Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 36

Thread: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    4,976
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    So based on all of this, do his conclusions above make logical sense? If he was confused about the order of events, could he have also been confused about the timing of the thousand years?
    No. He was confused like most about the literalness of the 1000 years. Scripture is clear the resurrection of the just would preclude such an event AND the unjust are raised in the same day not 1000+ years apart.

  2. #17

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    This would be where context counts.

    Luke 20:35*But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
    36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.


    If there are two resurrections, and in the first resurrection they are said to be blessed, and that the 2nd resurrection involves the LOF, and no one is said to be blessed in the 2nd resurrection, doesn't it seem obvious that Luke 20:35-36 would have to apply to the first resurrection and not the 2nd one instead? Surely folks who get cast into the LOF, it then can't be said that they, too, Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God. Verse 35 says this....they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead. That's what is being applied to verse 36, and that that world isn't meaning the LOF, thus nothing in either verse can apply to anyone cast into the LOF.

    Revelation 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.

    Compare the following. Neither can they die any more....on such the second death hath no power


    It makes me wonder what those, such as Justin, made of the first resurrection then? His thoughts on the first resurrection seems to be absent from his writing that I submitted in the OP.
    I don't believe he was confused. He expected to be raised in the general resurrection following the 1000 yrs. The first resurrection, at the beginning of the 1000 yrs, is for the dead in Christ that die during the reign of the beast if you take Rev 20:4-6 literally. If you read the description of who is raised before the 1000 yrs it is those who rejected the beast in one form or the other. Christians who die before this time period don't have the opportunity to reject the beast so can't qualify for the 'first resurrection'.

    You are correct that everyone in the 'first resurrection' is 'blessed', but it only includes those saints that die during the reign of the beast. There are no wicked raised at this time, so everyone that is raised is 'blessed and holy'. Where you are going astray I think, is that you believe that all righteous throughout history are raised at this time...it doesn't say that. It also never says anything about the '2nd resurrection', after the 1000 yrs, being only for the wicked. That wouldn't make any sense anyway unless every mortal that dies during the 1000 yr period is bound for the lake of fire. Jesus brings no one to righteousness during his earthly reign?

    The wicked and righteous are raised at the same time, during the same resurrection. John 5:29 says this explicitly, that at the same hour ALL the dead in the graves will hear Jesus's voice and rise from their graves, some to life and some to damnation. This cannot be the 'first resurrection' because as you say, everyone in this general resurrection is not 'blessed and holy'. So it must be the resurrection at the end of the 1000 yrs. Daniel 12:2 says the same thing....those asleep will be raised, some to life, some to damnation. This is the 'general resurrection' at the end of the 1000 yrs that Justin is speaking of, he does not include himself in the resurrection of the tribulation martyrs at the beginning of the 1000 yrs.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    18,004

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by crush View Post
    I don't believe he was confused. He expected to be raised in the general resurrection following the 1000 yrs. The first resurrection, at the beginning of the 1000 yrs, is for the dead in Christ that die during the reign of the beast if you take Rev 20:4-6 literally. If you read the description of who is raised before the 1000 yrs it is those who rejected the beast in one form or the other. Christians who die before this time period don't have the opportunity to reject the beast so can't qualify for the 'first resurrection'.

    You are correct that everyone in the 'first resurrection' is 'blessed', but it only includes those saints that die during the reign of the beast. There are no wicked raised at this time, so everyone that is raised is 'blessed and holy'. Where you are going astray I think, is that you believe that all righteous throughout history are raised at this time...it doesn't say that. It also never says anything about the '2nd resurrection', after the 1000 yrs, being only for the wicked. That wouldn't make any sense anyway unless every mortal that dies during the 1000 yr period is bound for the lake of fire. Jesus brings no one to righteousness during his earthly reign?

