The Ones Who Are Left…

[Brakelite]

passages that speak outright of resurrection speak of the just and unjust as being resurrected together.

Re 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.
Who are these guys?

 

[ScottA]

one could spin off in all sorts of directions imagining what is not revealed. I think there is sufficient revealed to make us speechless without needing to wonder about what is not revealed.

So then, no being guide into all truth, and no hearing what the Spirit says to the churches?

Sounds like quenching the spirit.

 

[Brakelite]

So then, no being guide into all truth, and no hearing what the Spirit says to the churches?

Sounds like quenching the spirit.

Helena Blavatsky could have said the same thing.

 

[Enoch111]

Possibly because its not.

Possibly because it. Kindly take some time to carefully study 1 Corinthians 15 along with related portions of Scripture and you will discover many things I have mentioned.

 

[ScottA]

And the meek inherit the earth...in which is time. I'm not even sure there isn't time in heaven. I mean, will we never consider what we did previously, and what we will do next?

What you have described, is world time being more and greater than eternal timelessness. See the problem? It's actually the other way around. It is world time that has restrictions and limits, and eternal timelessness that does not. The examples in scripture are numerous: "The Lamb slain before the foundation of the world", "before Abraham was, I am", etc., etc..

In Romans Paul lays out God amazing plans for Israel and Christians, and finishes with, among other things, the "renewing of your mind." That/this is the last chapter of God's plan--which is so unimaginably fantastic...even our minds are all wrong and need to be renewed. The above is just scratching the service.

 

[ScottA]

Helena Blavatsky could have said the same thing.

I was quoting Jesus Christ.

Don't know Helena Blavatsky.

 

[quietthinker]

So then, no being guide into all truth, and no hearing what the Spirit says to the churches?

Sounds like quenching the spirit.

Being revealed does not mean it is understood. I think the volume revealed available already fries minds. It is our privilege to discover what is already revealed.
Quenching is done when when we overlay scripture with faulty ideas/conclusions and insist on them being right. With this dynamic operative how is it possible to be guided into all truth? or do we count on being knocked off our donkey's with bright lights like Paul?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

There are several different takes on this passage in Revelation. Some, yes, do see it as meaning there must be two resurrections…by which they mean 2 separate physical resurrections.
However, there are those, and I am more persuaded by this argument, who believe that the ‘first resurrection’ being spoken about is not a physical one at all, but a spiritual one. Which would mean that the resurrection we experience at Christ’s coming…the physical resurrection…while, perhaps, would technically be the 2nd resurrection…it means that there is only 1 physical resurrection spoken of and taught.

Here is how that idea is believed and biblically backed up:

Revelation 20 says this about the 1st Resurrection:
“Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.”

What do we know about “the second death”? Revelation tells us:
“Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.”

Those who experience the 1st resurrection do not fear the second death: the lake of fire: the hell of eternal punishment.
And who are those who are “Priests of God and Christ”? Who are these?

Revelation 1:5-6
“ and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of kings on earth.
To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.

In short: it’s Christians. Christians do not fear hell, and we have been made a kingdom of priests.
But how is any of this a resurrection, you may ask?

John 5:24
Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

John 3:36
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

Romans 6:4
We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

Colossians 2:12-13
having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses,

2 Corinthians 5:17
Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.

There is a reason Christians call it ‘being born again’ or having ‘new life’. The NT is replete with verses that speak of what happens when we believe in Christ for salvation. The old dies and the new is born in him.

When we put together all these references of what happens to a person at regeneration…plus the Revelation references to that 1 resurrection (not needing to fear hell and becoming Priests of God)…a good biblical case is made for the 1st resurrection being a spiritual one. Especially when no other passage in the NT seems to point to multiple physical resurrections (in my opinion).

Mmm…that doesn’t make sense to me. It says those who had physically died and been beheaded came to life and it’s the first resurrection. They are physically dead and THEN they come to life. The rest of the dead do not live again until the thousand years are over. I think you are doing away with prophecy happening literally to support your understanding and your framework. Prophecy has happened literally even though there are spiritual fulfillment’s and meanings too. It’s the phrase “the rest of the dead” that tells me it is talking of physically dead men in both instances. If you have “the rest of the dead” then who are the first part of the dead?

