Post-trib Rapture or Pre-Wrath Rapture

[westtexas]

Y'all tell me what you think about these 2 points of view. It seems to me it is the same viewpoint but with just a different name. Either one would be raptured at the last trumpet. Both would go through the seal judgements and the trumpets but would not face the 7 bowls of God's wrath. Am I looking at something wrong? Thanks for your insight and your answers.

Westtexas

 

[justvisiting]

They are the same as long as you understand that pre-wrath is referring to GOD's wrath...not the anti-christs. When Christ returns the 2nd time (DAY OF THE LORD), then HIS(God's) wrath will be shown.
Without a doubt Post-tribulation resurrection.
2 Thessalonians 2:1  ¶Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2  That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3  ¶Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
(the sun turns black and the moon blood red...as the last warning sign...then the 2nd coming of Christ happens...when the just and the unjust are resurrected)
(the son of perdition is the beast or the anti-christ and is defeated at the battle of Armeggedon when the Lord returns)
4  Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5  Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
If you read the context of this... all the way from 1 Thess. 4 until 2 Thess. 2...it is about the 2nd coming of Christ. By the way...Day of the lord...Day of Christ...are synonymous. The all speak of the gathering of the elect and judgement to come.

 

[Heidi]

Y'all tell me what you think about these 2 points of view. It seems to me it is the same viewpoint but with just a different name. Either one would be raptured at the last trumpet. Both would go through the seal judgements and the trumpets but would not face the 7 bowls of God's wrath. Am I looking at something wrong? Thanks for your insight and your answers.

Westtexas

Jesus gives us the timeline in MT. 24. It's crystal clear in verses 39-40 that "At the coming of the Son of man, two people will be in the field..." Jesus is not going to come 2 more times; one time to gather his elect, then again after that at the end. He's coming one more time at the end as he says in MT. 24:30 and that's when he will gather his elect.

 

[justvisiting]

You must have confused what I said. Post-trib. is only 2x. Pretrib is 3x.
I think it was probably because I mentioned rapture. The actual word rapture is used (but it refers to the post-trib resurrection). Rapture is the latin word instead of the greek word for the resurrection. OK. Only 2x just so you understand. It's all done at the end of the Great Tribulation.
P.S. the field they are working in is the during the Great Tribulation. If you notice the abomination of desolation is mentioned. (the anti-christ). The wrath that these believers in the tribulation are saved from is not the anti-christ's wrath. It is the wrath of God, that immediately shows up as soon as Christ returns at the end of the tribulation. The sun turns black and the moon blood red, just after the tribulation. Then He returns.

 

[Drew]

Jesus gives us the timeline in MT. 24. It's crystal clear in verses 39-40 that "At the coming of the Son of man, two people will be in the field..." Jesus is not going to come 2 more times; one time to gather his elect, then again after that at the end. He's coming one more time at the end as he says in MT. 24:30 and that's when he will gather his elect.

I suggest that Matthew 24 does not deal with the second coming but rather with the events of 70 AD – the fall of Jerusalem. There is a long tradition of Matthew 24 (and its parallels) being read as prophecies about the second coming. However, there is every reason to challenge such an assertion. Consider the opening text of Matthew 24:

Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. 2And He said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down." As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?"

In verse 2, Jesus makes a clear allusion to a coming destruction of the temple. Which temple? A future temple thousands of years in the future? Of course not. The disciples point to the temple they are asking about – it is the one they (and Jesus) are looking at. The disciples then ask about the timing of this. What is Jesus’ answer?:

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

It should be obvious that the reading that I am advancing allows us to take Jesus at his word – 70 AD is one generation away. The 2nd coming hypothesis is forced to awkwardly rework the meaning of this statement. What is the justification for such a rework? Has Jesus given the listener any reason at all to think that He is talking about another generation? No, He has not.

What about this statement? Doesn’t this statement tell us that Jesus is talking about the end times and not 70 AD?