    The wicked and righteous are raised at the same time, during the same resurrection. John 5:29 says this explicitly, that at the same hour ALL the dead in the graves will hear Jesus's voice and rise from their graves, some to life and some to damnation. This cannot be the 'first resurrection' because as you say, everyone in this general resurrection is not 'blessed and holy'. So it must be the resurrection at the end of the 1000 yrs. Daniel 12:2 says the same thing....those asleep will be raised, some to life, some to damnation. This is the 'general resurrection' at the end of the 1000 yrs that Justin is speaking of, he does not include himself in the resurrection of the tribulation martyrs at the beginning of the 1000 yrs.

    Unless I'm mistaken, didn't his life end with a literal beheading? If yes, it is those that were beheaded, among others, who live again and reign with Christ a thousand years. He already fits the text just based on that, assuming I'm correct that he was beheaded. But that aside though, let's not forget what he initially concluded, that being the following.

    And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem

    He obviously believed in Christ. So dwelling a thousand years in Jerusalem would have to include him, otherwise he would be contradicting himself if he didn't think this included him as well.

  4. #19

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Unless I'm mistaken, didn't his life end with a literal beheading? If yes, it is those that were beheaded, among others, who live again and reign with Christ a thousand years. He already fits the text just based on that, assuming I'm correct that he was beheaded. But that aside though, let's not forget what he initially concluded, that being the following.

    And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem

    He obviously believed in Christ. So dwelling a thousand years in Jerusalem would have to include him, otherwise he would be contradicting himself if he didn't think this included him as well.
    I don't see his comments on Rev 20:4-6 as a contradiction or untruth. Believers in Christ will dwell with Christ for 1000 yrs in Jerusalem. Those believers are the tribulation martyrs. He goes on to say that ALL men are raised after the 1000 years. He separates that into two parts, the 'eternal resurrection' and the 'judgement of all men". The same separation found in John 5:29, the 'resurrection of life' and the 'resurrection of judgement'.

    .....and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place.

    Yes Justin was beheaded as are the martyrs in Rev 20:4-6, but other attributes are given to the martyrs of Rev 20. They are beheaded, don't worship the beast, don't receive his mark, nor worship the image of the beast. You could argue I guess that Justin didn't worship the beast, or get the mark. But I think John is referring to a specific group of believers living during the reign of the beast that are raised.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    18,004

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by crush View Post
    I don't see his comments on Rev 20:4-6 as a contradiction or untruth. Believers in Christ will dwell with Christ for 1000 yrs in Jerusalem. Those believers are the tribulation martyrs. He goes on to say that ALL men are raised after the 1000 years. He separates that into two parts, the 'eternal resurrection' and the 'judgement of all men". The same separation found in John 5:29, the 'resurrection of life' and the 'resurrection of judgement'.

    .....and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place.

    Yes Justin was beheaded as are the martyrs in Rev 20:4-6, but other attributes are given to the martyrs of Rev 20. They are beheaded, don't worship the beast, don't receive his mark, nor worship the image of the beast. You could argue I guess that Justin didn't worship the beast, or get the mark. But I think John is referring to a specific group of believers living during the reign of the beast that are raised.
    Do you or you not believe that Justin was a believer of Christ? If you do, didn't he clearly say that it was those that believe in our Christ, that these will dwell in Jerusalem a thousand years? How can it not be a contradiction to believe in Christ, and then not dwell in Jerusalem a thousand years? You can't have one with out the other. Irregardless whether or not Justin was correct about this, this was what he obviously believed. He believed that whoever believes in Christ, which would include him, the same would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem. Yet at the same time, he seems to place the resurrection after the thousand years, thus why I'm wondering if he was confused about some things.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    18,004

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffweeder View Post
    Your saying Justin seemed a little confused, and I offered an alternative understanding to what he said.., that makes sense of him putting those events you spoke of after the millennium.

    The scriptures I posted point this out.
    But it doesn't make sense though, based on what he concluded about the thousand years. He obviously saw himself being included among those that are to dwell in Jerusalem a thousand years. No way can that be fulfilled apart from him being bodily resurrected first. After all, the man is literally dead and has been dead for almost 2000 years now, and that he placed the time of dwelling in Jerusalem a thousand years, far into the future, in relation to the times he lived in. If not for that part, only then what you suggested might make sense.

