Who is Resurrected, and When?

[Diaste]

7 hours ago, DeighAnn said:

19And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

I know I asked you this before, and we discussed it so I apologize but can't remember what your answer was so asking again

What do you think happens to everyone in 'HIS ARMY', if they are NOT a part of the ones who are seen 'sitting on the thrones and judgment given to them? 

I guess I don't assume the armies of Jesus are any but the Holy Angels. 

I hear this from time to time but the evidence is gossamer thin. If you could provide some evidence directly stating the freshly resurrected dead and the translated living, whom just went though savagely brutal treatment at the hands of the beast, are conscripted into a returning heavenly army I will certainly take a look at it. 

7 hours ago, DeighAnn said:

14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

Do you think the 'even so them' is a part of the army returning with Christ at the 2nd Advent?

I don't. The whole context of 1 Thess 4:13-18 is about the resurrection and not about armies and fighting and returning to war with Jesus. Paul is saying God will also resurrect those in question as He resurrected Jesus.

The phrasing is a bit awkward in verse 14. Paul must have been tired or in a hurry because he doesn't normally write like that. 

7 hours ago, DeighAnn said:

How about the 'souls under the altar'?  part of the army or stay in heaven or ???

As far as I know from what I have read throughout scripture none of the resurrected are conscripts for a returning holy army bent on engaging the enemy to exact retribution. Wouldn't that be out of character for God our Father and Jesus Christ our Savior? We are told,

"Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but leave room for God’s wrath. For it is written: “Vengeance is Mine; I will repay, says the Lord." 

It would seem the saints as an army in the destruction of the enemy would not exactly fit this idea. 

But I am willing to see what you have in the way of evidence. Just know beforehand that I rejecting Rev 19:19 and 1 Thess 4:14 as evidence the resurrected saints and translated living are the armies coming with Jesus in Rev 19.

I will also reject Rev 19:14 as proof. Angels are also dressed in fine linen, white and clean as in Rev 15. "And out of the temple came the seven angels with the seven plagues, dressed in clean and bright linen..."[KJV says "...pure and white linen..."]

The attire here would suggest the Rev 19 armies are angels, not the newly resurrected and recently translated. 

But I'll be interested to see any evidence you have. 

[Diaste]

On 12/20/2022 at 8:58 PM, Retrobyter said:

The word translated as "coming" is the Greek word "parousia" ("παρουσία") meaning "(a) presence, (b) a coming, an arrival, advent, especially of the second coming of Christ," according to Strong's Concordance in biblehub.com. We usually take this to mean "at the point of His arrival" but what if it could also mean "in or among His presence?"

I don't disagree.

 parousía (from parōn, "be present, arrive to enter into a situation") – properly, coming, especially the arrival of the owner who alone can deal with a situation (cf. LS). 3952 (parousía) is a "technical term with reference to the visit of a king or some other official, 'a royal visit' " (Souter) – "hence, in the NT, specifically of the Advent or Parousia of Christ" (A-S).

[3952 (parousía) is "used in the east as a technical expression for the royal visit of a king, or emperor. The word means literally 'the being beside,' thus, 'the personal presence' 

I'm convinced it's not one or the other but both. The whole idea throughout scripture is Jesus is coming back to take the kingdom; the concept of parousia fulfills this idea perfectly. His advent is a personal arrival to stay. 

On 12/20/2022 at 8:58 PM, Retrobyter said:

Why shouldn't He perform this miracle of resurrection throughout the Millennium, as well? After all, He said to Martha,

"I am the Resurrection and the Life!" (John 11:25)

He would not be limited to the beginning and ending of the Millennium! He could perform this miracle THROUGHOUT His Kingdom reign (which BEGINS with the Millennium of haSatan's incarceration)!

Again, I don't disagree. The willingness and ability no doubt exists. But even so, this wouldn't have to be acted upon. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. All I know is there is a resurrection after the 1000 years at which;

"The sea gave up its dead, and Death and Hades gave up their dead, and each one was judged according to his deeds."

[Diaste]

On 12/20/2022 at 7:57 PM, Retrobyter said:

I had said, 'Since when has God's gift of eternal life been awarded on merits? No, these books are opened to determine DEGREES of punishment! Perhaps, they also determine LENGTH of punishment, but we may be too early and too dichotomy-minded to go into that. Suffice it to say at this point, that Yeeshuwa` will determine the EXTENT of punishment these unjust will suffer based upon the DEGREE of unjust actions they performed while alive.'

Highly speculative. 

" And the dead were judged according to their deeds, as recorded in the books."

This is 'ekrithēsan hekastos kata ta erga.'