But immediately after the (AI)tribulation of those days (AJ)THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND (AK)THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

Well, Jesus is here quoting Isaiah 13, where this exact same language is used. And what is the prophetic material in Isaiah 13 all about? The end of the world? No. It is about the defeat of Babylon, something we know has already happened. Conclusion: “end of the world†language is not to be taken literally. So this statement by Jesus in Matthew 24 does not requires us to think that the discourse is about events in our future.

 

[GodspromisesRyes]

Jesus gives us the timeline in MT. 24. It's crystal clear in verses 39-40 that "At the coming of the Son of man, two people will be in the field..." Jesus is not going to come 2 more times; one time to gather his elect, then again after that at the end. He's coming one more time at the end as he says in MT. 24:30 and that's when he will gather his elect.

I suggest that Matthew 24 does not deal with the second coming but rather with the events of 70 AD – the fall of Jerusalem. There is a long tradition of Matthew 24 (and its parallels) being read as prophecies about the second coming. However, there is every reason to challenge such an assertion. Consider the opening text of Matthew 24:

Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. 2And He said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down." As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?"

In verse 2, Jesus makes a clear allusion to a coming destruction of the temple. Which temple? A future temple thousands of years in the future? Of course not. The disciples point to the temple they are asking about – it is the one they (and Jesus) are looking at. The disciples then ask about the timing of this. What is Jesus’ answer?:

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

It should be obvious that the reading that I am advancing allows us to take Jesus at his word – 70 AD is one generation away. The 2nd coming hypothesis is forced to awkwardly rework the meaning of this statement. What is the justification for such a rework? Has Jesus given the listener any reason at all to think that He is talking about another generation? No, He has not.

What about this statement? Doesn’t this statement tell us that Jesus is talking about the end times and not 70 AD?

But immediately after the (AI)tribulation of those days (AJ)THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND (AK)THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

Well, Jesus is here quoting Isaiah 13, where this exact same language is used. And what is the prophetic material in Isaiah 13 all about? The end of the world? No. It is about the defeat of Babylon, something we know has already happened. Conclusion: “end of the world†language is not to be taken literally. So this statement by Jesus in Matthew 24 does not requires us to think that the discourse is about events in our future.

the problem here with what your saying is that that same lanaugages is used many times in the bible not just isiah 13 and it is not about just the destruction of babylon but the whole world, all the wicked and all the earth, all the kings mighty men slaves free etc...furthermore babylon was already destroyed. bqabylon is still alive and kickin in the form of mystery babylon but not the same old physical place- it still needs to be destroyed and will be as we see in rev and jer.

 

[NIGHTMARE]

Jesus gives us the timeline in MT. 24. It's crystal clear in verses 39-40 that "At the coming of the Son of man, two people will be in the field..." Jesus is not going to come 2 more times; one time to gather his elect, then again after that at the end. He's coming one more time at the end as he says in MT. 24:30 and that's when he will gather his elect.

I suggest that Matthew 24 does not deal with the second coming but rather with the events of 70 AD – the fall of Jerusalem. There is a long tradition of Matthew 24 (and its parallels) being read as prophecies about the second coming. However, there is every reason to challenge such an assertion. Consider the opening text of Matthew 24:

Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. 2And He said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down." As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?"

In verse 2, Jesus makes a clear allusion to a coming destruction of the temple. Which temple? A future temple thousands of years in the future? Of course not. The disciples point to the temple they are asking about – it is the one they (and Jesus) are looking at. The disciples then ask about the timing of this. What is Jesus’ answer?:

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

It should be obvious that the reading that I am advancing allows us to take Jesus at his word – 70 AD is one generation away. The 2nd coming hypothesis is forced to awkwardly rework the meaning of this statement. What is the justification for such a rework? Has Jesus given the listener any reason at all to think that He is talking about another generation? No, He has not.

What about this statement? Doesn’t this statement tell us that Jesus is talking about the end times and not 70 AD?

