Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 78

Thread: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    197

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    Whilst i agree with most of what you say about the destruction of the wicked. The whole future millennial argument you present doesn't stand up to Scripture or enjoy any other scriptural corroboration. If so: where?
    I backed up every point I made with scripture. If you think those scriptures were misused, please do explain how they were. Perhaps you could be more specific regarding what I have said that is nor backed up by scripture.

  2. #32

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by Keeth View Post
    I backed up every point I made with scripture. If you think those scriptures were misused, please do explain how they were. Perhaps you could be more specific regarding what I have said that is nor backed up by scripture.
    It is fine for you to explain your opinion of Revelation 20, but biblical doctrine is proven by repeated Scripture. The rest of Scripture depicts the Second Coming as climactic. In what you present a millennium is totally pointless. It doesn't serve any purpose. The rest of Scripture depicts a general resurrection/judgment. Where is your support in other Scripture?
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    197

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    It is fine for you to explain your opinion of Revelation 20, but biblical doctrine is proven by repeated Scripture. The rest of Scripture depicts the Second Coming as climactic. In what you present a millennium is totally pointless. It doesn't serve any purpose. The rest of Scripture depicts a general resurrection/judgment. Where is your support in other Scripture?
    I've never said there was not a general resurrection and judgment, there is. The resurrection of the saved takes place at the beginning of the thousand years. Rev 20 is all about the resurrection and judgment. It is written to help us understand more details involved with the same.

  4. #34

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by Keeth View Post
    I've never said there was not a general resurrection and judgment, there is. The resurrection of the saved takes place at the beginning of the thousand years. Rev 20 is all about the resurrection and judgment. It is written to help us understand more details involved with the same.
    But if you let Scripture interpret Scripture you will see that the "first resurrection" elsewhere is Christ's. Acts 26:23 presents Christ’s physical resurrection as the first resurrection, saying, “Christ should suffer, and that He should be the first resurrection from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles."

    Colossians 1:18 closely mirrors Acts 26:23, saying, “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.”

    Revelation 1:5 uses the same Greek word to describe Christ’s triumphant resurrection, saying, “Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth.”

    Paul similarly says in 1 Corinthians 15:20, “now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.”

    Revelation 20:6 simply says, “Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power.”
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    197

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    But if you let Scripture interpret Scripture you will see that the "first resurrection" elsewhere is Christ's. Acts 26:23 presents Christ’s physical resurrection as the first resurrection, saying, “Christ should suffer, and that He should be the first resurrection from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles."

    Colossians 1:18 closely mirrors Acts 26:23, saying, “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.”

    Revelation 1:5 uses the same Greek word to describe Christ’s triumphant resurrection, saying, “Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth.”

    Paul similarly says in 1 Corinthians 15:20, “now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.”

    Revelation 20:6 simply says, “Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power.”
    Christ was the first to rise from the dead, not because He was actually the first for there were others before Him, but because only through His resurrection could anyone ever be resurrected. Though He was and is the first born from the dead, the reference to the first resurrection of Rev 20 is not in relation to His resurrection as the context clearly reveals.

    Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 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.

    Those who partake of the first resurrection of Rev 20, are those who will be "priests of God and of Christ" and reign with Him during the thousand years. Apparently this does not fit what you wish to believe, so you are making it mean something else.

  6. #36

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by Keeth View Post
    Christ was the first to rise from the dead, not because He was actually the first for there were others before Him, but because only through His resurrection could anyone ever be resurrected. Though He was and is the first born from the dead, the reference to the first resurrection of Rev 20 is not in relation to His resurrection as the context clearly reveals.

    Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 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.

    Those who partake of the first resurrection of Rev 20, are those who will be "priests of God and of Christ" and reign with Him during the thousand years. Apparently this does not fit what you wish to believe, so you are making it mean something else.
    Christ was first to defeat the grave. Every other person that was supernaturally raised later died. None of them conquered death. Jesus did! He had to that the elect would be raised to heaven. That is what we are looking at now in Rev 20 - the dead in Christ reigning now. Rev 20 is demonstrating the victory over the grave believers can realize when they commit to Christ.
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    89

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    Christ was first to defeat the grave. Every other person that was supernaturally raised later died. None of them conquered death. Jesus did! He had to that the elect would be raised to heaven. That is what we are looking at now in Rev 20 - the dead in Christ reigning now. Rev 20 is demonstrating the victory over the grave believers can realize when they commit to Christ.
    let make it clear that Christ was resurrected by God his father while all other will come to life through him for he paid our ransom ;God did not have to paid a ransom for his own son ,

    JN 3:15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.

