Book of Revelation conflicts...amillenial,pre...

[D4Christ]

You are right. This is my conflict. I don't see a second resurrection, except in Revelations.

After giving this careful thought and much prayer, I've come to realized that the key to understanding the resurrections is in the wording. Rev 20:5-6 states;

5But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6Blessed 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.

Although the dead are delivered up to stand before Yahushua, this passage never actually calls this the 2nd resurrection. It is called the second death. The second death is also referred to in Rev 2:11;

11 “Anyone with ears to hear must listen to the Spirit and understand what he is saying to the churches. Whoever is victorious will not be harmed by the second death.

Though the 1st resurrection and the 2nd death are similar in that they both involve the resurrection of the dead, they are different in purpose. I find it helpful to think of the 1st resurrection as the, 'escape get out of jail free card' and the 2nd death as the, 'take a number and appear in court on this date' card.

The 1st resurrection is for the righteous (those dead and alive saints who are ready when Yahushua comes back for us as promised) and the 2nd death is for judgment where people are on trial to see if evidence presented clears them or condems them. The 2nd death is the lake of fire...and those rescued in the 1st resurrection have no fear of going there.

The first resurrection is for the righteous (alive and dead), who escape the coming wrath, meet the Yahushua in the air, get rewarded for their deeds, and have no fear of judgment, thereby have no fear of being sent into the lake of fire.

Luke 14:14

14 Then at the resurrection of the righteous, God will reward you for inviting those who could not repay you.â€Â

--righteous are rewarded

1 Thess 1:10

10 And they speak of how you are looking forward to the coming of God’s Son from heavenâ€â€Jesus, whom God raised from the dead. He is the one who has rescued us from the terrors of the coming judgment.

--righteous rescued


John 5

24 “I tell you the truth, those who listen to my message and believe in God who sent me have eternal life. They will never be condemned for their sins, but they have already passed from death into life.

--Here we see how the righteous (those who listen and believe) are automatically passed from death and will receive life...making it unecessary for them to be tried at the second death.

Interestingly enough, John while making reference to requirements for the first resurrection, also describes those who will stand for judgement at the second death.

28 Don’t be so surprised! Indeed, the time is coming when all the dead in their graves will hear the voice of God’s Son, 29 and they will rise again. Those who have done good will rise to experience eternal life, and those who have continued in evil will rise to experience judgment.

This is also the second death as described in Rev 20;

11 And I saw a great white throne and the one sitting on it. The earth and sky fled from his presence, but they found no place to hide. 12 I saw the dead, both great and small, standing before God’s throne. And the books were opened, including the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to what they had done, as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up its dead, and death and the grave gave up their dead. And all were judged according to their deeds. 14 Then death and the grave were thrown into the lake of fire. This lake of fire is the second death. 15 And anyone whose name was not found recorded in the Book of Life was thrown into the lake of fire.

--As we can see these dead are not resurrected to meet the Lord in the air but they are appear before the Great White Throne to have their lives examined. We know they are examined because they are judged based on the information contained in the books (more than one) and the Book of Life. Those not in the book go into the lake of fire. We can infer that if some are not in the book, some are found in the book and will receive eternal life as stated in John 5:29.

In conclusion, I think is is a mistake to refer to the 2nd death as the 2nd resurrection. Clearly the first resurrection is an event that changes the dead and those alive (in dying flesh) to living immortal bodies that do not die.

1 Corinthians 15

52 It will happen in a moment, in the blink of an eye, when the last trumpet is blown. For when the trumpet sounds, those who have died will be raised to live forever. And we who are living will also be transformed. 53 For our dying bodies must be transformed into bodies that will never die; our mortal bodies must be transformed into immortal bodies.

On the other hand, the 2nd death never states the people who stand before the Throne are resurrected or transformed in any way. In fact, throughout the judgment these people are referred to as the dead.

'...the dead were judged....' (Rev 20:12).

I pray to YHWH that I gave an accurate account of his Word as I continue to learn. I've never made this comparison before and this research had been helpful in other areas of my study. Talk with you soon....

Blessings,
Deirdre

 

[justvisiting]

Acts 1:1  ¶The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
2  Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:
3  To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
Acts 13:30  But God raised him from the dead:
31  And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.32  And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers,
33  God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

Time to take a break. Maybe talk later.

 

[Drew]

I really think you need to read the full context of mark 13. The...THIS Generation that Christ is speaking of is the generation that is in the tribulation.