But immediately after the (AI)tribulation of those days (AJ)THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND (AK)THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

Well, Jesus is here quoting Isaiah 13, where this exact same language is used. And what is the prophetic material in Isaiah 13 all about? The end of the world? No. It is about the defeat of Babylon, something we know has already happened. Conclusion: “end of the world†language is not to be taken literally. So this statement by Jesus in Matthew 24 does not requires us to think that the discourse is about events in our future.

the problem here with what your saying is that that same lanaugages is used many times in the bible not just isiah 13 and it is not about just the destruction of babylon but the whole world, all the wicked and all the earth, all the kings mighty men slaves free etc...furthermore babylon was already destroyed. bqabylon is still alive and kickin in the form of mystery babylon but not the same old physical place- it still needs to be destroyed and will be as we see in rev and jer.

the problem here with what your saying is that that same lanaugages is used many times in the bible not just isiah 13 and it is not about just the destruction of babylon but the whole world, all the wicked and all the earth, all the kings mighty men slaves free etc...furthermore babylon was already destroyed. bqabylon is still alive and kickin in the form of mystery babylon but not the same old physical place- it still needs to be destroyed and will be as we see in rev and jer.

Jesus gives us the timeline in MT. 24. It's crystal clear in verses 39-40 that "At the coming of the Son of man, two people will be in the field..." Jesus is not going to come 2 more times; one time to gather his elect, then again after that at the end. He's coming one more time at the end as he says in MT. 24:30 and that's when he will gather his elect.

I suggest that Matthew 24 does not deal with the second coming but rather with the events of 70 AD – the fall of Jerusalem. There is a long tradition of Matthew 24 (and its parallels) being read as prophecies about the second coming. However, there is every reason to challenge such an assertion. Consider the opening text of Matthew 24:

Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. 2And He said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down." As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?"

In verse 2, Jesus makes a clear allusion to a coming destruction of the temple. Which temple? A future temple thousands of years in the future? Of course not. The disciples point to the temple they are asking about – it is the one they (and Jesus) are looking at. The disciples then ask about the timing of this. What is Jesus’ answer?:

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

It should be obvious that the reading that I am advancing allows us to take Jesus at his word – 70 AD is one generation away. The 2nd coming hypothesis is forced to awkwardly rework the meaning of this statement. What is the justification for such a rework? Has Jesus given the listener any reason at all to think that He is talking about another generation? No, He has not.

What about this statement? Doesn’t this statement tell us that Jesus is talking about the end times and not 70 AD?

But immediately after the (AI)tribulation of those days (AJ)THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND (AK)THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

Well, Jesus is here quoting Isaiah 13, where this exact same language is used. And what is the prophetic material in Isaiah 13 all about? The end of the world? No. It is about the defeat of Babylon, something we know has already happened. Conclusion: “end of the world†language is not to be taken literally. So this statement by Jesus in Matthew 24 does not requires us to think that the discourse is about events in our future.

the problem here with what your saying is that that same lanaugages is used many times in the bible not just isiah 13 and it is not about just the destruction of babylon but the whole world, all the wicked and all the earth, all the kings mighty men slaves free etc...furthermore babylon was already destroyed. bqabylon is still alive and kickin in the form of mystery babylon but not the same old physical place- it still needs to be destroyed and will be as we see in rev and jer.

:yes

 

[Drew]

the problem here with what your saying is that that same lanaugages is used many times in the bible not just isiah 13 and it is not about just the destruction of babylon but the whole world, all the wicked and all the earth, all the kings mighty men slaves free etc...furthermore babylon was already destroyed. bqabylon is still alive and kickin in the form of mystery babylon but not the same old physical place- it still needs to be destroyed and will be as we see in rev and jer.

I suggest that you may be using circular argument - assuming the very thing you should be demonstrating.

If a prophecy - such as the one in Matthew 24 - has already been clearly fulfilled, you cannot simply assume that it will be fulfilled again. Let me know what specific texts you are talking about in Revelation and Jeremiah.

