The theological fallacy of a spiritual 'resurrection'

[ScottA]

False claims = no need for me to answer.
Paul teaches very clearly that the flesh-and-blood body that dies becomes the seed of the spiritual body that will be raised, and as you know I do not claim otherwise.

If the best you can do is to expose yourself as someone who makes false claims regarding what someone else says only in order to maintain your own false premise, then maybe you should do some more Bible study yourself.

....the body that died that will be raised a non-flesh-and-blood, incorruptible, immortal spiritual body).​

I was responding to your premise that as you say again here, is that the body of flesh-and-blood is what is changed to be immortal...rather than Jesus' indication that the flesh and the spirit are separate, each born of their own in kind--not converted. Meaning that the change that Paul spoke of is not against what Jesus taught--not at all, but means rather that the change is from the flesh which is dissolved with the elements of the earth (being dust, to which it returns), to reside in the new born [again] spirit, which is to say, in God whom is spirit.

But giving you the benefit of the doubt--because your thesis is so lengthy and involved, perhaps even more confused by the confusions of language--are you not advocating for the flesh itself, that which was born flesh, to be converted or changed into spirit, rather than born separately (again), or are you?

 

[Earburner]

I agree. It's foolish to say Revelation is not chronological.

Do you not accept Revelation 13:5?

"And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months."

Do these 42 months not exist in your reality?

Yes. The 42 months do prophetically exist, but for the 10H Beast only. IT will be against the Holy City, which at present, is "the camp* of the saints", the Heavenly Jerusalem, which always has a remnant now on earth, in all of it's generations since Pentecost, who in every generation, have been "looking for that blessed hope", patiently waiting for the Glorious and fiery appearance of Jesus from Heaven.
Rev.11[2] But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city * shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

Rev.13:1-5
[5] And there was given unto him [10H Beast] a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him [10H Beast] to continue forty and two months.

*Notes: all Born Again saints, of every generation, whether in their flesh, or now asleep in Jesus, are members of Heavenly Jerusalem.
Gal.4[26] But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all [who of faith in Christ].

* CAMP is the temporary dwelling place of the saints, while in their mortal flesh and blood bodies.
2Cor.4[7] But we have this treasure in [our] earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

The period of 42 months should not be confused with the 1260 days (3.5 years), which had to do with the combined ministry of John the Baptist and Jesus.

 

[Timtofly]

And that has what to do with the price of books in Europe?

Apostle Paul said what he said because it is God's Truth, you ought to learn to actually stick with what God's Word says as written instead of listening to Jewish fables.

Genesis 1-4 is God's Word. According to you Genesis must be Jewish fables.

Adam died when he disobeyed God. Through Jesus many will be made alive. Adam was physical before he died. Many will be restored to Adam's pre-death physical condition. Read Paul, unless the NT is just more Jewish fables to you. You think Paul is just a Pharisee with a bunch of Jewish fables?

I do accept that Paul claims we have a new permanent incorruptible physical body from God, just like Adam was created with a permanent incorruptible physical body from God.

 

[Timtofly]

Yes. The 42 months do prophetically exist, but for the 10H Beast only. IT will be against the Holy City, which at present, is "the camp of the saints", the Heavenly Jerusalem, which has always a remnant now on earth, in all of it's generations since Pentecost, who in every generation, have been "looking for that blessed hope", patiently waiting for the Glorious and fiery appearance of Jesus from Heaven.
Rev.11[2] But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city * shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

Rev.13:1-5
[5] And there was given unto him [10H Beast] a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him [10H Beast] to continue forty and two months.

*Note: all Born Again saints, of every generation, whether in their flesh, or now asleep in Jesus, are members of Heavenly Jerusalem.
Gal.4[26] But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all [who of faith in Christ].

The period of 42 months should not be confused with the 1260 days (3.5 years), which had to do with the combined ministry of John the Baptist and Jesus.

Yet you remain in your foolishness with a gap of 42 months equal to the last 1992 years.

Is it a future 42 months or the last 1992 years. Make up your mind.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The issue is that a resurrection is a standing up again which is physical. Being born again is a spiritual change not a physical change.

Obviously. I was simply correcting your false claim. After someone said "we are quickened in the Spirit", you said "That particular wording is not used in scripture regarding the concept of being born again.". And then I showed you that the word quickened is used in scripture regarding the concept of being born again in Ephesians 2:5.

Being born again is not a resurrection.

I didn't say it was. I was simply correcting a false claim made about the use of the word "quickened" in scripture. That word is not used to describe a bodily resurrection and I'm not saying it was. But, it is used in the sense of someone going from being spiritually dead in their sins to spiritually alive in Christ.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Christ's resurrection is not what is being spoken about in Revelation 20 nor is it speaking of anyone being born again.