    JN 3:36 “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”

    JN 5:21 “For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes.

    JN 5:24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

    It is my believe that Jesus was the first creation of God and so had life in him, death had no impact on him so the reasons for his sacrifice has another meaning ,a true gift from the father through him and the gift for Jesus was that he could chose those that will be changed to be with him in heaven and see his glory has he really is ,

    all others will remain or resurrected on the earth ,
    of course this is my God given understanding

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,526

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    It is fine for you to explain your opinion of Revelation 20, but biblical doctrine is proven by repeated Scripture. The rest of Scripture depicts the Second Coming as climactic. In what you present a millennium is totally pointless. It doesn't serve any purpose. The rest of Scripture depicts a general resurrection/judgment. Where is your support in other Scripture?
    I have been challenging this repeatedly, and have not had much response from you. Important doctrine does obtain repeated verification. However, some doctrinal details do not always require repeated verification, such as the "virgin birth." The prophecy upon which the NT fulfillment is based is a bit ambiguous, or sketchy. It is more suggestive than "corroborated," as you like to describe it.

    So doctrinal details such as the "Millennium" can be scanty as well, without extensive repetition. But here is the kicker. The Millennium is not exclusively focused on the duration of this time period, although that may seem to be critical. Rather, the Millennium is focused on what happens in that period of time, and this is what I believe is more critical. And that is the salvation of Israel, the Christianization of the nations, or in sum, the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant. And since this is the more substantive, more critical element than the duration of 1000 years, I would expect to find the *substance* of the Millennium to be repetitively verified, and not the Millennial duration itself.

    So why is John focused on the duration at all? I think it has had the effect of showing how God wishes history to have a millennial Sabbath. Although that is not said it is certainly how many Christians have viewed it. The Millennium is thought to be the "7th day of rest" following after 6 thousand-year "days" of recorded human history.

    However, as I said, this is less critical than the substance of the Millennium, which involves the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant. And this is verified throughout the whole of Scriptures. Whole nations must come to Christ, and Israel herself must submit to her Davidic King, the Messiah. This is, in other words, the Christianization of Israel. And is this verified repeatedly? Yes. But you have long, long ignored this, wmp! Well, why should I be surprised? It blows your "corroboration" complaints out of the water!

  9. #39

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I have been challenging this repeatedly, and have not had much response from you. Important doctrine does obtain repeated verification. However, some doctrinal details do not always require repeated verification, such as the "virgin birth." The prophecy upon which the NT fulfillment is based is a bit ambiguous, or sketchy. It is more suggestive than "corroborated," as you like to describe it.

    So doctrinal details such as the "Millennium" can be scanty as well, without extensive repetition. But here is the kicker. The Millennium is not exclusively focused on the duration of this time period, although that may seem to be critical. Rather, the Millennium is focused on what happens in that period of time, and this is what I believe is more critical. And that is the salvation of Israel, the Christianization of the nations, or in sum, the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant. And since this is the more substantive, more critical element than the duration of 1000 years, I would expect to find the *substance* of the Millennium to be repetitively verified, and not the Millennial duration itself.

    So why is John focused on the duration at all? I think it has had the effect of showing how God wishes history to have a millennial Sabbath. Although that is not said it is certainly how many Christians have viewed it. The Millennium is thought to be the "7th day of rest" following after 6 thousand-year "days" of recorded human history.

    However, as I said, this is less critical than the substance of the Millennium, which involves the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant. And this is verified throughout the whole of Scriptures. Whole nations must come to Christ, and Israel herself must submit to her Davidic King, the Messiah. This is, in other words, the Christianization of Israel. And is this verified repeatedly? Yes. But you have long, long ignored this, wmp! Well, why should I be surprised? It blows your "corroboration" complaints out of the water!
    That is not true. You have provided nothing but personal opinion, like above. This is not evidence. What is more, I have repeatedly told you that the Virgin birth was predicted in the OT and coroborated in the NT. You reject that. That may explain your insistence on an additional extra-biblical age in-between this age and the age to come which is simply a re-run of our age, with more sin, death, corruption, the wicked and war.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,526

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    That is not true. You have provided nothing but personal opinion, like above. This is not evidence. What is more, I have repeatedly told you that the Virgin birth was predicted in the OT and coroborated in the NT. You reject that. That may explain your insistence on an additional extra-biblical age in-between this age and the age to come which is simply a re-run of our age, with more sin, death, corruption, the wicked and war.
    Everybody adds personal opinion, including you. Everybody uses the Bible to make their point, as do you. Yes, you have told me that the virgin birth is corroborated. My point is that the virgin birth receives as little corroboration as the duration of the Millennium! The virgin birth prophecy merely *alludes* to a miracle, but is often viewed as something already fulfilled in the OT! That is not the kind of corroboration you're asking of the Millennium!

