actually beheaded (like John the Baptist), but others were not (like Peter, who was crucified upside down). But the point of John's vision there is not that they were actually beheaded, but that they were martyred, that they symbolically "had their heads taken off" for their testimonies regarding Christ.

Putting one's head back on is the first resurrection.

Oh my... LOL! Well, if you were speaking here in a symbolic fashion, then I would agree, but... LOL!

Cutting one's head off is not how a spiritual birth happens now...

Of course not. Good Lord.

One is both in a state of physical death and spiritual death at conception.

LOL! No, just spiritual, this is the natural human condition. Good Lord.

One is not conceived into God's permanent incorruptible physical body. One is conceived into Adam's dead corruptible flesh.

Right. Never suggested otherwise. Good Lord.

That is why the first birth is always physical. The first death is always physical.

Sure. Never suggested otherwise. Good Lord.

The first resurrection is always physical.

Nope. We disagree on this. See above.

The soul changes bodies at physical death.

The spirit/soul is separated from the physical body at death and either, in the case of God's elect, goes to be with Jesus in paradise that very day (as was the case with the thief crucified on Jesus's right) or goes... somewhere else... that very day (as was the case with the thief crucified on Jesus's left). They enter in to what we call the intermediate state and await the physical resurrection, when they will be reunited with their physical bodies and stand before Jesus in the final Judgment.

The soul is not physically dead at the physical death. The body is physically dead at physical death

Agree. The soul/spirit is not physical, so it can't be dead physically... But sure; see above.

The soul is currently in a state of physical death even in this physical body, because of this physical body. Just because this body is death.

In this life, all people are spiritually dead from birth; they are dead in their sin ~ but physically alive, of course. This may or may not remain the case, as they may at some point be born again of the Holy Spirit (if they are elect of God, of course), in which case they would be spiritually alive, made so by God by His Spirit.

What you say here seems similar to what Paul says in Romans 7, Timtofly, when he dramatically laments, "Who will deliver me from this body of death?" But he's not saying, of course, that he's physically dead, else he would not be able to physically say/write/do anything at all. One cannot be physically alive and physically dead at the same time; surely you don't actually think that...

Wow.

 

[PinSeeker]

The second birth is the entrance into the spiritual out of death.

The second birth (as I've said numerous times now) results in the resurrection of the spirit within us, the spirit being made alive, brought from death in sin to life in Christ, wherein we no longer live to the world and ourselves but to God, and from that point on we walk in the Spirit.

But has nothing to do with the first resurrection.

It is the first resurrection. We disagree.

So during this thousand year period there is no ongoing death and resurrection...

That's your position. I fully understand, and disagree.

The judgment happened prior to the first resurrection...

Disagree... In order, the first resurrection (which is spiritual and not everyone experiences), the first death (which is physical and everyone experiences) ~ both of which happen in full prior to the close of the millennium and before Christ's return ~ and the second resurrection (which is physical, where our disembodies spirits are reunited with our physical bodies, which everyone experiences) ~ happens after the close of the millennium and upon Christ's return and just prior to the final Judgment, which is executed by Christ. See above.

BTW, I am not ewq1938.

I replied to you both in the same post. For consolidation purposes. You are... two of a kind, that's for sure...

Beheaded does not signify anything else but that they physically died because they had their head chopped off.

So you say. Disagree. Again, you're reading John's vision in a way that it should not be read... very, very "wooden," and far too literalistic; see above.

The point of beheading was their testimony. Not anything they did prior to being beheaded.

Yes, the reason for their being physically killed was their testimony of Christ. This is what martyrdom is.

"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded" This is not the Cross. This will be a one time judgment only for those beheaded. Not about the church at all, unless it was the church sitting on those thrones.

Dude. There is no judgment here in Revelation 20:4. Those beheaded are given authority to judge. I agree it's not the Cross; I don't even know why you feel like that needs to be said. But it's not a judgment for those beheaded. My Lord. The resurrection of Revelation 20:4-6 is experienced by all those who are raised to spiritual life in Christ ~ spiritually resurrected from their spiritual dead-ness in sin, as it happens for them individually over the course of the millennium.

I think it is Amil who claim the first resurrection is the second birth, when Scripture teaches they are two distinct actions.

Well, the first resurrection is a result of the second birth. They are not the exact same thing, but intimately related. I've said this many times.

The first resurrection is a physical resurrection...

Nope.

... when the soul leaves Adam's physical body for God's physical body.

I don't even know what this means. When we Christians physically die, our spirits, which were once dead but made alive and raised to life in Christ at some point in our lifetime, leave our physical body and go to be with Jesus. And until Jesus returns, our spirits are separate from our physical bodies and awaiting the second resurrection, the physical resurrection, when our spirits are reunited with our physical bodies. This is orthodox Christianity, Timtofly.