    Either there's something about his theology that is not being fully grasped by some of us, or he was literally confused about some things at the time. I'm 50/50 on that for the time being. I don't know which it might be, as of now anyway.

  7. #22

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Do you or you not believe that Justin was a believer of Christ? If you do, didn't he clearly say that it was those that believe in our Christ, that these will dwell in Jerusalem a thousand years? How can it not be a contradiction to believe in Christ, and then not dwell in Jerusalem a thousand years? You can't have one with out the other. Irregardless whether or not Justin was correct about this, this was what he obviously believed. He believed that whoever believes in Christ, which would include him, the same would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem. Yet at the same time, he seems to place the resurrection after the thousand years, thus why I'm wondering if he was confused about some things.
    If I said "'those that believe in our Christ' will dig a well in an Ethiopian village this year" would you also assume that meant every Christian on Earth? You are inserting an 'all' where there isn't one.

    He is saying 'those that believe in our Christ' (the tribulation martyrs) will rise and dwell in Jerusalem for 1000 yrs (Rev 20:4-6), then afterwards the general resurrection comprised of Christians (the eternal resurrection) and non-Christians (the judgement of all men)(John 5:29).

    Maybe his wording is throwing you off? "Those that believe in our Christ" just means "Christians" right? If I said "Christians are dwelling in Jerusalem now" does that mean that there aren't Christians anywhere else but Jerusalem? He never says ALL Christians are raised before the 1000 yrs and neither does John. John says specific Christians are raised in the first resurrection. If you stay strictly to the two passages Justin is exegeting, Rev 20:4 and John 5:29, this should be clear.

  8. #23

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by crush View Post
    He never says ALL Christians are raised before the 1000 yrs and neither does John. John says specific Christians are raised in the first resurrection.
    Daniel [OT saint] was told "thou shalt rest [in death], and stand in thy lot [be resurrected to stand again on the earth] AT THE END OF THE DAYS [at the end of the days referred to in that context, see Dan12:6-7,10-12,13]"... not meaning at the end of the MK.

    ALL saints will be resurrected [unless they are still-living/alive, at that point] to experience the MK time period.

    It is "the dead" which "lived not again until the 1000 years were finished" (so to experience the carrying out of their sentence). Rev20:5.
    If one is not "resurrected" to experience the MK time period [again, not talking about the LIVING saints when that time commences], it is because they were not a "saint" [saved]. No "saint" misses out on the MK time period (tho having differing capacities, certainly).




    side note: I can't really make heads nor tails out of the OP quoted point being made.



    Adding this thought: the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom is variously referred to as:

    --"the kingdom of the heavens" [on the earth, upon His "return" there]
    --"the wedding feast/supper" [on the earth]
    --the "shall sit down [at a meal; G347]"
    --"the age [singular] to come/coming"
    --"when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of His glory" [Matt19:28, Matt25:31-34 (see also Luk22:30,16,18 and Matt26:29); see also Isa24:21-23 "reign... GLORIOUSLY"]
    --His "return" (that is, to the earth; Luke 12:36-37,38,40,42-44; Luk19:12,15,17,19)
    --the "BLESSED" [time period / references, including "He blessed the seventh day"/and Heb4:9, also Ex31:17]
    --"which in His times He SHALL SHEW [openly manifest; future], who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords"
    --etc...

  9. #24

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDivineWatermark View Post
    Daniel [OT saint] was told "thou shalt rest [in death], and stand in thy lot [be resurrected to stand again on the earth] AT THE END OF THE DAYS [at the end of the days referred to in that context, see Dan12:6-7,10-12,13]"... not meaning at the end of the MK.

    ALL saints will be resurrected [unless they are still-living/alive, at that point] to experience the MK time period.