 

[Vic C.]

Y'all tell me what you think about these 2 points of view. It seems to me it is the same viewpoint but with just a different name. Either one would be raptured at the last trumpet. Both would go through the seal judgements and the trumpets but would not face the 7 bowls of God's wrath. Am I looking at something wrong? Thanks for your insight and your answers.

Westtexas

My conclusions:

The seals are not God's Wrath but the trumps and bowls (vials) are God's Wrath. While it is possible that the last trump is the same as the seventh trump, it's not probable. I laid out this belief recently in another thread and many times in the past. All I can to is this for now:

http://philologos.org/bpr/files/l002.htm

I am of the belief that Tribulation and Wrath are two different and separated events. While the tribulation we face and have faced is not from God, the type of Wrath spoken of is scripture IS from God. I am also a believer that there were more than one Day of the Lord (God's Wrath) in the OT and that we have been in "tribulation" for a long, long time now.

I can't for sure how you are seeing it. I'd do a sturdy (OT and NT) on tribulation and Wrath. I'd research what trumpets of God's meant to the Hebrews and how it related to their various feasts, festivals and memorials. I find that many a NT commentator are not up on these things as they should be if they are also teaching. :yes

 

[westtexas]

Y'all tell me what you think about these 2 points of view. It seems to me it is the same viewpoint but with just a different name. Either one would be raptured at the last trumpet. Both would go through the seal judgements and the trumpets but would not face the 7 bowls of God's wrath. Am I looking at something wrong? Thanks for your insight and your answers.

Westtexas

My conclusions:

The seals are not God's Wrath but the trumps and bowls (vials) are God's Wrath. While it is possible that the last trump is the same as the seventh trump, it's not probable. I laid out this belief recently in another thread and many times in the past. All I can to is this for now:

http://philologos.org/bpr/files/l002.htm

I am of the belief that Tribulation and Wrath are two different and separated events. While the tribulation we face and have faced is not from God, the type of Wrath spoken of is scripture IS from God. I am also a believer that there were more than one Day of the Lord (God's Wrath) in the OT and that we have been in "tribulation" for a long, long time now.

I can't for sure how you are seeing it. I'd do a sturdy (OT and NT) on tribulation and Wrath. I'd research what trumpets of God's meant to the Hebrews and how it related to their various feasts, festivals and memorials. I find that many a NT commentator are not up on these things as they should be if they are also teaching. :yes

Good article, Thanks. I appreciate the suggestion on the research on the feasts and festivals. I intend to start working on it! One thing I figured out for sure, the more I study--the more I realize how much I don't know. I tried to find the thread you spoke about but couldn't seem to find it. If you find it could you bump it up? I'd like to read it. Thanks

Westtexas

 

[GodspromisesRyes]

the problem here with what your saying is that that same lanaugages is used many times in the bible not just isiah 13 and it is not about just the destruction of babylon but the whole world, all the wicked and all the earth, all the kings mighty men slaves free etc...furthermore babylon was already destroyed. bqabylon is still alive and kickin in the form of mystery babylon but not the same old physical place- it still needs to be destroyed and will be as we see in rev and jer.

I suggest that you may be using circular argument - assuming the very thing you should be demonstrating.

If a prophecy - such as the one in Matthew 24 - has already been clearly fulfilled, you cannot simply assume that it will be fulfilled again. Let me know what specific texts you are talking about in Revelation and Jeremiah.

firstly isaiah 13 is about the Day of the Lord when God will judge the world, not about an event that already happened. The entire chapter makes this very clear. secondly so it matt 24 future, many are sticking to the " this generation' verse the problem is it is taken out of the context it was said in. Jesus is saying the generation that sees the things he is describing shall not pass, not that the generation he is standing in will see it. Futher we see the same DAY OF THE LORD prophecy about the sun moon and stars in many books of the bible we see it in isaiah, joel, matt, acts, rev etc.. It is always speaking about the time when Gods wrath upon the entire world and all the wicked has come in the end when God will destroy the wicked from off the earth and make a new heaven and earth. If you use a bible browswer go and look up these signs and read every context they are given in

 

[Drew]

firstly isaiah 13 is about the Day of the Lord when God will judge the world, not about an event that already happened. The entire chapter makes this very clear.