I have read Mark 13 many times with intense focus.

I trust you realize that you need to actually make a case that this tribulation lies in our future and is not constituted by the tumult of the events of the first century. Otherwise, you are begging the very question at issue. Why would Jesus tell people that "this generation" - clearly implying their generation unless he has otherwise made it clear that He is talking about another generation - would not pass away till all these things occur. If your assertion is correct, He would have likely said "that generation"

Did you notice that it mentions the sun turning black, the moon blood red, the antichrist etc.

Yes I have and this matter has been addressed many many times in other threads.

I believe that Christians err when they read Biblical texts containing end of the world language – stars falling, the moon turning red, earthquakes, splitting mountains, etc. – and take such language literally. One common manifestation of this involves interpreting prophetic texts that use such language as having “end of the time†events as their referent - when it is believed that there will indeed be such cataclysmic events. Such readers rule out the possibility that these prophecies have already been fulfilled by basically arguing “That could not have happened in the past, since the stars did not full or the moon did not turn redâ€Â.

This entire positions rests on a radical misunderstanding of how these texts are used in the Biblical tradition. We know for a fact that such language is not intended to be taken literally – it is a literary device used by the prophet to emphasize the theological significance of much more “mundane†events – events that do not involve the end of the world but rather changes in the socio-political order. There are many examples of this. Consider this from Isaiah 13:

10For the stars of heaven and their constellations
Will not flash forth their light;
The sun will be dark when it rises
And the moon will not shed its light

What was going on? Babylon was being destroyed, never to be rebuilt – check the context and consider the historical record. The world was not coming to an end and we are not take this text literally.

Here is another example from Isaiah concerning the fate of the nation of the Edomites:

And all the host of heaven will wear away,
And the sky will be rolled up like a scroll;
All their hosts will also wither away
As a leaf withers from the vine,
Or as one withers from the fig tree.
5For (K)My sword is satiated in heaven,
Behold it shall descend for judgment upon Edom

Has this prophecy already been fulfilled? Was Edom defeated? The historical record indicates that it indeed has. Did the sky roll up? Did the stars (the “host of the skyâ€Â) stop shining (wither away)? No, in both cases.

Jesus was born into that tradition, he was steeped in that tradition. No first century Jew (who knew his Old Testament) listening to the discourse of Mark 13 would take such language literally as denoting literal end of the world events. He would have interpreted such language in accordance with Biblical precedent – as a literary device to ascribe theological significance to non end of the world events.

And for many reasons addressed in a number of recent threads, this discourse is almost certainly a prophecy about events in the very near future – events culminating in 70 AD.

And, of course, this allows us to take Jesus at His word in His remark about “this generation†– we are not forced into inventing awkward theories about He could look his audience in the eye, reer to “this generationâ€Â, and actually mean another generation, thousands of years in the future.

 

[Drew]

I just now realize that "researcher" has provided many other examples of precisely the same usage of such "end of the world" language. There really is very little doubt - to take such language literally is to ignore a very strong Biblical tradition about how such apocalyptic language is actually used.

And this ignoring of the Biblical tradition has had the effect of causing many to place prophetic events in future simply because the "stars have not yet fallen" and "the moon has not yet turned red". We need to educate our churches about how such language is used in the Biblical tradition and try to undo all the errors that have piled up over the centuries about the meaning of such "end of the world" propetic texts.

 

[Vic C.]

I believe Daniel 9:24-27 has to do with the anti-christ...however, there are much clearer new testament scriptures. Why use Daniel. Jesus fully explained the scriptures when He was resurrected from the dead, to the Apostles. He was seen of them many days after the resurrection. The Apostles in turn have clearly explained it to us. My point is... why go to a partial revelation in the OT. When the full revelation is in the NT.

Hi again, JV. I was once where you are. :yes Actually, I am where I am now in my studies because scripture has led me there. Honestly, there is nowhere in the NT that directly points to a future seven year period. That left me puzzled. I was introduced to the Reformer's view by a reformed acquaintance of mine that used to frequent the boards. I fought the interpretation of Daniel 9 that says the whole 70 weeks is about the rebuilding of the Temple and the coming, anointing and cutting off of the Messiah. I fought hard because the futurist viewpoint was so ingrained in my head.

The thing is, you can only fight off the truth for so long. Eventually, I gave in to what the Spirit was trying to teach me. Yes, much of the OT is a shadow of of things to come. :yes But also, the OT is very rich in history as well. This just can't be ignored. What else can't be ignored is the NT explanation and fulfillment of certain prophecy wouldn't exist without the revelation from God in the OT.