    It is "the dead" which "lived not again until the 1000 years were finished" (so to experience the carrying out of their sentence). Rev20:5.
    If one is not "resurrected" to experience the MK time period [again, not talking about the LIVING saints when that time commences], it is because they were not a "saint" [saved]. No "saint" misses out on the MK time period (tho having differing capacities, certainly).
    Your point is highly interpretive IMO because Christians can also physically die and be dead. There is no reason to think that the 'rest of the dead' cannot include Christians too. But I understand that there is a case to be made for more than just the tribulation martyrs being raised at Christ's second coming. The disciples, for example, were promised that they would rule over the 12 tribes of Israel during this regeneration period. However the texts Justin is drawing from aren't inclusive of all believers, just the martyrs and then everybody else in the 'general resurrection' to follow the 1000 yrs.


    side note: I can't really make heads nor tails out of the OP quoted point being made.
    From what I can tell OP believes that there is a resurrection before the millennium for only the just, and then there is a resurrection after the millennium for only unjust. Justin contradicts this belief by saying that Christians are raised both before and after the millennium.

    IMO, in any scenario, Christians must be raised after the millennium. Because even if every Christian and OT believer in history is raised at Christ's second coming, you'd still need to consider those mortals that are born and die during the millennial time period. They would have to be raised to eternal life or judgement after the 1000 yrs. Most of them wouldn't even have been born yet at the time of Christ second coming.

  10. #25

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by crush View Post
    IMO, in any scenario, Christians must be raised after the millennium. Because even if every Christian and OT believer in history is raised at Christ's second coming, you'd still need to consider those mortals that are born and die during the millennial time period. They would have to be raised to eternal life or judgement after the 1000 yrs. Most of them wouldn't even have been born yet at the time of Christ second coming.
    Here's how I understand that.

    --only "saints" [I mean, here, the mortals/living persons capable of having children (there are others)] ENTER the MK time period
    --the children born to them are not "born automatically righteous [not born as saints/saved]
    --of those children born in the MK, only the rebellious "die" during the MK [they go the way of all those awaiting the final sentencing of the GWTj]
    --all of the "saints" continue to live on in/during the MK, never experiencing "death"/never "die"

    Therefore, NO "saints" die from or during the MK time period, thus only "the dead [unsaved]" (as well as "the dead [unsaved]" of all times) stand before the GWTj for the sentence to be carried out.



    "I am The Resurrection AND The Life: he that believeth in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live [this is because of the Person, The Resurrection]: AND whosoever LIVETH [living persons] and believeth in Me SHALL NEVER DIE. Believest thou this? [this is because of the Person, The LIFE]"... So once Jesus Himself has returned and IS PRESENT (FOR the MK), The LIFE Himself present here on the earth, there is no reason for any "saint" to DIE in/during the MK (to later be raised for possible "eternal life" or "eternal judgment"--They've been present on the earth with "LIFE HIMSELF" reigning). Death will be very rare, and reserved solely for the rebellious [unsaved].


    I believe that is what it means where it talks about His reign. His judging/governing. He is sustaining LIFE. "Death" being much more rare in that MK time period (and, before the MK ever started the Matthew 13 "angels REAP" took place, so at the very beginning, only the righteous enter [that time period] and "shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father" Matt13:40-43, which informs us that this is at "the end [singular] of the age [singular]" (mentioned also in Matt24:3 and answered in Jesus' OD that follows) which immediately precedes "the age [singular] to come," i.e the earthly MK time period. Only "the righteous" [as mortals] ENTER that time period. (there will be "resurrected" saints also, like Daniel [Dan12:13] and Abraham, Isaac, Jacob [Matt8:11 and parallels], who will NOT be having/producing/bearing children, but we're not discussing these in this post).

    Since only "righteous mortals" ENTER the MK time period [besides "resurrected" persons who don't bear/produce children], this requires a time period between our Rapture [when ALL living saints are "transformed/translated" into glorified bodies] and the time that living/mortal saints enter the MK [capable of having/bearing children]. None of "the dead/unsaved" ENTER the MK (though the children born to them are not "born RIGHTEOUS [saved]," thus these [alone] are susceptible to dying during the MK, if rebellious [only those "die"])

  11. #26

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDivineWatermark View Post
    Here's how I understand that.