Which is; "To decide of all according as work" This is a trial based on the tasks accomplished by all individuals. 

The verb 'krino' which is translated 'judged' means to separate. This isn't a decision on type of sentence but rather a separation of the masses based on their deeds.

This is what I have been saying all along. The 2nd death is the time when all the rest are resurrected that were not those who overcame the beast and his power and authority; and they are judged according to their deeds and only those NOT FOUND in the Book of Life are cast out. 

On 12/20/2022 at 7:57 PM, Retrobyter said:

So, I can only assume that your first sentence is a response to my question, "Since when has God's gift of eternal life been awarded on merits?"

I noticed, though, that you added a question mark at the end. Does that mean you are guessing? Whether you are or not, Yeeshuwa` (Jesus) said,

It was rhetorical.

You shouldn't engage in speculation just because you don't like what you see in regard to whom is resurrected and when. 

James 2 says, [emphasis mine]

What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works?

Can faith save him? [Good question the church cannot answer] 

If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food,  and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?  

Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.[no works= dead faith]

 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.  You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble!  

But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? 

 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? [Yes, is the answer]

 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? [The church does not get this simple, glaringly bright fact.]

 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God.  You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. [The church does not see this for it is blind]

²⁵ Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? [Again, the answer is, yes]

²⁶ For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. [You hear that for the third time? Faith apart from works is DEAD] 

Faith without works is dead, or in other words it is no faith at all. So what I'm saying about Rev 20:12-15 is in accord with the teaching of the Apostle James, the brother of Jesus. So I'm right off the bat going to assume James is reliable and accurate in the concepts presented.

This is in alignment with judging the dead in Rev 20 between those with works that are faith based and faith without works, which is dead faith and, one can surmise, the ones with neither faith nor works and/or the ones that had love for others and acted upon that.

So the idea that works are not important in our faith based spiritual lives, with eternal ramifications, is just ostrich-like. 

On 12/20/2022 at 7:57 PM, Retrobyter said:

Well, think about it for a moment. We've already covered the fact that NO ONE is justified by his or her own deeds, so what IS the point of investigating their deeds? Even our "RIGHTEOUSNESSES" - what we consider our "GOOD deeds" - are as FILTHY RAGS - MENSTRUAL CLOTHS - in His sight! So, why are their "deeds" being considered at the Great White Throne Judgment? YOU tell ME!

Oops!! Big mistake here.

Listen to James. [emphasis mine]

O foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is worthless?

 21Was not our father Abraham justified by what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?

 22You see that his faith was working with his actions, and his faith was perfected by what he did.

 23And the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”i and he was called a friend of God.j 

24As you can see, a man is justified by his deeds and not by faith alone. [you should listen here, this is the Brother of Jesus]

25In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute justified by her actions when she welcomed the spiesk and sent them off on another route?

 26As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

This is why the deeds are recorded, to prove the faith.

You muddy the waters by saying;

On 12/20/2022 at 7:57 PM, Retrobyter said:

 Even our "RIGHTEOUSNESSES" - what we consider our "GOOD deeds" - are as FILTHY RAGS - MENSTRUAL CLOTHS - in His sight!

and equating the righteousness of man with good deeds. Righteousness in the sight of God is determined by the covering of blood shed by the innocent, not by anything the unrighteous can do. The unrighteous are become righteous through the sacrifice of another and apart from that there is no righteousness in the sight of our Father. 

Any righteousness claimed by man that is not due to the covering of innocent blood is the same filth it has always been. I think it takes a deep and consequential misunderstanding to equate righteousness in our Father's eyes with faith based works. 

But, ya know, you go.

So again, the judgement of Rev 20 clearly states the dead are judged according to what is written in the books and only those NOT FOUND written in the Book of Life are cast out. This means the opposite is true and some, I hope most, are found written therein.

 

[Diaste]

On 12/20/2022 at 9:26 AM, JoeCanada said:

The "dead in Christ"..... who are they?

In the context of the OP that is the question. 

On 12/20/2022 at 9:26 AM, JoeCanada said:

"we who are alive and remain" .... well, that would be us if the Lord returns in our lifetime. And ALL the dead in Christ, from Adam to those who die today.... are those whom the Lord raises up at the first resurrection.... Rev 14:15 "the harvest of the earth is ripe"

Mat 13:30.............. ‘Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.”

This is the 'first resurrection'. 