 

[ScottA]

Being revealed does not mean it is understood. I think the volume revealed available already fries minds. It is our privilege to discover what is already revealed.

You are advocating for the status quo, for slumber and blindness, rather than "leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection" Hebrews 6:1

Not good advice.

Quenching is done when when we overlay scripture with faulty ideas/conclusions and insist on them being right. With this dynamic operative how is it possible to be guided into all truth? or do we count on being knocked off our donkey's with bright lights like Paul?

Certainly conjecture by those who do not know, is and has been a great problem. And for this reason we have our commandment that women (the bride) be silent, that only God should speak by the Holy Spirit. But if those who do not know from God, but dabble in those things they do not know, also insist that pressing on is evil--this is the quenching of the Spirit, which gives aid to the darkness and prolongs the day.

 

[ScottA]

There are several different takes on this passage in Revelation. Some, yes, do see it as meaning there must be two resurrections…by which they mean 2 separate physical resurrections.
However, there are those, and I am more persuaded by this argument, who believe that the ‘first resurrection’ being spoken about is not a physical one at all, but a spiritual one. Which would mean that the resurrection we experience at Christ’s coming…the physical resurrection…while, perhaps, would technically be the 2nd resurrection…it means that there is only 1 physical resurrection spoken of and taught.

Here is how that idea is believed and biblically backed up:

Revelation 20 says this about the 1st Resurrection:
“Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.”

What do we know about “the second death”? Revelation tells us:
“Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.”

Those who experience the 1st resurrection do not fear the second death: the lake of fire: the hell of eternal punishment.
And who are those who are “Priests of God and Christ”? Who are these?

Revelation 1:5-6
“ and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of kings on earth.
To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.

In short: it’s Christians. Christians do not fear hell, and we have been made a kingdom of priests.
But how is any of this a resurrection, you may ask?

John 5:24
Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

John 3:36
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

Romans 6:4
We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

Colossians 2:12-13
having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses,

2 Corinthians 5:17
Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.

There is a reason Christians call it ‘being born again’ or having ‘new life’. The NT is replete with verses that speak of what happens when we believe in Christ for salvation. The old dies and the new is born in him.

When we put together all these references of what happens to a person at regeneration…plus the Revelation references to that 1 resurrection (not needing to fear hell and becoming Priests of God)…a good biblical case is made for the 1st resurrection being a spiritual one. Especially when no other passage in the NT seems to point to multiple physical resurrections (in my opinion).

Very good explanation of the first resurrection!

But there is no physical resurrection. All such elements are burned with fire and are no more. 2 Peter 3:11-13 The flesh is not glorified as some insist by their own love of the flesh. But no, the glory that is to come, is the glory of God, whom is spirit.

 

[Davy]

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17
[16] For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. [17] Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.

This passage is, without a doubt, talking about the ‘Rapture’. The event where Christians are ‘caught up’…gathered to be with Christ. Regardless of how or when you understand this event, it’s clearly there. But…huh. The dead in Christ go first. And then we who are alive. WHO ARE LEFT. After reading the parable of the weeds, I’m suddenly wondering if Paul is being at all literal here. If the parable can be taken at all seriously, then we might be able to say that at that future time, living Christians will witness the ‘harvesting’, or ‘reaping’ of sinners from the face of the earth. And once that has happened, then they will be gathered to meet the Lord.
It could, even understanding what is happening, be quite a daunting prospect.
Of course, it all could happen within seconds of one another, who truly knows.
But, like I said, it was interesting to me.

1 Thess 4:17
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
KJV

It's not about what you're thinking. It's just distinguishing the difference between the asleep saints Jesus brings with Him, vs. those of us still alive on earth, at His coming.