The second birth is adoption into the family of God.

That would be the first. The second is consummation of it, when our spirits are reunited with our bodies and we are with the Lord in spirit and body ~ in person ~ ultimately (after the final Judgment and unbelievers are sent away) for eternity.

...as Paul put it, grafted into Jesus Christ. The second birth is spiritual.

Agree with this.... Never disagreed with this...

The first resurrection is physical.

Nope. Spiritual. Our spirits are raised... resurrected... after having been made alive ~ born again of the Spirit ~ before which, though physically alive, dead in spirit, dead in sin.

How does a resurrection work prior to death? Seems backwards.

Well, that is backwards, I agree, but that's contrary to what I have been saying. See above. From our birth, we are dead spiritually, and we are subsequently born again and thus resurrected from this spiritual death, Timtofly. I understand that you disagree, but why you keep answering backwards questions like this is beyond me. Incredible, really. You seem to not want to acknowledge our being born physically but dead physically, which Scripture is very clear about many times over.

You state one can only sit in heaven spiritually.

No, I've never said that... But, after our being born again and placed in Christ, we are raised spiritually and seated with Christ ~ in spirit ~ in the heavenly places, which is exactly what Paul says in Ephesians 2.

You are the one selling this experience short, not me.

LOL!!! You are only reading what I say that way. That's your deal, my friend, and yours alone. Wow.

While your spiritual birth in Christ affords that experience,

See, now, how you can say this ~ which is correct; yes, it is a spiritual reality ~ but still not understand (or deny) what I've said over and over again is just astounding. Literally astounding.

...your state of death is still binding you to the physical...

Are you suggesting that I have not been born again of the Spirit, Timtofly? I would suggest to you that, as Scripture says, none of us should call unclean what God has made clean.

Not until physical death will you experience the first resurrection, and then you will no longer be Amil at that point.

Think what you will, my friend.

Contrary to popular opinion, Amil is only a physical thought process of the soul.

LOL!!! I don't even know what this means.... A "physical thought process of the soul"? So you can actually see and/or touch thought processes? LOL!!!

Grace and peace to you, Timtofly.

 

[ewq1938]

The second birth (as I've said numerous times now) results in the resurrection of the spirit within us, the spirit being made alive, brought from death in sin to life in Christ, wherein we no longer live to the world and ourselves but to God, and from that point on we walk in the Spirit.


It is the first resurrection. We disagree.

That is not what the first resurrection is in regard to though. The beheaded ones already had a spiritual resurrection before being killed and later coming to life in the first of two resurrections. Obviously both resurrections in Rev 20 are physical.

The beheaded saints: Born in flesh, born a second time (spiritual resurrection), reject worship of beast and the mark and have the witness of Christ and are physically killed because of those things, John sees them in Rev 20 and sees them live and reign with Christ due to taking part in the first resurrection while John saw the "rest of the dead" live not again until after the thousand years.

Amill is wrong that there is only one mass resurrection in Rev 20.
Amill is wrong that the first resurrection is being born again while still physically alive.

 

[PinSeeker]

If the beheaded saints of Rev 20:4 had a spiritual resurrection before they were physically killed, then that is Premill...

Okay, well, it's also an amillennial understanding. There are some eschatological things that premillennialists get right...

...because it would make their participation in the first resurrection as their physical resurrection from physical death...

Not necessarily. That the only way premillennialists think it can go and is thus how premillennialists understand it, yes, but that's incorrect.

Amill does not interpret it that way...

Right, yes...

...they believe the beheading is symbolic...

well, symbolic of their being physically killed because of their testimony about Christ Jesus and thus martyred, but a very real thing for each of them individually, as I have said...

...and not a literal method of death...

Oh, yes, they were all literally physically killed, for sure. You apparently don't even know what you're arguing against, EWQ. Or are foisting things in error on amillennialists. Either way... not good.

...and thus believe the first resurrection is a spiritual resurrection while still physically alive.

Well, the first resurrection is a spiritual resurrection while still physically alive, yes, but it doesn't follow from the... well, wrongheaded thing you just said. It does, however, necessarily follow from the clarification I made immediately above. They are still physically alive, but spiritually, they have been brought from spiritual death to spiritual life... and thus spiritually raised (resurrected) and spiritually seated in the heavenly places in Christ. This, yet again, is exactly what Paul says in Ephesians 2:4-10.

You are closer to Premill on this issue than you are to Amill, and that is a good thing we can build upon.

Well, I would say that, regarding this one issue, premillennialists are closer to amillennialists than they realized, and really don't have that far to go to get things right. But, okay, sure, maybe there's hope for you yet.

Grace and peace to you, my friend.