    --only "saints" [I mean, here, the mortals/living persons capable of having children (there are others)] ENTER the MK time period
    --the children born to them are not "born automatically righteous [not born as saints/saved]
    --of those children born in the MK, only the rebellious "die" during the MK [they go the way of all those awaiting the final sentencing of the GWTj]
    --all of the "saints" continue to live on in/during the MK, never experiencing "death"/never "die"

    Therefore, NO "saints" die from or during the MK time period, thus only "the dead [unsaved]" (as well as "the dead [unsaved]" of all times) stand before the GWTj for the sentence to be carried out.



    "I am The Resurrection AND The Life: he that believeth in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live [this is because of the Person, The Resurrection]: AND whosoever LIVETH [living persons] and believeth in Me SHALL NEVER DIE. Believest thou this? [the is because of the Person, The LIFE]"... So once Jesus Himself has returned and IS PRESENT (FOR the MK), The LIFE Himself present here on the earth, there is no reason for any "saint" to DIE in/during the MK (to later be raised for possible "eternal life" or "eternal judgment"--They've been present on the earth with "LIFE HIMSELF" reigning). Death will be very rare, and reserved solely for the rebellious [unsaved].


    I believe that is what it means where it talks about His reign. His judging/governing. He is sustaining LIFE. "Death" being much more rare in that MK time period (and, before the MK ever started the Matthew 13 "angels REAP" took place, so at the very beginning, only the righteous enter [that time period] and "shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father" Matt13:40-43, which informs us that this is at "the end [singular] of the age [singular]" (mentioned also in Matt24:3 and answered in Jesus' OD that follows) which immediately precedes "the age [singular] to come," i.e the earthly MK time period. Only "the righteous" [as mortals] ENTER that time period. (there will be "resurrected" saints also, like Daniel [Dan12:13] and Abraham, Isaac, Jacob [Matt8:11 and parallels], who will NOT be having/producing/bearing children, but we're not discussing these in this post).
    Every man must die according to Heb 9:27. The bible doesn't cease being true during the 1000 yrs I don't think. Isaiah 65:20 says that every person will "live out their days", which are 120 years according to Gen 6:3. Unless they are cursed, then they will die before they reach 120.

    The resurrection of the just and unjust occurs at the same time according to John 5:29 (at the same hour). It says it does in no uncertain terms. Since only the 'blessed' partake in the 'first resurrection' before the 1000 yrs, John 5:29 must occur after the 1000 yrs. Because John 5:29 is a mixture of just and unjust it cannot be the 'first resurrection. It must be the 'rest of the dead' resurrection in Rev 20:6, or the 'general resurrection' as Justin calls it.

  12. #27

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by crush View Post
    Every man must die according to Heb 9:27. The bible doesn't cease being true during the 1000 yrs I don't think. Isaiah 65:20 says that every person will "live out their days", which are 120 years according to Gen 6:3. Unless they are cursed, then they will die before they reach 120.
    So in John 11:25-26, Jesus said, "I am The Resurrection AND The Life: he that believeth in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live [this is because of the Person, The Resurrection]: AND whosoever LIVETH [living persons] and believeth in Me SHALL NEVER DIE. Believest thou this? [this is because of the Person, The LIFE]"...

    And He also said, "the word which I have spoken, the same shall judge him IN THE LAST DAY" ("the last day" I believe refers to the 7th Millennium, the sabbatismos of Heb4:9 [the "BLESSED" Day (edit: will be back to insert the references; inserting this post which has the references to "BLESSED" where referring to their entrance into the earthly MK time period: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.ph...17#post3429617 ), Gen2:3/Ex20:11/Ex31:13,17]



    ...back in a bit... [done. inserted the post with the "BLESSED" references which refer to their entrance into the earthly MK time period; there may be more--most people tend to gloss over the Scripture references without considering whether these things be so, but at least I'm offering it for that option ]


    Matthew 25:31-34,40,41,46 context tells us that "the righteous/'ye BLESSED'" [of the Gentile nations] will enter the MK time period, but that the others (called here 'ye cursed') will not.