Those who have part in His resurrection are spoken about in Revelation 20. You are trying to change "the first resurrection" into something different than what other scripture says is the first resurrection (Christ's resurrection). You need to learn to interpret scripture with scripture instead of interpreting one scripture in such a way that contradicts other scripture. Scripture is very clear that Christ's resurrection is the first resurrection. You need to learn to take what scripture clearly teaches and then interpret the more difficult passages according to what the more clear scriptures teach.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Took you a long time to work out the best way to get that dig in, didn't it?

No, it didn't. Did you not read my post? I didn't get around to reading this thread right away because I was reading other threads and doing other things. Is this too hard for you to understand that your posts are not my top priority to read?

I'm not surprised you "didn't notice" the terror expressed by one Amil poster at the prospect of what the scriptural facts I produced in the first four posts might do to the interpretation of Revelation 20:4-6 (which is not what this thread is about, though you Amills keep dragging it toward one and one only place where the words anastasis and zao are found in three verses.

You're slipping up. Normally you're much faster than that.

Are you seriously trying to criticize me for not responding as fast as you would prefer? Give me a break. Grow up. This isn't the only thread on the forum and isn't the only thing I've had to do. I couldn't care less what another Amil poster might think about what you've said. Not all Amils agree on everything just as not all Premils agree on everything.

 

[ewq1938]

Those who have part in His resurrection are spoken about in Revelation 20.

They are taking part in their own physical resurrection.

You are trying to change "the first resurrection" into something different than what other scripture says is the first resurrection (Christ's resurrection).

You are the one changing what the first resurrection in Revelation 20 is, not me. It's the first of two resurrections, the first is called the first resurrection.

You need to learn to interpret scripture with scripture instead of interpreting one scripture in such a way that contradicts other scripture.

YOU need to learn to interpret scripture with scripture instead of interpreting one scripture in such a way that contradicts other scripture.

Scripture is very clear that Christ's resurrection is the first resurrection.

Not in Revelation 20!

You need to learn to take what scripture clearly teaches and then interpret the more difficult passages according to what the more clear scriptures teach.

Take your own advice as it only applies to you, the squeaky wheel that tells everyone else they need oil when it is they that need it.

 

[ewq1938]

Of course pre-mils don't think that. Just like the Pharisees, pre-mils are too much into the literal biblical words, and not that which the Spirit means.

lol, Amills are the modern Pharisees.

Did the false expectations the Pharisees had about the Messiah match the expectations of Amillennialists?

Yes.

The Pharisees expected the Messiah to rule right away but he didn't. His rule would come far into the future. Amillennialists make the same error the Pharisees did by wanting the rule to be happening now when the truth is the rule comes in the future. That's Premillennialism.

Don't make the same Amillennialistic error the Pharisees did.

 

[ewq1938]

Obviously. I was simply correcting your false claim.

No false claim was made. You are confused.

After someone said "we are quickened in the Spirit", you said "That particular wording is not used in scripture regarding the concept of being born again.".

Wrong. I said the word "resurrection" is never used for anyone being born again. I am correcting your false claims.

But, it is used in the sense of someone going from being spiritually dead in their sins to spiritually alive in Christ.

Which is not a resurrection. The saints in Revelation 20 are not being shown to be spiritually quickened or being born again. They are shown being resurrected physically.

 

[Zao is life]

No, it didn't. Did you not read my post? I didn't get around to reading this thread right away because I was reading other threads and doing other things. Is this too hard for you to understand that your posts are not my top priority to read?

Are you seriously trying to criticize me for not responding as fast as you would prefer? Give me a break. Grow up. This isn't the only thread on the forum and isn't the only thing I've had to do. I couldn't care less what another Amil poster might think about what you've said. Not all Amils agree on everything just as not all Premils agree on everything.

You're the one who needs to do the growing up. The kind of things you post often smacks of either serious ignorance or serious immaturity (or both). I don't know how you can expect anyone to take you seriously or deal with you in an adult to adult way.

Anyway you've once again proved how dishonestly you handle scripture both in this thread and in the other thread about the millennium started by @ewq1938 so there is no point in me engaging with you any more about the millennium.

So I have you on ignore from now on, because you have shown that you cannot or will not deal honestly with scripture.

 

[Davy]

Genesis 1-4 is God's Word. According to you Genesis must be Jewish fables.

It's not 'me'... you are disagreeing with, it is Apostle Paul you are disagreeing with.