Messianic prophecy usually just deals with that; the coming of Messiah. It is clear to me that Daniel 9:24-27 is all about Him. We use Daniel quite frankly, because he so precisely predicted everything right down to the last days of the covenant being offered to the Jews first before it was given to the Gentiles.

I read that passage over and over again. It finally started to makes sense. The covenant established was the New Covenant offered up the the Jews. This is also the beginning of Jesus' earthly ministry. Threescore and two weeks later (that is 3 1/2 years later) Jesus was crucified. His death ushered in the end of temple sacrifices and oblations. At the point of His death, when the veil of the Temple was torn, those rituals were null and void and pointless. They continued on because the Jews didn't not accept Jesus as the once and for all atonement and sacrifice for the transgressions of man.

The Temple was important to them because they were still under the old Law. Then, as Daniel and Jesus told us, the Temple was finally laid to rest and their sacrifices were also laid to rest forever. They revolted against the Romans over taxes and such and finally the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple with it.

Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Side note: a interesting study we just started last Sunday was on how the Jewish revolt came to be.

Mat 22:15-22 The Jews were ticked off about having to give Caesar tax money because the name Caesar was synonymous to god. They thought they were violating a Commandment.

(they actually believed because an engraving of Caesar in their coins meant they were worshipping him every time they had to pay taxes. No matter what Jesus told them on that day, they held on to that belief and their misunderstanding of their Law festered until they revolted against the Romans.

So, they revolted against God, the Son of God and the very governing powers they were supposed to respect... and people question whether or not the wrath of the Romans against them was some sort of divine judgment?)

Notice I didn't leave the Bible to explain any of that either! :D

 

[justvisiting]

I pray to YHWH that I gave an accurate account of his Word as I continue to learn. I've never made this comparison before and this research had been helpful in other areas of my study. Talk with you soon....

Alright, Deirdre. Thanks again for your efforts. I continue to paste your research into Word. However, I am still up in the air regarding my final position.
I am posting this webpage up only for perusal. It is not mine. It is Mike Blume's. It is about premillenialism or chiliasm (which come from Revelations) versus what the epistles taught.
This is not to dissuade anyone. It is only another source of information. I presently have a great deal of trouble reconciling, the teachings of Christ and the Apostles, to correlate or corroborate properly with Revelations.
I would normally only use scripture...however...I'm having a hard time reconciling discrepancies between Revelations and the rest of NT teaching.
Here is the link
http://mikeblume.com/chiliasm.htm
P.S. I have been reading the other's, but as I said I am doing some research myself right now.

 

[justvisiting]

The thing is, you can only fight off the truth for so long. Eventually, I gave in to what the Spirit was trying to teach me. Yes, much of the OT is a shadow of of things to come. But also, the OT is very rich in history as well. This just can't be ignored. What else can't be ignored is the NT explanation and fulfillment of certain prophecy wouldn't exist without the revelation from God in the OT.

Messianic prophecy usually just deals with that; the coming of Messiah. It is clear to me that Daniel 9:24-27 is all about Him. We use Daniel quite frankly, because he so precisely predicted everything right down to the last days of the covenant being offered to the Jews first before it was given to the Gentiles.

I wouldn't disagree with you that the OT is rich in Messianic prophecy and I, by no means am suggesting forget about it. Daniel does come up with some numbers.
As for myself, right now, I still believe in a 7 year tribulation and Christ returning after that.
Revelations is still messing up my mind though so I'm doing a little research right now.

 

[justvisiting]

I believe that Christians err when they read Biblical texts containing end of the world language – stars falling, the moon turning red, earthquakes, splitting mountains, etc. – and take such language literally. One common manifestation of this involves interpreting prophetic texts that use such language as having “end of the time†events as their referent - when it is believed that there will indeed be such cataclysmic events. Such readers rule out the possibility that these prophecies have already been fulfilled by basically arguing “That could not have happened in the past, since the stars did not full or the moon did not turn redâ€Â.

Well, it's pretty hard to contend with a non-literalist. Everything I say will not be taken literally?
I am a literalist and the resurrection has not past and I do believe in the 2nd coming of Christ.
I'm not sure whether you also believe this is the millenium now...but if you do...it's one sorry millenium. It's supposed to be a time of peace and temple restoration. Christ even reigns in the millenium. Sorry, you are way too off base for me.