All the dead in Christ from all time? 1 Thess 4:16 does not say, 'all from all time'. The text says, 'the dead in Christ'. It's assumed this means all from Adam to the 2nd advent but it's not in the text. Here 'the' assumes a concept of 'the dead...'. If that were 'all' or 'some' it would still hold true that what is in evidence is 'the dead in Christ' not the 'living in Christ' and does not tell us it's 'all from all time' 

The following is what appears in the text.

ho, hé, to: the

Original Word: ὁ, ἡ, τό
Part of Speech: Definite Article
Transliteration: ho, hé, to
Phonetic Spelling: (ho)
Definition: the
Usage: the, the definite article."

The following does not appear in the text.

pas: all, every

Original Word: πᾶς, πᾶσα, πᾶν
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: pas
Phonetic Spelling: (pas)
Definition: all, every
Usage: all, the whole, every kind of."

I'm convinced Paul knew the difference between 'ho' and 'pas'. If Paul meant 'pas' then why why write 'ho'? You may be correct that it's 'all' the dead in Christ from all time but it's certainly not proven in 1 Thess 4:16.

On 12/20/2022 at 9:26 AM, JoeCanada said:

Mat 13:30.............. ‘Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.”

This is the 'first resurrection'. 

Since the concept of the 1st resurrection doesn't appear here, but it does here;

 And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image, and had not received its mark on their foreheads or hands. And they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

5The rest of the dead did not come back to life until the thousand years were complete. This is the first resurrection.

And the ones in the 1st resurrection are concisely described, I'm going to have to go with Rev 20 on this and say Matt 13:30 is not describing the primary resurrection, but is instead describing the judgement in Matt 25:31-46 and the resurrection in Rev 20:11-15.

The wheat and tares have more parallels to the 2nd resurrection than the first:

The wheat and tares grow together normally till harvest when they are separated.

The concept of judgement in Rev 20:12 is one of separation.

The idea in Matt 25:32 also separates between sheep and goats.

This is not seen in either Rev 7:9-14 where there is no separation as all pictured come from one place for one reason and have the same destiny. Neither is separation seen in Rev 20:4-5 as all pictured have faced the beast and have a singular destiny again. 

I just don't see where a general resurrection of all from all time fits in with what is said in Rev 7:9-14 and Rev 20:4-5. In both of these references the group has either come out from within GT or has been beheaded, refused the mark and refused the forced worship of the beast and the image; either one or the other or all of the above. 

Now contrast and compare that with what is said about the 1st resurrection in the modern, white, western, dispensational, replacement theology, pretrib church doctrine and one can only conclude the whole of the evidence for the doctrine is;

"Because we said it."

On 12/20/2022 at 9:26 AM, JoeCanada said:

John is writing in the 1st century.

When one of the elders asked who "these in white robes....who are they and where did they come from"

I'm supposing that the elder pointed to a group that looked totally different from the rest. People with tatoos, freakish hair styles and color.... who knows. It's just a guess..... maybe not a very good one  .... or maybe?

Sure. I'm all about context in most text. But this is prophecy and prophecy not come to pass as yet. So even if John is in the 1st century he is describing what is said, and what is shown him, by the immortal. The immortal has no context regarding time. And we cannot even conceive of heavenly immortality. John is witnessing to what the immortal God and the Savior of all mankind is showing him and there is no 1st century context for that.

But to your point...where is the balance of the group?

Why did the elder point out the ones in white robes?

Why did the elder say they came out of GT and "they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."?

If these stunning attributes of this group are pointed out by the elder then the balance of the group didn't wear white robes washed in the blood of the Lamb? And if the balance is in white robes why only single out this group? Because they came out from within GT?

On 12/20/2022 at 9:26 AM, JoeCanada said:

Jesus tells the "souls under the altar" that they should rest a little longer, until

"the number of their fellow servants and their brethren who were to be killed even as they had been, would be completed also"

The souls who had been beheaded in Rev 20 are the souls that Jesus talked about in Rev 6.... the number who were to be killed as they had been. So, Rev 20's souls who had been beheaded are not the only souls who came to life and reigned with Christ.

True, they are not the only ones, but they would be the only ones from the point of the declaration forward, not past. So if the 5th seal is in the last week then this reference is only about those beheaded for their testimony of Jesus and the word of God, within the last 7 years only. 

On 12/20/2022 at 9:26 AM, JoeCanada said:

The souls in Rev 6 are the souls that John saw...."under the altar". This is the "altar of sacrifice". It is the first structure of the inner court. They were sacrificed for their testimony and for the Word of God. They are not the total sum of all the souls from Adam to Revelation. 

Which circles back to the OP question:

Is it only the people in GT that came out from within GT and overcame the power and authority of the beast that rule and reign with Christ for 1000 years; and the rest of the dead which did not experience GT and the power and authority of the beast are resurrected after the 1000 years?