You cannot say there is NO "spiritual body" by trying to USE the Genesis 2:7 verse being the ONLY Scripture of how God created man's makeup. And doing THAT is what is known as a Jewish fable.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

lol, Amills are the modern Pharisees.

Did the false expectations the Pharisees had about the Messiah match the expectations of Amillennialists?

Yes.

The Pharisees expected the Messiah to rule right away but he didn't. His rule would come far into the future. Amillennialists make the same error the Pharisees did by wanting the rule to be happening now when the truth is the rule comes in the future. That's Premillennialism.

Don't make the same Amillennialistic error the Pharisees did.

LOL. Nice dodge. The Pharisees expected the Messiah to rule on earth just like Premils do. Instead, He rules from the right hand of the Father in heaven. His kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36) and does not come with observation (Luke 17:20), but Premils can't accept that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No false claim was made. You are confused.

You made a false claim and that's a fact. After someone said "We are quickened in the Spirit", you said "That particular wording is not used in scripture regarding the concept of being born again.". And then I showed where the word is used in relation to being born again.

Ephesians 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, 5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved; ).

Paul equated being "quickened" with being spiritually saved which is the same thing as being born again.

Wrong. I said the word "resurrection" is never used for anyone being born again. I am correcting your false claims.

No, you said that about the word "quickened". That's a fact. Why are you denying it now?

Which is not a resurrection. The saints in Revelation 20 are not being shown to be spiritually quickened or being born again. They are shown being resurrected physically.

Where is that shown? It's not. That is your assumption about what it means to have part in the first resurrection. But, if you look at Revelation 20:6 carefully then you should see that what is described there is a current reality. Christ currently reigns (Matt 28:18, Eph 1:19-23, Rev 1:5, etc.), His people reign with Him as priests in His kingdom (1 Peter 2:9, Rev 1:5-6), and the second death currently has no power over those who belong to Him because they have the promise of eternal life.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You're the one who needs to do the growing up. The kind of things you post often smacks of either serious ignorance or serious immaturity (or both). I don't know how you can expect anyone to take you seriously or deal with you in an adult to adult way.

If I was you I would want to only spend time making false personal accusations instead of discussing the scripture, too. Because scripture is not on your side.

Anyway you've once again proved how dishonestly you handle scripture both in this thread and in the other thread about the millennium started by @ewq1938 so there is no point in me engaging with you any more about the millennium.

So I have you on ignore from now on, because you have shown that you cannot or will not deal honestly with scripture.

I have dealt with the scripture and you know it. You just want to run away whenever you don't have any answers.

 

[Earburner]

lol, Amills are the modern Pharisees.

Did the false expectations the Pharisees had about the Messiah match the expectations of Amillennialists?

Yes.

The Pharisees expected the Messiah to rule right away but he didn't. His rule would come far into the future. Amillennialists make the same error the Pharisees did by wanting the rule to be happening now when the truth is the rule comes in the future. That's Premillennialism.

Don't make the same Amillennialistic error the Pharisees did.

I don't think that you comprehend at all, of HOW Christ is NOW reigning, and we with Him.

There is only one thing that God is concerned with at this time, the saving of as many people as possible, who will come to Him, through Christ and ** we who ARE His body.

Ephesians 1[19] And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to usward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
[20] Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
[21] Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
[22] And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
[23] Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

** Matt.23[39] For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

 

[Earburner]

Yet you remain in your foolishness with a gap of 42 months equal to the last 1992 years.

Is it a future 42 months or the last 1992 years. Make up your mind.

Revelation 11:1-4, 13:1-8.

The 42 months is future and its literal, as the 1260 days (3.5 years) was literal for John the Baptist and Jesus' combined ministry- Revelation 11:3-4.

 

[ewq1938]

LOL. Nice dodge. The Pharisees expected the Messiah to rule on earth just like Premils do.

It's a fact the rule is Earthly. What the Pharisees and Amillennialism gets wrong is when it takes place. It's not now like the Pharisees expected. Christ said his kingdom is not from here.

 

[ewq1938]

You made a false claim and that's a fact. After someone said "We are quickened in the Spirit", you said "That particular wording is not used in scripture regarding the concept of being born again.".

Ephesians 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, 5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved; ).

Paul equated being "quickened" with being spiritually saved which is the same thing as being born again.

No, you said that about the word "quickened". That's a fact. Why are you denying it now?

Can Amillennialists even provide a scripture that speaks of being born again using the word resurrection? Being born is very different than resurrecting.

That particular wording is not used in scripture regarding the concept of being born again.

Ok, I admit I quoted the wrong text in the second post. I meant to say that resurrection is not used in scripture for being born again which was a follow up to my post, "Can Amillennialists even provide a scripture that speaks of being born again using the word resurrection? Being born is very different than resurrecting."

Where is that shown? It's not. That is your assumption about what it means to have part in the first resurrection.

No, it's directly from Revelation 20:

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; 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.

They are beheaded which means they died physically, then they live and reign with Christ (living after being physically dead means a resurrection happened) and "the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished". That's two resurrections separated by a thousand years. Can you admit that is correct?

But, if you look at Revelation 20:6 carefully then you should see that what is described there is a current reality.

Hardly. Where are all these dead people at who are resurrecting? The time for the dead in Christ to rise is not now. It is foolish to even suggest otherwise.

Christ currently reigns (Matt 28:18, Eph 1:19-23, Rev 1:5, etc.), His people reign with Him as priests in His kingdom (1 Peter 2:9, Rev 1:5-6), and the second death currently has no power over those who belong to Him because they have the promise of eternal life.

Christ reigns the Earth when he returns, Revelation 11. We reign with him after his return, Revelation 2, 20.

 

[ewq1938]

I don't think that you comprehend at all, of HOW Christ is NOW reigning, and we with Him.

Because we aren't yet:

Jesus is NOT reigning over His enemies now - according to Scripture

To reign means to rule over people and have complete control. Look around at the world. ISIS is murdering Christians and harming the growth of the gospel. The world is full is false gods and religions and evil practices.

It is clear someone else reigns this wicked, morally corrupt world currently:

Joh 14:29 And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.
Joh 14:30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.

Prince here doesn't mean second in command or something like we think in modern English, it means the ruler, the first in rank or power:

G758
a?´????
archo¯n
ar'-khone
Present participle of G757; a first (in rank or power): - chief (ruler), magistrate, prince, ruler.


G758
a?´????
archo¯n
Thayer Definition:
1) a ruler, commander, chief, leader
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: present participle of G757
Citing in TDNT: 1:488, 81

According to Christ, the ruler of this world was to come after Christ left. We know from Rev 12 that after He ascended there was a war in heaven and satan was cast to the Earth just as Christ said would happen. According to Jesus Christ himself, the one reigning/ruling the world after His ascension would be satan!

Psa_110:2 The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.

When would Christ reign over his enemies on the Earth?

Mat 22:44 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?

Mar 12:36 For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.

Luk 20:42 And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Luk 20:43 Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.

Act 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Act 2:35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.

Psa 110:1 A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Psa 110:2 The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.
Psa 110:3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.
Psa 110:4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.
Psa 110:5 The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath.
Psa 110:6 He shall judge among the heathen, he shall fill the places with the dead bodies; he shall wound the heads over many countries.
Psa 110:7 He shall drink of the brook in the way: therefore shall he lift up the head.

So when does Christ leave the right hand of God in heaven and come to the Earth to defeat his enemies and rule in the midst of those enemies? The second coming of course. We also see this depicted in Revelation 19-20.


Amill asks, "Isn't Christ's kingdom reigning on the Earth now?"

No.


His reign here begins when the 7th trump sounds.


Rev 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

This is the first time when Christ reigns literally over all kings and their kingdoms.

1Ti 6:14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
1Ti 6:15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;

His times would be specifically "the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ" at the 7th trump! That is when he is actively and defacto King of Kings reigning over all Earthly kingdoms and reigning over his enemies with a rod of iron.

Here is what we know:

1. Christ said satan is the ruler of the world.
2. Christ's reign will begin when he leaves the right hand of God in heaven and comes to the Earth.
2a. That is the second coming at the 7th trump.


John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Amill claims the opposite, that the Kingdom is of this world. Christ disagrees.


Christ knew his kingdom and reign here starts when he returned at the 7th trump.

Rev 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.





Joh_10:18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

Does this mean Christ died and resurrected himself right at this moment or was that a future thing he had authority to do?

It is the same with ruling. He has the authority now but is not yet excercising that authority because he is waiting for the right time.


Rev_2:27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.

So in comparison he received the knowledge that in the future he and his saints would rule over the nations with a rod of iron.
That particular reign did not start when John had this vision, which was somewhere around Ad 93 or so. Even AD 70, which I disagree with, is still many decades after the cross. If Christ is reigning now with a rod of iron why the decades of delay after the cross? That makes no logical sense.

But understand both of the things he said he received from the Father were related to the future, everything makes logical and scriptural sense and matches perfectly with each other.


Heb_2:8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.


This was written long after the cross and even at that time not all things were put under Him. That doesn't happen until the second coming.