    Not only are you not focusing on the real issues here, but you are being dishonest when you refer to the Millennium as an "extra-biblical age." You know full well that the Millennium is derived from the Bible, in Rev. 20! What you deny is actually what the Bible says!

  11. #41

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Not only are you not focusing on the real issues here, but you are being dishonest when you refer to the Millennium as an "extra-biblical age." You know full well that the Millennium is derived from the Bible, in Rev. 20! What you deny is actually what the Bible says!
    No, it is not me being dishonest, it is you. I have never said the Millennium is an "extra-biblical age." Anyone on this forum that has engaged with me knows that. The millennium is now. You know that. It is your future millennium that is flied with religious phonies who turn on Christ in their billions at the end that i believe is extra-biblical. Stop twisting the truth. This is a classic sign you have no rebuttal.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,526

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    No, it is not me being dishonest, it is you. I have never said the Millennium is an "extra-biblical age." Anyone on this forum that has engaged with me knows that. The millennium is now. You know that. It is your future millennium that is flied with religious phonies who turn on Christ in their billions at the end that i believe is extra-biblical. Stop twisting the truth. This is a classic sign you have no rebuttal.
    The following is *not* extra-biblical, whether you take the account literally or figuratively:

    Rev 19-21: I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war...
    And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. 2 He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years....
    Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,” for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away...

    So what are you calling "extra-biblical?" The account itself places the Millennial Age between Christ's coming at the end of the current age and the eternal age in which new heavens and a new earth is created. Premillennialism is not based on an "extra-biblical" account, but upon the biblical account. Whether or not you agree with our interpretation you must admit that our belief is based on the *biblical account.* Otherwise you are being dishonest.

  13. #43

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    The following is *not* extra-biblical, whether you take the account literally or figuratively:

    Rev 19-21: I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war...
    And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. 2 He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years....
    Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,” for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away...

    So what are you calling "extra-biblical?" The account itself places the Millennial Age between Christ's coming at the end of the current age and the eternal age in which new heavens and a new earth is created. Premillennialism is not based on an "extra-biblical" account, but upon the biblical account. Whether or not you agree with our interpretation you must admit that our belief is based on the *biblical account.* Otherwise you are being dishonest.
    You either are not reading my posts or you are deliberately trying to misrepresent the Amil position. The extra-biblical element, I believe, is a FUTURE millennium. I do not accept that or is such a claim corroborated with other Scripture.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,526

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    You either are not reading my posts or you are deliberately trying to misrepresent the Amil position. The extra-biblical element, I believe, is a FUTURE millennium. I do not accept that or is such a claim corroborated with other Scripture.
    I'm pointing out that the Amil position assumes the allegorical system of interpretation. In doing so it recognizes that Premil is based upon a false literal rendering of truths that are *in the Bible.* So your claim that Premil is "extra-biblical" is disingenuous. The whole weakness of the Amil position is that it is based upon allegorical interpretation, and must reject what is otherwise explicitly said in the passage. And we are warned against doing that in the Revelation itself!

  15. #45

    Re: End-Times Debate: "One or Two Resurrections / Judgments?"

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I'm pointing out that the Amil position assumes the allegorical system of interpretation. In doing so it recognizes that Premil is based upon a false literal rendering of truths that are *in the Bible.* So your claim that Premil is "extra-biblical" is disingenuous. The whole weakness of the Amil position is that it is based upon allegorical interpretation, and must reject what is otherwise explicitly said in the passage. And we are warned against doing that in the Revelation itself!
    One of the great difficulties Amils have with Premil is their literalizing of symbolic passages and their symbolizing of literal passages. This is demonstrated in their approach to Revelation. Amils see the spiritual application of Rev 20 relating to a symbolic dragon, chain, key and prison representing the spiritual restraint of Satan in our day. What is more, this is supported with much NT Scripture. Premil have nothing to support their idea of Satan being literally chained in a physical prison for 1,000 years after the second coming, followed by his release to wreck havoc on the millennial earth. That is because their approach is non-corroborative and conflicting to much clear and repeated Scripture that shows the curtailment of Satan whilst his territory [the Gentiles] is invaded.
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Discussion Two judgments, two resurrections
    By DurbanDude in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: Mar 12th 2010, 09:28 PM
  2. Colbert takes on Bart Ehrman (video link to "debate")
    By A820djd in forum Christian Fellowship
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Apr 12th 2009, 06:55 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •