I don't think Paul would agree with you on this.
1 Corinthians 2:10 these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. 14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.
If everything was meant to be taken literally, as you claim, then there would be no need for spiritual discernment from the Holy Spirit. You are very clearly wrong about this.
You've missed the point again.
Taking Scripture literally includes acknowledge every word in Scripture, whether it's symbolic or not. It's called integrity of Scripture. By ignoring one word, or changing it to another, the entire Scripture is ruined.
It's called wresting the Scriptures, and mishandling the world of God.
And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
Many people rejecting Christ's earthly reign over all natural people, leave out the word
them, so that they can say He only goes on to rule the new earth, and not
them remaining from the smitten nations.
Someone can try and say
'them' is symbolic or is only on the new earth, which is false, but at least they acknowledge the word itself.
It's the same as trying to say a multitude of the dead, means everyone that ever died.
Where is the resurrection of John 6 called the first resurrection? That's not what I see. Instead, I see Christ's resurrection as being the one that is referred to as the first resurrection.
True. His was the first bodily resurrection of any man, but the first bodily resurrection of any other man will not be until His return.
If you are trying to say, that the spiritual
and bodily resurrection of the saints
is past, then you are teaching a heresy, that I have seen others do, which Paul condemns as overthrowing the faith.
The saints on earth have not yet recieved their immortal spiritual bodies, while seated in heavenly places, so that our souls are no longer judged and condemned as dead, even if our 'mortal bodies'
left behind on earth, are still doing unrighteous works of the flesh with the unrighteous of the earth.
That is a deep delusion of certain OSAS extremists.
Acts 26:23 that the Messiah would suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would bring the message of light to his own people and to the Gentiles.”
1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.
Those who have part in the first resurrection spiritually have part in Christ's resurrection (the first resurrection) and their souls are in heaven living and reigning with Christ there.
We have part in the body of Christ spiritually, by being born again and resurrected from being dead in sins and trespasses.
And if we continue faithful to the end, then we will also have part in His bodily resurrection, which is the first resurrection of the dead in Christ, in Rev 20:4-6
The first resurrection is therefore twofold, even as with Christ's reign on earth: first spiritually on earth with His aints only, and then bodily in heaven and over all the earth with His saints ruling.
The first spiritual resurrection and reigning of Christ over His people on earth, is today, and the first bodily resurrection of Christ's people over all the earth, is tomorrow.
Simple.
You are twisting scripture by doing that. It very clearly says the righteous and wicked will be raised "at that time".
Yes, many of the dead will, but not all.
There was the first bodily resurrection of the dead saints in Christ first.
Daniel 12:1 “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered. 2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.
Multitudes, not all. That would also include many multitudes.
Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision: for the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision.
Many multitudes may be in the valley of decision at any given time, but not all. Many have already set their hearts aright for God.
And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women.
Multitudes were saved, but not all Jerusalem, much less all the earth.
And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.
Multitudes of the earth, not all.
There will be multitudes from among all nations of the earth, gathered to make war with the Lamb and His saints at Armageddon, but not all.
And there will be
them remaining, that the Lord and His saints will rule, after the slaughter without mercy of all them multitudes at Armageddon.
Now if Scripture says
all the many multitudes of the earth, then you would have an easy point to make, without trying to make Scripture say that, where it doesn't.
And I would already be teaching it long before debating with you, and there would be no debate.
That is what is meant by how taking Scripture seriously, includes taking the words used in Scripture seriously, without trying to make them mean something they don't.
There is no basis whatsoever for claiming that the time when "everyone whose name is found written in the book" is delivered is a different time than when "multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.
You have a persistent habit of mistating what other say, or showing ignorance if it. As I've said before, it can't be by mistake.
No one is saying that Daniel 12:2 is not at the same resurrection and judgement time as Rev 20:11-15. But the opposite, Rev 20:11-15 is fulfilling Dan 12:2.
But those many multitudes of the rest of the dead, which Daniel and Rev 20:11 speak of, are not the saints in the first resurrection of the dead, which Jesus prophesies in John 6.
And that first resurrection is not the same resurrection of Jesus Christ bodily, since He is already resurrected bodily, and His saints are not,
yet.
It very clearly indicates that the ones who are resurrected unto "everlasting life" are resurrected at generally the same time ("at that time") as those who are resurrected "to shame and everlasting contempt".
Ah, a little tweak here I see. Now you are speaking of the first resurrection and that of the rest of the dead, as being
generally at the same time, which means not being the same exact resurrection time.
The plot thickens. If you were to explain more about that, then maybe we could actually agree one something.
Which is the same thing Jesus taught in John 5:28-29 as well.
Jesus spoke only of them that abide in Him, and so prophesied the first bodily resurrection of all the dead saints at His return. That is fulfilled in Rev 20:4
Daniel 12:2 was speaking of the many multitude of the rest of the dead, fulfilled at Rev 20:12.