 

[Vic C.]

I wouldn't disagree with you that the OT is rich in Messianic prophecy and I, by no means am suggesting forget about it. Daniel does come up with some numbers.
As for myself, right now, I still believe in a 7 year tribulation and Christ returning after that.
Revelations is still messing up my mind though so I'm doing a little research right now.

I know exactly what you are saying. The member that first introduced me to Newton and the Reformers said this:

"Just as soon as you think you have it all figured out, someone like Newton comes along..."

Thanks for posting the Mike Blume link. I've read it already but thanks anyway.

I'm not sure whether you also believe this is the millenium now...but if you do...it's one sorry millenium.

LOL, the amillennialist believes that the ratio of good vs. evil would remain as it is until the second coming. They believe Satan has already been bound and that was his only binding. Therefore the power to hinder the spreading of the Gospel has been effectively taken away from him and whatever evil influences that were present at his binding remained. I may have even gotten that from your amil post on page 1.

 

[Drew]

Well, it's pretty hard to contend with a non-literalist. Everything I say will not be taken literally? I am a literalist and the resurrection has not past and I do believe in the 2nd coming of Christ.

I hope that you do not think that I deny a future 2nd coming Jesus. I fully embrace this. Likewise, nothing in my posts can be (properly) understood as embracing the idea that the general resurrection of believers has already taken place. I believe that event lies in the future.

Christ even reigns in the millenium.

The Bible is very clear - Christ is reigning right now.

Sorry, you are way too off base for me.

Of course, you need to engage my arguments and actually make a case that I am "off-base". Simply asserting that I am is not convincing.

The Biblical material is definitive - "end of the world" language is often used to invest non end of the world events with their theological significance. So the fact that the moon has not turned red (or whatever) does not mean that the events prophecied in Mark 13 have not taken place.

It is interesting that as a "literalist", you apparently do not take "this generation" literally, preferring instead to see it as a reference to a generation other than the one characterizing the people Jesus was speaking to when he made the statement.

 

[Drew]

LOL, the amillennialist believes that the ratio of good vs. evil would remain as it is until the second coming. They believe Satan has already been bound and that was his only binding

I am not up on all the terminology, so I do not know what an "amillenialist" is. But I think it is clear that, through the work of Jesus 2000 years ago, the power of Satan has indeed already been broken in some sense. The words of Jesus from Luke:

The seventy returned with joy, saying, "Lord, even (A)the demons are subject to us in Your name." And He said to them, "I was watching Satan fall from heaven like lightning."

 

[Vic C.]

LOL, the amillennialist believes that the ratio of good vs. evil would remain as it is until the second coming. They believe Satan has already been bound and that was his only binding

I am not up on all the terminology, so I do not know what an "amillenialist" is. But I think it is clear that, through the work of Jesus 2000 years ago, the power of Satan has indeed already been broken in some sense. The words of Jesus from Luke:

The seventy returned with joy, saying, "Lord, even (A)the demons are subject to us in Your name." And He said to them, "I was watching Satan fall from heaven like lightning."

I agree, it was diminished at his fall, but has it continued to diminish? Is his evil influences less than they were eons ago? I know your belief that things are getting better, but one look around shows me mankind is in no better state (from the heart out) than it was since man's fall. Man's heart is still cold without the help and guidance of God Almighty.

For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; (romans 3:23)


Anyway, here is a link that may help to understand the nature of apocalyptic writing styles:

http://sites.silaspartners.com/partner/ ... 42,00.html

 

[Vic C.]

I am not up on all the terminology, so I do not know what an "amillenialist" is.

Right, I sometimes make the assumption that people who study End Times are familiar with the various beliefs. Sorry.

You can Google it or just go back to page 1 of this topic. :yes

 

[researcher]

I am a literalist

Cool, me too!

Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all these things be accomplished.

Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

Luk 17:25 But first must he suffer many things and be rejected of this generation.

Exo 1:6 And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation.

Well, when warranted. ;) :D

 

[researcher]

Well, it's pretty hard to contend with a non-literalist. Everything I say will not be taken literally? I am a literalist and the resurrection has not past and I do believe in the 2nd coming of Christ.

I hope that you do not think that I deny a future 2nd coming Jesus. I fully embrace this. Likewise, nothing in my posts can be (properly) understood as embracing the idea that the general resurrection of believers has already taken place. I believe that event lies in the future.

Christ even reigns in the millenium.