And His parable of the tares of the field doesn't go into the future "thousand years" reign that Revelation 20 and Zechariah 14 declares, especially Zechariah 14, which shows leftovers of the wicked that will come upon Jerusalem on the last day of this world being made to come to Jerusalem from year to year to worship Christ, and keep the feast of tabernacles.

So by other Scripture than Matthew 13 by itself, we know there is a time period on earth with Christ's future reign with His elect over the unsaved, in the world to come. The unbelieving are not destroyed at Christ's return, but only after He reigns over them for a thousand years, for He must reign until all His enemies are made His footstool.

 

[Naomi25]

And the meek inherit the earth...in which is time. I'm not even sure there isn't time in heaven. I mean, will we never consider what we did previously, and what we will do next?

As I said…it’s a massive assumption that just because God is outside of time (which we must allow since he created it), that he intends for us to ‘land there’ as well. Even being gifted ‘eternity’, can we truly say that we have the capacity to dwell outside time like God? What if that is one of his attributes AS God?
We can look at passages like Rev 22:2, which tells us that in the ‘new earth’, the tree of life will bear fruit “each month”. Now…granted, much of Revelation holds symbolism….but, that would appear to tell us that time passes there just as it does here.
But…again…we are not told directly, and thus it is only something we can speculate on.

 

[Naomi25]

Very good explanation of the first resurrection!

But there is no physical resurrection. All such elements are burned with fire and are no more. 2 Peter 3:11-13 The flesh is not glorified as some insist by their own love of the flesh. But no, the glory that is to come, is the glory of God, whom is spirit.

I disagree. As, I think, would Paul.

1 Corinthians 15:12-23
Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied. But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ.

Paul is clearly telling us 2 things here. The first is: if Christ was not physically raised from the dead…we’re all idiots and believing in nothing. Pipe dreams.
The second is that God DID in fact raise Christ, and that those of us who ‘belong’ to Christ (which presupposes a new life or spiritual birth in Christ has already taken place, or we would not be ‘his’) will also receive these ‘firstfruit’ bodies, just as Christ did at his resurrection. Paul goes on in the passage to explain the difference between natural bodies and spiritual bodies. The fact is, Christ’s ‘spiritual’ body, after he was raised from the dead, was still very physical. The bible records him interacting physically many times.
Thus, we see that Paul is telling us that the resurrection we can expect on the day of Christ’s return is physical. Which is nice, because I don’t know about you, but my current body suffers from the ravages of this current age. It gets sick, tired, sore…older. I think we may expect that in the new heavens and earth it will be a place where sin has not had its influence…on nature or people. God made us to be both physical and spiritual beings. It makes little sense that he would give us a new heart and spirit in Christ, but allow the affects of sin to remain on the other half of us. No…Paul tells us that at Christ’s coming, we, like the cosmos, will be made new…completely.

 

[Naomi25]

Re 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.
Who are these guys?

Well….if we are (and I suppose I mean me here!) supposing that the 1st resurrection is talking of those who are made spiritually alive with Christ….Christians…., then we must suppose that the ‘rest of the dead’ are everyone not found in Christ. Both those alive and dead at his return, unsaved, they are ‘spiritually dead’.
We know that at Christ’s return there will be a physical resurrection of both the just and unjust. It tells us so in both Daniel and John. And, of course, we see in other passages that speak specifically of those belonging to Christ and his return…Rapture passages, people term them. They describe believers in Christ…both dead and alive…being ‘translated’.
So…we know that even the unjust will ‘live again’ in some way…and yet…are still bound for the second death…the lake of fire. It is only those in Christ and have experienced the ‘first resurrection’ that need not fear the second death.

Anyway, that’s how I see it. Again…I’m not dogmatic on it, it’s just the best explanation I’ve heard that makes sense of all the passages. I’m not going to be devastated if I’m wrong. Could be that it’s speaking specifically of those martyred during the tribulation time. I…just don’t see other passages supporting that view.

 

[Cassandra]

Except that verse which states: And they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5The restof the dead did not come back to life untilthe thousand years were complete. This isthe first resurrection. 6Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection!