No. This chapter is about the fall of Babylon, an event that has already occurred.

The oracle concerning Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw.....

Behold, I am going to (AI)stir up the Medes against them,
Who will not value silver or (AJ)take pleasure in gold.
18And their bows will mow down the (AK)young men,
They will not even have compassion on the fruit of the womb,
Nor will their (AL)eye pity children.
19And Babylon, the (AN)beauty of kingdoms, the glory of the Chaldeans' pride,
Will be as when God (AO)overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.

And Babylon was indeed defeated. Isaiah 13 is a prophecy that has already been fulfilled.

 

[Drew]

secondly so it matt 24 future, many are sticking to the " this generation' verse the problem is it is taken out of the context it was said in. Jesus is saying the generation that sees the things he is describing shall not pass, not that the generation he is standing in will see it.

But they are clearly one and the same generation. Remember, Jesus was asked about the destruction of the temple that they were actually looking at. Jesus points to the temple - picture it please in your mind - and predicts its destruction. The disciples then ask him when the temple will be destroyed.

Your position cannot make sense in that context. A specific temple is at issue - the one they were actually looking at. And the question is when will this temple be destroyed. So Jesus tells them that it will happen with their generation.

Imagine yourself sitting there at the time. Imagine sitting next to Jesus as a disciple. Jesus points to the temple and tells you it will be destroyed. You ask him when this will happen. Jesus answers with a story about tumult and chaos and tells you "this generation" will see these events, including the destruction of the very temple you are looking at.

Clearly, He means "your generation".

And history bears Him out - the temple was indeed destroyed within 40 years.

 

[D4Christ]

Imagine yourself sitting there at the time. Imagine sitting next to Jesus as a disciple. Jesus points to the temple and tells you it will be destroyed. You ask him when this will happen. Jesus answers with a story about tumult and chaos and tells you "this generation" will see these events, including the destruction of the very temple you are looking at.

Clearly, He means "your generation".

And history bears Him out - the temple was indeed destroyed within 40 years.

So, Yahushu doesn't know the difference between 'this' and 'your.'

Clearly the Son of YHWH meant what He said...this generation (those alive at the time of the events He described for the time of the end) will not disappear before everything is finished.

Of course Drew, I understand mostly everything has already taken place for you. :D

Keep hope alive for the rest of us dreamers....

Praying for His soon return,
Deirdre

 

[Drew]

So, Yahushu doesn't know the difference between 'this' and 'your.'

Please re-read my post carefully - this should clear up your confusion. I put forward a hypothetical scenario, and in that scenario, it makes sense to equate "this generation" and "your generation".

 

[guibox]

I believe that Jesus was answering both questions in Matthew 24. The first part applies to 70 AD and some to the end of time. Remember that the Bible sometimes has dual prophecies where there is an immediate and future context. i.e., history has a way of repeating itself.

This is the eschaetological timeline in a nutshell as I see the scriptures:

1) Time of trouble for God's people such as never was
2) revealing of the anti-Christ/enforcement of the mark of the beast
3) seven last plagues poured out
4) 2nd coming of Christ
5) 1000 year reign of Christians in heaven
6) New Jerusalem comes down/wicked dead are resurrected
7) Satan's last onslaught on the city and God
8) Satan and wicked are cast into the lake of fire and destroyed forever

No pre-tribulation rapture and no 1000 years for those left behind and the wicked for second chances. These concepts are not biblical and cannot be proven exegetically.

 

[whirlwind]

I believe that Jesus was answering both questions in Matthew 24. The first part applies to 70 AD and some to the end of time. Remember that the Bible sometimes has dual prophecies where there is an immediate and future context. i.e., history has a way of repeating itself.