    "...but the righteous into life eternal." [note: the context here being the LIVING persons at the time of Christ's Second Coming to the earth, aka "the end [singular] of the age [singular]" (same as Matt13:30,39,40,49-50 and the basis of the disciples' Q in 24:3) at the commencement of "the age [singular] to come"/the earthly MK, who will enter in mortal bodies capable of reproducing]

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    18,004

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by crush View Post
    If I said "'those that believe in our Christ' will dig a well in an Ethiopian village this year" would you also assume that meant every Christian on Earth? You are inserting an 'all' where there isn't one.

    He is saying 'those that believe in our Christ' (the tribulation martyrs) will rise and dwell in Jerusalem for 1000 yrs (Rev 20:4-6), then afterwards the general resurrection comprised of Christians (the eternal resurrection) and non-Christians (the judgement of all men)(John 5:29).

    Maybe his wording is throwing you off? "Those that believe in our Christ" just means "Christians" right? If I said "Christians are dwelling in Jerusalem now" does that mean that there aren't Christians anywhere else but Jerusalem? He never says ALL Christians are raised before the 1000 yrs and neither does John. John says specific Christians are raised in the first resurrection. If you stay strictly to the two passages Justin is exegeting, Rev 20:4 and John 5:29, this should be clear.
    You make some good points, points which I grasp. So let's look again at what Justin said.



    And Trypho to this replied, “I remarked to you sir, that you are very anxious to be safe in all respects, since you cling to the Scriptures. But tell me, do you really admit that this place, Jerusalem, shall be rebuilt; and do you expect your people to be gathered together, and made joyful with Christ and the patriarchs, and the prophets, both the men of our nation, and other proselytes who joined them before your Christ came? or have you given way, and admitted this in order to have the appearance of worsting us in the controversies?”

    Then I answered, “I am not so miserable a fellow, Trypho, as to say one thing and think another. I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion, and [believe] that such will take place

    But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, [as] the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare.

    https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf...i.iv.lxxx.html



    and do you expect your people to be gathered together, and made joyful with Christ and the patriarchs, and the prophets

    Let's think through this part for a moment. Note that it says....the patriarchs, and the prophets. How can that not be meaning men such as Abraham, Isaac, etc? Why then would saints from the OT be present during the thousand years, who would not be anyone that was martyred during the great trib in the end of this age, but Justin wouldn't be? How do these patriarchs, and the prophets of old, manage to show up bodily during the future thousand years? A bodily resurrection of course. If they can be bodily resurrected in order to be there at the time, then so can Justin, except like I pointed out in the OP, Justin seems to be placing the resurrection after the thousand years, and that he seems to be only seeing one resurrection total, and not two instead. Thus why I'm still wondering if he was confused about some things at the time? I just can't figure out how he was assuming a future thousand years in Jerusalem could work out if he was placing his and everyone elses' resurrection after the thousand years?

  14. #29

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    The confusion starting with this part.


    And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place. Just as our Lord also said, ‘They shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, but shall be equal to the angels, the children of the God of the resurrection.’

    It looks like to me he placed the following after the thousand years.
    I think I'll take a stab at what he POSSIBLY could have meant (not sure).

    " And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem [is he maybe referring to those LIVING/MORTAL persons who ENTER the MK time period, here]; and that thereafter [by 'thereafter,' MIGHT he be meaning 'once Christ "RETURNS" to the earth FOR the earthly MK'] the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place [that is, at the START of the MK time period (and I'd say, during that entire spans, meaning, "IN THE LAST DAY" and "IN WHICH")]. Just as our Lord also said, ‘They shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, but shall be equal to the angels, the children of the God of the resurrection.’ [these would be the "RESURRECTED" persons (resurrected FOR the MK time period, and not capable of reproducing), rather than the "LIVING/MORTAL" persons previously referred to (who enter the MK in mortal bodies capable of reproducing))]"


    Maybe this? [this is without knowing anything outside the quoted portions divaD supplied in this thread, or at least not recalling much else besides ]



    ...or might he be thinking "the general [at the time of His 2nd Coming] AND the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men [at the GWTj]" are two distinct things occurring at 1000 yrs apart from each other?? (by his use of the word "and" here, as well as his phrase "would likewise")?? Again, it's hard to really tell...