[DeighAnn]

14 hours ago, Diaste said:

It would seem the saints as an army in the destruction of the enemy would not exactly fit this idea.

Since the army is the only thing returning with Christ and we will be returning with Him for the 1000 years, wouldn't it stand to reason the 'soldiers for Christ' would be returning in His army?  How many times are we told to put on the gospel armor?   When we return with Christ we are not in dust bodies that are corruptible. We are in glorified bodies, bodies raised in power.   HEAVEN is coming to earth.  

I know sometimes when I am really focused on something my brain just shuts off some of the other things I know and they just get lost.  I am just going to put forth a few verses you know that, who knows, might help, if nothing else to understand what I believe, EVEN if you don't.  

(We know the alive and remaining are gathered TO those in the clouds and all we are told is He comes with His Army...)

Also, we like the angels in heaven when we resurrect, neither taking or giving in marriage 

"Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ." 2 Timothy 2:3 KJV

"No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier." 2 Timothy 2:4 KJV

"(A Psalm of David.) Blessed be the LORD my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight:" Psalms 144:1 KJV

And David was a man after GODS OWN HEART  -  he was a man of war.

"Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence." John 18:36 KJV
 

"And they shall be as mighty men, which tread down their enemies in the mire of the streets in the battle: and they shall fight, because the LORD is with them, and the riders on horses shall be confounded." Zechariah 10:5 KJV

[DeighAnn]

15 hours ago, Diaste said:

The attire here would suggest the Rev 19 armies are angels, not the newly resurrected and recently translated. 

I don't think the 'newly' resurrected are anything but still DEAD.  Can't come to faith when you SEE CHRIST, so only way left is through works.  


I happen to truly believe what Christ said, so I believe the saved NEVER DIE.  Yes, I know the natural body dies but I believe we are raised up in our glorified spiritual bodies when the natural has sown the bare grain that God gives a body too and we follow Him to be where He is.  And I believe we are called 'angels' when we are in spiritual bodies so no need to worry about that being used in my defense.

"And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." Revelation 19:10 KJV


"And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things." Revelation 22:8 KJV

[DeighAnn]

15 hours ago, Diaste said:

Again, I don't disagree. The willingness and ability no doubt exists. But even so, this wouldn't have to be acted upon. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. All I know is there is a resurrection after the 1000 years at which;

Wrong place to quote, so Question is when it comes to 'death' durning the 1000 years  with Death/Satan being bound, how exactly will there be any 'death' taking place?   The DEAD will have been raised up in imperishable bodies, STILL MORTAL at least until they find out if their names are in the book of life in 1000 years, so ALL would have already had their first death and the 2nd is only by GOD in the lake of fire.  How does that work, if you know?


54So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

55O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?

56The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

57But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

So, how would someone die?

[Retrobyter]

15 hours ago, Diaste said:

I don't disagree.

 parousía (from parōn, "be present, arrive to enter into a situation") – properly, coming, especially the arrival of the owner who alone can deal with a situation (cf. LS). 3952 (parousía) is a "technical term with reference to the visit of a king or some other official, 'a royal visit' " (Souter) – "hence, in the NT, specifically of the Advent or Parousia of Christ" (A-S).

[3952 (parousía) is "used in the east as a technical expression for the royal visit of a king, or emperor. The word means literally 'the being beside,' thus, 'the personal presence' 

I'm convinced it's not one or the other but both. The whole idea throughout scripture is Jesus is coming back to take the kingdom; the concept of parousia fulfills this idea perfectly. His advent is a personal arrival to stay. 

Again, I don't disagree. The willingness and ability no doubt exists. But even so, this wouldn't have to be acted upon. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. All I know is there is a resurrection after the 1000 years at which;

"The sea gave up its dead, and Death and Hades gave up their dead, and each one was judged according to his deeds."

Shalom, Diaste.

Yes, but not to appease God. Works aren't for that purpose.

[Sister]

On 12/22/2022 at 11:47 PM, FreeGrace said:

This is a great question.  This is what the Bible says on the subject.

1.  There will be two resurrections, total.  A resurrection for the saved and a resurrection for the unsaved.

Dan 12:2 - Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.

John 5:29 - and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned.

Acts 24:15 - and I have the same hope in God as these men themselves have, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

From these 3 verses, it is clear that there will be just two resurrections total.

Agree!

 

Quote

2.  The singular resurrection of the saved will include all believers from all time, from Adam forward.

Not so, the first resurrection is for the generations from Christ onward.  "The first will be last and the last will be first"

However, God has not forgotten Israel, and those who lived before the tribes were formed, so he has a separate plan for them.