This is the eschaetological timeline in a nutshell as I see the scriptures:

1) Time of trouble for God's people such as never was
2) revealing of the anti-Christ/enforcement of the mark of the beast
3) seven last plagues poured out
4) 2nd coming of Christ
5) 1000 year reign of Christians in heaven
6) New Jerusalem comes down/wicked dead are resurrected
7) Satan's last onslaught on the city and God
8) Satan and wicked are cast into the lake of fire and destroyed forever

No pre-tribulation rapture and no 1000 years for those left behind and the wicked for second chances. These concepts are not biblical and cannot be proven exegetically.

Who are these folks?

• Revelation 20:7-9 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
  
  20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
  
  20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

They aren't the elect.

 

[guibox]

• Revelation 20:7-9 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
  
  20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
  
  20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

They aren't the elect. [/b]

I believe they are the wicked dead that are resurrected as told in vs 5. They are resurrected and Satan gathers them together. There is nothing in the scriptures that say that life goes on after the second coming and people are left alive for another 1000 years. The earth is a bottomless pit as foretold by Jeremiah (the 2nd coming will be a cataclysmic event and the end of all we know it) and here Satan is bound for these 1000 years with no one to deceive. The 2nd resurrection brings the dead back to life and it is these of which Revelation 20 speaks of being gathered and then judged and destroyed forever.

 

[whirlwind]

• Revelation 20:7-9 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
  
  20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
  
  20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

They aren't the elect. [/b]

I believe they are the wicked dead that are resurrected as told in vs 5. They are resurrected and Satan gathers them together. There is nothing in the scriptures that say that life goes on after the second coming and people are left alive for another 1000 years. The earth is a bottomless pit as foretold by Jeremiah (the 2nd coming will be a cataclysmic event and the end of all we know it) and here Satan is bound for these 1000 years with no one to deceive. The 2nd resurrection brings the dead back to life and it is these of which Revelation 20 speaks of being gathered and then judged and destroyed forever.

So you see thousand year old flesh bodies coming out of their graves, Satan gathering the zombies and deceiving them? How does one deceive a corpse? And...why do this? Why bring a corpse back to life to kill it again? Why not at the first judgment, when Christ separates the sheep and goats...why not then do away with them? What is the point in Jesus separating and killing them only to bring them back at the end of the millennium for another battle? Why have a millennium?

Another question is just what do the "priests of God" do as they "reign with Him" during the millennium? If there are only the elect and the dead just why does anyone need to be a priest and do priestly duties? God answers that question....

• Ezekiel 37:28 And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when My sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.' ' "

That takes place DURING the millennium. The "heathen" are not those that worshiped God while in their flesh lives so they are "the dead." Still in their incorruptible bodies in order to learn so that one day perhaps...they too can be among the living, the spiritually living.

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

The "dead" are the spiritually dead and they walk among us now...and will continue to during the millennium. Consider the following verses....

• Romans 6:13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
  
  2 Timothy 4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, Who shall judge the quick and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom:
  
  [list:mqfzxoq8]Jesus judges the living and the dead...as you can see it means the spiritually living and dead.

[/list:u:mqfzxoq8]

 

[guibox]

Until you accept that the righteous have been resurrected and return to heaven for the 1000 years in full bodily form, we are aren't going to get anywhere.

As far as why the dead are resurrected again, they have not been fully judged. They do not get their punishment at their physical death, thus they must be judged. Rev 20:5 speaks ofthe second resurrection. Your argument falls flat because the dead are resurrected again no matter what. The bible is clear on this. There IS a bodily resurrection of he wicked. This is the difference between the first resurrection for the righteous at the second coming of Christ, and the second resurrection of the wicked to face the executive judgment.

God is fair. He will show everyone why they are in the position that they are in so that your Ezekiel 37 quote is fulfilled and 'every knee shall bow' to acknowledge that God was fair and just in His dealings and punishment is deserved.