The Bible is very clear - Christ is reigning right now.

Sorry, you are way too off base for me.

Of course, you need to engage my arguments and actually make a case that I am "off-base". Simply asserting that I am is not convincing.

The Biblical material is definitive - "end of the world" language is often used to invest non end of the world events with their theological significance. So the fact that the moon has not turned red (or whatever) does not mean that the events prophecied in Mark 13 have not taken place.

It is interesting that as a "literalist", you apparently do not take "this generation" literally, preferring instead to see it as a reference to a generation other than the one characterizing the people Jesus was speaking to when he made the statement.

Mat 28:16 But the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them.
Mat 28:17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him; but some doubted.
Mat 28:18 And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth.

Yep, Jesus should definitely be ruling if he has all authority.

 

[researcher]

Three verses dealing with historic events, i.e. 70AD.

Mat 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
Mat 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Rev 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
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 14:19 And the angel cast his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vintage of the earth, and cast it into the winepress, the great winepress, of the wrath of God.
Rev 14:20 And the winepress was trodden without the city, and there came out blood from the winepress, even unto the bridles of the horses, as far as a thousand and six hundred furlongs.

All about Jerusalem in the 1st century.

Now we can read Rev. chapters 11 and 14 and see how much is actually in the past.

 

[Drew]

I know your belief that things are getting better,....

I know that you almost see this on these boards, but I am going to state that I was probably mistaken.

I believe that Christ is reigning and the kingdom is here - as Jesus said. But I used to think that this meant that things must be getting better. I am now open to the possibility that this is not so.

 

[Drew]

Three verses dealing with historic events, i.e. 70AD.

Mat 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
Mat 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

I agree. And I find it interesting that people believe that Jesus was talking about a different temple in a different, distant generation when:

1. The disciples and Jesus were on the Mount of Olives looking at the very temple that stood there at the time;

2. Jesus points at this temple and can only be reasonably understood as saying "This temple - the one that we see before us at this very moment - this temple will be destroyed". He says "See ye not all these things?"

3. The disciples ask when this will happen.

4. Jesus answers "This generation will see it".

And we are being are accused at not taking things literally?

Please.....

 

[justvisiting]

Drew
I wonder if you could give a short summary of what you believe has occurred so far in regards to your beliefs. As in... tribulation...resurrection...millenium...day of the Lord...final judgement (s)... etc.
I am not saying I will agree with your view...only that it helps to know also what your arguments are and how I differ.
I did this earlier with D4Christ. (which I am more partial to... but still not in total agreement with)
P.S. Some consider the questions In Matthew 24 Mark 13 and Luke 21 regarding the temple and the END... as two separate questions.
Perhaps "researcher" could do the same. I don't want a whole bunch of dissertations. Just your core beliefs in what has occurred and will occur. Again, we may totally disagree... but it helps to see where you are arguing from.
Something like this... I hope this is correct for Deirdre's
Let me try to recap your view.Day of the Lord...Christian's taken up(1st resurrection)at the end? of the tribulation...mansions provided and rewards...judgement upon the rest of the earth...1000 year reign (satan bound)... temple restored... some bad ones alive during that time...satan loosed after the 1000 years...Gog and Magog...final judgement...earth and heavens burnt up with fire...new heavens and new earth...new jerusalem...(2nd resurrection)great white throne judgement of the just(back to Adam) and unjust. Is that correct?
I really should read some of the posts again. There are quite a few now. You know what happens... you're thinking what you believe...and reading what they believe... and betwixt the two...the memory gets screwed up> :D

 

[Drew]

Drew
I wonder if you could give a short summary of what you believe has occurred so far in regards to your beliefs. As in... tribulation...resurrection...millenium...day of the Lord...final judgement (s)... etc.

I will give a very short answer (since I do not have a position on several of your questions)

1. I believe that Jesus will indeed return in the future;

2. I believe that the "tribulation" material in Matthew 24 (and its parallels) is about events of the first century - the tumult surrounding the 70 AD defeat of Jerusalem. I do not have an opinion on whether any kind of tribulation will precede the future return of Jesus;

3. I am not sure what the term "millenium" even refers to. I have a vague sense that I will likely come to see the "1000 years" as a kind of metaphor;

4. I believe that the "day of the Lord" denotes events of the first century. I am open to the possibility of a double fulfillment.

5. I believe that the only person who has ever been resurrected is Jesus Christ, and that when He returns, all those who belong to him will be resurrected.