 

[ewq1938]

Okay, well, it's also an amillennial understanding.

No, they don't accept that.

Well, the first resurrection is a spiritual resurrection while still physically alive, yes,

Not the first resurrection of Rev 20 though. It is a resurrection that happens to spiritually resurrected people that died, then they take part in the first of two resurrections to become physically alive again.

but it doesn't follow from the... well, wrongheaded thing you just said. It does, however, necessarily follow from the clarification I made immediately above. They are still physically alive, but spiritually, they have been brought from spiritual death to spiritual life... and thus spiritually raised (resurrected) and spiritually seated in the heavenly places in Christ. This, yet again, is exactly what Paul says in Ephesians 2:4-10.

And that takes place to them BEFORE they stand against the beast, refuse his mark and are killed. You keep trying to place the spiritual resurrection after the people died which is not how it works. The people are physically DEAD and come back to physical life in Rev 20:4

 

[PinSeeker]

No, they don't accept that.

They do. I am amillennial in my eschatological understanding, and I do accept it. Now, yes, as I have said, some who call themselves amillennial may not accept it, but in that case they are... well, at least not-very-good amillennial believers.

Not the first resurrection of Rev 20 though. It is a resurrection that happens to spiritually resurrected people that died, then they take part in the first of two resurrections to become physically alive again.

It is. We disagree. As I have said numerous times. Need the back and forth continue?

You keep trying to place the spiritual resurrection after the people died which is not how it works.

<sigh>... It (what I said) is "how it works,", EWQ. The problem is, you continue to conflate two very different things; you're conflating the spiritual with the physical... more specifically, trying to make the physical resurrection the remedy for the spiritual death. Plus ~ your silence on this is deafening ~ you seem opposed to the idea that man, in his natural state, even while physically alive, is spiritually dead..... Anyway, rather, the spiritual resurrection is the remedy for the spiritual death in that it enables the ones who share in it to avoid, or be kept from experiencing, the second death, eternal punishment. To correctly illustrate:

CONDITION:....Spiritual death (the natural human condition from physical birth... death in sin)
REMEDY:...........Spiritual resurrection (result of being born again of the Spirit; happens during physical life at the point one comes to life in Christ (John 3:8, Ephesians 2:6-8; 1 Peter 1:3-5); the first resurrection (Revelation 20:4-6, specific only to God's elect
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

CONDITION:....Physical death (no explanation needed; general and appointed to all ~ Hebrews 9:27; the first death)
REMEDY:...........Physical resurrection (also no explanation needed; general but a resurrection to two opposite things, as Jesus says in John 5:28-29, some to one [eternal life] and others to the other [judgment/eternal punishment], the latter being the second death)

The people are physically DEAD and come back to physical life in Rev 20:4

No one is back to physical life in Revelation 20:4 or Revelation 20:4-6. What John "sees" there is a vision of heaven before the return of Christ... or, if it's easier, you may think of it as a vision of heaven just before the return of Christ at the conclusion of the millennium, the "thousand years." Everyone is brought back to physical life in the physical resurrection that takes place immediately before what we see in the scene described in Revelation 20:11-15. I have said this many times. Revelation 20:7-10 is the final defeat of Satan and synonymous with what is described in Revelation 19:11-21.

But hey, EWQ, by all means, let's continue to go back and forth and repeat ourselves yet again!

Grace and peace to you.

 

[ewq1938]

They do. I am amillennial in my eschatological understanding, and I do accept it. Now, yes, as I have said, some who call themselves amillennial may not accept it, but in that case they are... well, at least not-very-good amillennial believers.


It is. We disagree. As I have said numerous times. Need the back and forth continue?

Apparently you needed to.

But hey, EWQ, by all means, let's continue to go back and forth and repeat ourselves yet again!

That's all you.

 

[PinSeeker]

Apparently you needed to.

You were the one keeping it going...

That's all you.

Ah, well, there's yet another thing we disagree on. Wanna argue about that?

Grace and peace to you.

 

[jeffweeder]

Not the first resurrection of Rev 20 though. It is a resurrection that happens to spiritually resurrected people that died, then they take part in the first of two resurrections to become physically alive again.

That is not what the first resurrection is. Jesus had already laid the foundation to John in John 5.

The time "now is" for the first passing from death to life....., and it has to Spiritually born again.


Jn 5
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.

26 For just as the Father has life in Himself [and is self-existent], even so He has given to the Son to have life in Himself [and be self-existent]. 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].

At this particular Hour below, all will come out of the tomb together. This speaks of physical, proving there is not a 1000 years between 2 physical resurrections.


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].

 

[ewq1938]

That is not what the first resurrection is.

Incorrect. It is exactly as I explained it. It is Amill that re-defines what the first resurrection of Rev 20 is, altering it's meaning.