This verse seems to clearly state two resurrections.

I think so too.

 

[quietthinker]

Well….if we are (and I suppose I mean me here!) supposing that the 1st resurrection is talking of those who are made spiritually alive with Christ….Christians…., then we must suppose that the ‘rest of the dead’ are everyone not found in Christ. Both those alive and dead at his return, unsaved, they are ‘spiritually dead’.
We know that at Christ’s return there will be a physical resurrection of both the just and unjust. It tells us so in both Daniel and John. And, of course, we see in other passages that speak specifically of those belonging to Christ and his return…Rapture passages, people term them. They describe believers in Christ…both dead and alive…being ‘translated’.
So…we know that even the unjust will ‘live again’ in some way…and yet…are still bound for the second death…the lake of fire. It is only those in Christ and have experienced the ‘first resurrection’ that need not fear the second death.

Anyway, that’s how I see it. Again…I’m not dogmatic on it, it’s just the best explanation I’ve heard that makes sense of all the passages. I’m not going to be devastated if I’m wrong. Could be that it’s speaking specifically of those martyred during the tribulation time. I…just don’t see other passages supporting that view.

Here is something to consider; all are in Adam are they not and Adam is in all. All are also in Christ as the scripture says but Christ is not in all. Why is Christ not in all? Because they refuse the love of the truth that they are in Christ. They reject the new representative of the Human race given them freely. They refuse life and embrace death.....and many do it under the guise of having life. What a clever deception!

 

[Naomi25]

Possibly because it. Kindly take some time to carefully study 1 Corinthians 15 along with related portions of Scripture and you will discover many things I have mentioned.

Forgive me…but the assumption that I have not already “carefully studied” 1 Corinthians, and that also any “careful study” that I might do would automatically produce views similar to yours, is both presumptuous and slightly preposterous.

Let’s look at your claim per as 1 Cor 15:
“What most people fail to grasp is that the first resurrection (the resurrection of the just or the righteous) is actually in three phases, similar to a Hebrew harvest: (1) Christ the first fruits, (2) the Resurrection/Rapture the main harvest, and (3) the resurrection of the Tribulation saints the gleanings. See 1 Corinthians 15.”

And now lets look at the passage in question and see if we can find these claims within:

1 Corinthians 15:20-27
[20] But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. [21] For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. [22] For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. [23] But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. [24] Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. [25] For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. [26] The last enemy to be destroyed is death. [27] For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him.

We can see in Verse 23 that Christ indeed was the first fruits of the physical resurrection. Whether or not we want to call it the ‘first phase of the resurrection of the just’…I’m not sure. Christ, being the Son of God stands apart from even ‘the just’. But yes…he was the first of what is to come for the rest of us; he is the promise the rest of us look to.

But…what of claim 2 and 3? Verse 23 and 24 tells us “Then AT his coming those who belong to Christ. THEN comes the end”….
Hmm. Not…”at his 2.1 coming the Rapture…then 7 years later his 2.2 coming all the trib saints”.
One wonders where you get a ‘two phase’ resurrection for two lots of Christians from “AT his coming THOSE who belong to Christ, THEN comes the END”.
Seems pretty cut and dried to me.

But…let’s just read on, and see if more clarity can be had in terms of bringing in more passages of scripture to build a better picture.

Verse 24-26: “Then comes the end when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death.”

So…the end comes when he delivers the Kingdom to God the Father AFTER destroying every rule and authority and power. What Kingdom? What powers/authorities/rulers? Is this something he must do AFTER he returns, or is he ruling over this kingdom/powers/authorities right now?

Ephesians 1:20-22
that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church,

Colossians 2:10
and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority.

Philippians 2:9-10
Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

Luke 17:20-21
Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them, “The kingdom of God is not coming in ways that can be observed, nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you.”

So: Jesus sits at Gods right hand, above all rule and authority, power and dominion “in this age”…so, right now. And the Kingdom was “in the midst of you” when Jesus was present on earth during his first advent….the Kingdom being something that “was not coming in ways that could be observed”.