And that plan is wonderful!

Amongst them are the chosen remnant from Adam onwards.

They will be brought back from the dead in their "flesh" bodies and placed into the Kingdom on earth with the living remnant of Israel.  They will live a ripe old age and will multiply.  All the remnant chosen will be taught by Christ and they will know him.  All will enter the 2nd resurrection and there will they receive their change.

So Christ's kingdom when he returns will consist of the mortal and the immortal.

 

Quote

 

1 Cor 15:23 -  But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

This verse says that Jesus is the FIRST human being to receive a glorified body, and then, "when He comes" we read that "those who belong to Him" will be resurrected.  So, who are "those"?  It includes every believer from Adam forward.  There is no distinction between believers or saved people.  So we know that ALL the saved will be saved "when He comes".

 

There is a distinction, because God has a plan for both.  Those who were born before Christ first came did not know him, and there is a new commandment that all must go through Christ first before they can receive everlasting life.  This is their time, and they have a thousand years of teaching and learning and spreading the truth out to the whole earth amongst the remnant of the nations who survive Armageddon.

There will be a remnant of Israel from today as well, who will be brought into the kingdom and joined with them.  These did not know Christ either but rejected him because the enemy was too strong.  God knows all this and he also blinded their eyes, but already had it in his plan that he would bring them back after the works of the devil is revealed to them and they have gone through the fire. 

We all go through the fire where there is suffering, and the Lord does this so that we can learn by our mistakes. There is a fire that purifies, and a fire that kills.  We want that fire that purifies and wakes us up.

 

 

Quote

So, what does "when He comes" actually refer to?  Since the OT prophesied of just two advents or comings of the Lord, we know that every verse that discusses the "coming of the Lord" is a clear reference to the Second Advent.  Some will argue that there are actually 3 "comings of the Lord" so they can justify a "pretrib rapture with trip to heaven".  However, no early NT believer would know which "coming" is being referred to, without some pretext.  So, we know that the Second Advent will occur at the end of the Tribulation and that is the meaning of all verses that mention the "coming of the Lord".

True.

 

 

Quote

 

rev 20:4-6

4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 

5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 

6 Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.

v.4 clearly shows saved people being resurrected after the Tribulation (martyrs).  And v.5 clearly shows this resurrection to be the FIRST one.  So "the rest of the dead" refers to all unbelievers, which will occur 1,000 years later, which is at the end of the MK.

 

Right. The 2nd resurrection includes all who lived which did not make the first resurrection.  It will also include the remnant I just explained to you, and their future generations, along with the future generations of the gentiles who are yet to be born during the thousand years.

 

Quote

Obviously, this is a "hot topic".  Those who disagree with this are invited to address each point and explain how and why I am incorrect.  I do not want to be wrong any more than anyone else, and would appreciate correction, if needed.

However, the verses I have provided seem so clear as to not require any correction.  

 

You are not really that wrong here, but more on the side of right.  More awareness of the OT prophesies where some good meat is hidden can only make things more clear and add to knowledge.  All is written and I can provide scriptures if you require.

God bless.

 

[Diaste]

9 hours ago, DeighAnn said:

Wrong place to quote, so Question is when it comes to 'death' durning the 1000 years  with Death/Satan being bound, how exactly will there be any 'death' taking place?   The DEAD will have been raised up in imperishable bodies, STILL MORTAL at least until they find out if their names are in the book of life in 1000 years, so ALL would have already had their first death and the 2nd is only by GOD in the lake of fire.  How does that work, if you know?

I haven't looked into this too much so I can't really say just how it works. But I also can't ignore what the scripture says. There is a resurrection after the 1000 years where death and hell give up their dead and the books are opened and the judgement occurs. 

At this juncture my focus is upon who participates in the primary resurrection[is it all from all time or just those who come out of GT and faced the power and authority of the beast] and whom is resurrected at the 2nd death; and on the periphery of those questions, is the 2nd resurrection only a resurrection of condemnation only or is it a judgement of righteousness and unrighteousness?

In this, I leave out who may or may not die in the millennium. What it looks like to me is the primary resurrection is for those who overcame the beast and all the rest who did not have to face the power and authority of the beast at the end of the age wait until the 1000 years are over.

9 hours ago, DeighAnn said:

The DEAD will have been raised up in imperishable bodies, STILL MORTAL at least until they find out if their names are in the book of life in 1000 years, so ALL would have already had their first death and the 2nd is only by GOD in the lake of fire.  How does that work, if you know?

Are you thinking all the dead from all time are raised at the primary resurrection?