    --->Or maybe more like "and that thereafter [after Christ's "RETURN" FOR the MK] the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection[at the time of Christ's 2nd Coming to the earth] AND judgment of all men [at the later GWTj] would likewise take place"

    divaD said:

    It seems to me though....Just as our Lord also said, ‘They shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, but shall be equal to the angels, the children of the God of the resurrection....that Justin was applying that to what he labeled the general resurrection after the thousand years, rather than applying it to the resurrection that precedes the thousand years. Why would he apply Luke 20:36 to the 2nd resurrection and not the first one instead?

    that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place. Just as our Lord also said, ‘They shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, but shall be equal to the angels, the children of the God of the resurrection.’
    Read my last suggestion, above (the one with the arrow).

    Perhaps the first group referred to the LIVING/MORTALS who enter the MK time period, and his "thereafter" word refers to those "RESURRECTED" to enter the MK time period (meaning, "after Christ's RETURN to the earth at His SEcond Coming to the earth FOR the MK), and the "AND" and the "would likewise" perhaps indicates he's referring to two distinct times of "resurrection" (the one "of life" BEFORE/at START of the MK, and the one "of damnation" likewise after He comes, but this one 1000 yrs later, at the GWTj)

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    18,004

    Re: Was Justin Martyer confused about some things?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDivineWatermark View Post
    I think I'll take a stab at what he POSSIBLY could have meant (not sure).

    " And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem [is he maybe referring to those LIVING/MORTAL persons who ENTER the MK time period, here]; and that thereafter [by 'thereafter,' MIGHT he be meaning 'once Christ "RETURNS" to the earth FOR the earthly MK'] the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place [that is, at the START of the MK time period (and I'd say, during that entire spans, meaning, "IN THE LAST DAY" and "IN THE WHICH")]. Just as our Lord also said, ‘They shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, but shall be equal to the angels, the children of the God of the resurrection.’ [these would be the "RESURRECTED" persons (resurrected FOR the MK time period, and not capable of reproducing), rather than the "LIVING/MORTAL" persons previously referred to (who enter the MK in mortal bodies capable of reproducing))]"


    Maybe this? [this is without knowing anything outside the quoted portions divaD supplied in this thread, or at least not recalling much else besides ]



    ...or might he be thinking "the general [at the time of His 2nd Coming] AND the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men [at the GWTj]" are two distinct things occurring at 1000 yrs apart from each other?? (by his use of the word "and" here, as well as his phrase "would likewise")?? Again, it's hard to really tell...

    --->Or maybe more like "and that thereafter [after Christ's "RETURN" FOR the MK] the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection[at the time of Christ's 2nd Coming to the earth] AND judgment of all men [at the later GWTj] would likewise take place"



    Read my last suggestion, above (the one with the arrow).

    Perhaps the first group referred to the LIVING/MORTALS who enter the MK time period, and his "thereafter" word refers to those "RESURRECTED" to enter the MK time period (meaning, "after Christ's RETURN to the earth at His SEcond Coming to the earth FOR the MK), and the "AND" and the "would likewise" perhaps indicates he's referring to two distinct times of "resurrection" (the one "of life" BEFORE/at START of the MK, and the one "of damnation" likewise after He comes, but this one 1000 yrs later, at the GWTj)

    that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place.


    Unless I'm not reading this correctly, isn't the chronology obvious here? Doesn't 'thereafter' tell us the parts having to do with the resurrection, that they follow this time of dwelling in Jerusalem a thousand years? How can 'thereafter possibly mean anything other than after something? Take note, he defines this as the eternal resurrection. I would think the resurrection mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15:51-57, that this is the eternal resurrection, and that it occurs as of the 2nd coming. Justin apparently has the thousand years as occurring at the 2nd coming, and the eternal resurrection occurring after the thousand years. Something is not adding up here.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. confused about some things. Warning: VERY LONG
    By mommix3 in forum Counseling Requests
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Jan 8th 2014, 02:06 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: Jan 19th 2012, 03:53 AM
  3. Confused about some things
    By *Living~By~Faith* in forum Growing in Christ
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Jan 31st 2009, 02:06 PM

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
  •