So…in fact, when reading 1 Cor 15, all that Christ needs to do when he comes again, is “Put the last enemy under his feet”. The last enemy? Death. And…it just so happens, that is EXACTLY what is effectuated BY his return. As…we are told that WHEN he comes, THEN we are given our firstfruit bodies….which, when we look down the passage just a little, we learn this:

1 Corinthians 15:54
When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:
“Death is swallowed up in victory.”

It is when Christ returns and we receive our new resurrection bodies that death is finally defeated.

Let me ask you this:
IF the order you propose is correct…how could this passage be? IF, at Christ’s return, people are Raptured, but then 7 years of Tribulation happen, and then at the end of it another ‘resurrection’ happens when he returns again…how can the chronology of 1 Cor 15 be true? How can we receive our resurrection bodies if death continues afterwards? How can death be defeated by our receiving resurrection bodies if, during the tribulation both death AND powers and authorities have not been laid waste? You effectively have both rampaging through the planet for 7 years before Christ defeats them finally.
And yet….1 Cor 15 tells us that AT his return, the END comes, when he hands over the Kingdom (which means all earthy authorities have been quenched) and death is dealt its final blow as the people of God are resurrected beyond its grasp.

I would submit to you that nothing about your order of events appears in the passage or even makes sense when held up against what it clearly says.

 

[ScottA]

I disagree. As, I think, would Paul.

1 Corinthians 15:12-23
Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied. But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ.

Paul is clearly telling us 2 things here. The first is: if Christ was not physically raised from the dead…we’re all idiots and believing in nothing. Pipe dreams.
The second is that God DID in fact raise Christ, and that those of us who ‘belong’ to Christ (which presupposes a new life or spiritual birth in Christ has already taken place, or we would not be ‘his’) will also receive these ‘firstfruit’ bodies, just as Christ did at his resurrection. Paul goes on in the passage to explain the difference between natural bodies and spiritual bodies. The fact is, Christ’s ‘spiritual’ body, after he was raised from the dead, was still very physical. The bible records him interacting physically many times.
Thus, we see that Paul is telling us that the resurrection we can expect on the day of Christ’s return is physical. Which is nice, because I don’t know about you, but my current body suffers from the ravages of this current age. It gets sick, tired, sore…older. I think we may expect that in the new heavens and earth it will be a place where sin has not had its influence…on nature or people. God made us to be both physical and spiritual beings. It makes little sense that he would give us a new heart and spirit in Christ, but allow the affects of sin to remain on the other half of us. No…Paul tells us that at Christ’s coming, we, like the cosmos, will be made new…completely.

I hear you, but there is more to it, more to consider and factor in.

First, what you have described comes from the confusion of the use of the word "resurrection" for Christ rising from the dead--which He did do. But that is the nature of language confused by God, and it is only by the rest of scripture and by revelation from God unto all truth that we could possible put it all together. Please read all of this very carefully.

Jesus's so called resurrection from the dead in the flesh is a fact, but it is a completely different event from His ascension to be with the Father. His fleshly resurrection is like all of the accounts of Israel--in which case He is "the Last"--all of which is only a foreshadowing of things to come, and His part of Israel being a light upon a hill for all nations and peoples to see. For this very reason, before His ascension He even told Mary, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father” Which was also the case when He had Thomas touch His wounds.

The two events (Jesus' resurrection, and ascension) are not the same thing.

Which, granted, is confusing...for it is referred to as His "resurrection." But again, that is the limit of language confused by God, and it is only by the rest of what is written and God revealing it to us, that we can know the whole truth (all truth).

As for His ascension, Jesus Himself told the truth of it, saying "I go to the Father", and "Where I am going, you cannot go." Which, by itself, could easily be explained away. But he also expressed this mystery while praying to the Father, saying "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; 21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22 And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one." John 17:20-22

Now again, this alone could easily be explained away. But not if you put it all together:

• God is spirit.
• I go to the Father.
• I go to prepare a place for you, that where I am you may be also.
• that they also may be one in Us.
• And thus we shall always be with the Lord.

Combined, each of these contribute a part of the mystery of us being one with God, whom is spirt. Not Him being where we are in the end, but us being where He is...where flesh and blood cannot inherit. Remember, in being made flesh and dwelling among us, Jesus lowered Himself, the end of which is not God lowering Himself, but rather us being raised up.

If we are to be One with God, He is not going to lower Himself. Period.

 

[Naomi25]

Mmm…that doesn’t make sense to me. It says those who had physically died and been beheaded came to life and it’s the first resurrection. They are physically dead and THEN they come to life. The rest of the dead do not live again until the thousand years are over. I think you are doing away with prophecy happening literally to support your understanding and your framework. Prophecy has happened literally even though there are spiritual fulfillment’s and meanings too. It’s the phrase “the rest of the dead” that tells me it is talking of physically dead men in both instances. If you have “the rest of the dead” then who are the first part of the dead?

It’s entirely possible I’m letting my biases and presuppositions sway my understanding of the texts. We all do, even if we’re not aware of it.
And yes…one of the reasons I refuse to be dogmatic on my view is because of the…uncertainty around it given the mention of the beheading and the direct reference to the mark of the beast.
However…while there is a good chance you are right…there is also the chance that the reference to the mark and beheading is symbolic. I….waver here. I do believe there is massive use of symbolism in Revelation. But…not the sort of symbolism that waves away the idea that very real things will take place. To be honest, I’m still finding my feet as to the balance between the two.
The fact remain, however….I cannot ignore that so much of the imagery used in Revelation is plucked straight out of the OT. And the reference to the ‘mark’ (being placed on forehead or hand) comes from Deut 6:8….where God is commanding the nation of Israel to “love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and might”…and that he “the Lord your God is one”. He tells them that they are to “bind these words as a sign on your hand and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes”.
Now…of course he wasn’t commanding them to actually tie the words of the Shema on their bodies. He was telling them to heed them with all their actions and thoughts.
So…when we come to Revelation and the imagery that there will be an evil man who will ‘force people to take his mark in order to buy or sell’, do we think it must be a physical mark, or do we take the imagery that John has used from scripture itself and think it means that this man will insist upon total submission and affirmation to his regime in order to live in his society. I mean…look at China. One must not dare speak out against them. One must live in complete harmony with the Party, and the more you voice your praise of it, the higher your social credit score. They don’t have physical marks…not yet either.
I’m….not excluding that it could possibly be a physical mark. The technology is certainly here and it could absolutely be used to ensure people fell in line. But…I don’t think that’s ONLY the intent of the imagery used.

So…when we come to Rev 20, it becomes….not so clear cut. Yes…it could be simply saying “everyone who gets their head literally chopped off”. Or…it could be saying that Christians who lived a faithful life (deed and thought) to Christ, no matter how hard, are now ruling and reigning. I’ve heard the arguments from both camps. And…like I said, I’m…not closed to any possibility…but I am swayed more towards the 1st resurrection being spiritual in nature, simply because of other biblical verses supporting it. But…as you’ve pointed out…there do remain questions.

 

[Naomi25]

1 Thess 4:17
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
KJV

It's not about what you're thinking. It's just distinguishing the difference between the asleep saints Jesus brings with Him, vs. those of us still alive on earth, at His coming.

And His parable of the tares of the field doesn't go into the future "thousand years" reign that Revelation 20 and Zechariah 14 declares, especially Zechariah 14, which shows leftovers of the wicked that will come upon Jerusalem on the last day of this world being made to come to Jerusalem from year to year to worship Christ, and keep the feast of tabernacles.

So by other Scripture than Matthew 13 by itself, we know there is a time period on earth with Christ's future reign with His elect over the unsaved, in the world to come. The unbelieving are not destroyed at Christ's return, but only after He reigns over them for a thousand years, for He must reign until all His enemies are made His footstool.

Maybe the parable doesn’t ‘go into the future 1000 years’ because there’s not one…? Or…at least, not one in the sense most people would argue.