Rev 20, literal, symbolic, spiritual.

[farouk]

4 hours ago, WilliamL said:

The resurrection unto life! That is the foremost resurrection! John 5:29

Hi @WilliamL A lot about it in 1 Corinthians 15 also........

[abcdef]

On 2/15/2023 at 8:49 AM, WilliamL said:

The resurrection unto life! That is the foremost resurrection! John 5:29

Your answer reminds me of a river in Africa.

And you may say, "Which one?"

I would say, "denial". (The Nile)

You deny that the resurrection of Jesus is the first, foremost, preeminent, the primary.

How convenient to forget Jn 5:25, the resurrection of Jesus and the OT saints.

-----

So you think that the resurrection of Jesus is secondary to yours?

Do you think that the resurrection of Jesus is not the primary? foremost? the preeminent? Apparently you do.

----

 But I don't really think that you believe that the resurrection of Jesus is secondary to yours, that your resurrection is far more important than Jesus. 

I think that you are taking that position to maintain a theory that is broken and faulted. I believe that you wish to try to keep to the pretrib timeline.

--------

But instead of trying to make the passage fit into the pretrib time line, try just accepting the first resurrection for exactly what it says.

That is, that the 1st resurrection of Rev 20 is Jesus in 33 AD.

You know, the firstborn from the dead, Col 1:18, Rev 1:5.

The preeminent one, the foremost, the primary one, the first, the firstborn from the dead.

------

Did you ever think that it is described by those terms, because it is talking about the resurrection of Jesus in 33 AD?

------

Of course by recognizing that the 1st resurrection of Rev 20 is Jesus in 33 AD, that it shows that the pretrib theory timeline is faulted and incorrect.

Perhaps you have endorsed it for years, and you wouldn't want to change now, even for the truth.

----

I'm interested in your answer.

I want to know what you are going to tell Jesus when you are standing in front of the throne with 10,000's of flaming angels surrounding us.

I can hear it now, "Lord Jesus, your resurrection wasn't that important, it was secondary. It wasn't as important as my resurrection. My resurrection was the most important, the foremost, the preeminent one."

I think that He may not be pleased.

But, do what you wish, believe what you want, I'm just showing what it says.

[abcdef]

On 2/15/2023 at 9:04 AM, WilliamL said:

That verse only says Adam was a son of God; his sons were not. Whereas Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7, and Psalm 82:6, along with Genesis 6:2, speak of the angelic sons of God.

Believe what you want to.

[WilliamL]

2 minutes ago, abcdef said:

I think that you are taking that position to maintain a theory that is broken and faulted. I believe that you wish to try to keep to the pretrib timeline.

This statement is so ludicrous a representation of what I actually believe and have written that it is almost laughable. There is no reason for me to even attempt to converse with you since you keep projecting what I believe.

[abcdef]

On 2/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, Diaste said:

Why is that a problem? In the context of eternity 2000 years is what? Nothing. Not even a blip. There is no way to compare the slavery of the clock with timelessness.

 

On 2/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, Diaste said:

The flesh struggles and wars against time; The Most High God does not.

 

On 2/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, Diaste said:

That's why the word 'prote' is used to describe this resurrection. It's not the first.

 

On 2/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, Diaste said:

Not even Jesus resurrection was the 1st resurrection of all time.

Yes it was. Jesus is the firstborn from the dead, Col 1:18, Rev 1:5.

Paul calls Jesus the first 1 Cor 15:23-24.

This is part of the confusion about the events of the timelines.

There are only 2 resurrections to eternal life, Jesus and then those who are His at His coming.

By understanding that there are only 2 resurrections, we can then place the resurrections shown in the Rev as either the 1st or 2nd resurrection.

The 1st resurrection of Rev 20 is, literally, the resurrection of Jesus in 33 AD.

The 2nd resurrection of Rev 20 is, literally, the resurrection when Jesus comes for the kingdom, also shown as the second coming for salvation of Heb 9:28. 

The mix up comes from trying to get the Rev 20 passage to fit into the 7 yr/1000 yr timeline, which it doesn't fit.

 

On 2/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, Diaste said:

In that context then, demanding 'prote' means the 1st in order of all others doesn't work.

 

On 2/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, Diaste said:

No serious scholar thinks

Think outside what others think.

I suppose that the Scribes and Pharisees said something like, "No serious scholars believe that the carpenter is the Son of God," or, "No serious scholar believes these fishermen, that the kingdom is spiritual and not material."

Serious scholars can be wrong, just ask any Roman Catholic, Baptist, Assembly of God, Lutheran, Methodist, Greek Orthodox, Presbyterian, Mormon, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, or well, you get the picture.  

 

On 2/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, Diaste said:

the 1st resurrection of Rev 20:4 is anything other than 'the 1st of what follows' if a hierarchy is required, and 'important or chief' as the definition of 'prote' in context.

Important, chief, foremost, preeminent, are all describing the resurrection of Jesus and no other resurrection.

Ours will be the 2nd resurrection, the resur/rapt.

Then it is the end, 1 Cor 15:23-28, 24.

 

On 2/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, Diaste said:

I'll admit the dispensational pretribbers have muddied the waters. It's a shame really. Their accurate contributions are dismissed because they are so wrong about other very important doctrines.

Yes, you know that pretrib is not right, but you are still maintaining that timeline, almost to the letter.

The timeline of the statue in Dan 2 is the start.

The Rev timelines are parallel of each other, not necessarily consecutive.

Where the timelines begin and end, and who is the subjects, is almost everything.

 

On 2/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, Diaste said:

I don't think that's the case here. In looking at the two witnesses and that resurrection, which is before the 1st resurrection, we can see a strict rendering of 'prote' as the 1st of all time isn't what the term means.

I don't disagree.

The 2 witnesses timeline is parallel to Rev 20.

Both end at the 2nd coming for the kingdom and salvation, the resur/rapt.

 

On 2/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, Diaste said:

Well, there has to be an A of D first. That didn't happen in 67 AD. It didn't happen in 70 AD. It didn't happen any time in the last 2000 years. It's yet to occur so the end of the age timeline has not yet begun.

Who told you that the AoD didn't happen in the 70 AD ish time? Some scholar?

The AoD happened when Titus sacrificed a pig on the altar when Jerusalem fell.

All those things associated with it already happened.

The Roman Antichrist has deceived souls into thinking that the Antichrist hasn't been revealed yet, but he has been here, over Israel, for 2000 years ish.

The scriptures cannot be broken, the iron of the statue in Dan 2 is continual, without interruption, until the toes end. 63 BC until 1967, that iron is Rome, still with us today.

 

On 2/15/2023 at 6:36 AM, Diaste said:

I for one am not adding additional anything. I'm just trying to reconcile all the facts so they merge seamlessly and unforced. 

You can understand the timelines, but you must abandon the pretrib 7 year timeline and accept the Dan 2 and Dan 7 timelines.

That is, instead of trying to place things in the pretrib timeline, place them first, in the Dan 2 timeline.

[abcdef]

48 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

This statement is so ludicrous a representation of what I actually believe and have written that it is almost laughable. There is no reason for me to even attempt to converse with you since you keep projecting what I believe.

Well then, straighten me out on that.

Will you give in so easily? or continue to try to further confirm your position?

I didn't say you believe this or that, I said, I believe that you may believe those things.

Is Jesus the foremost? the preeminent? The firstborn? or not?

[abcdef]

On 2/14/2023 at 9:54 PM, truth7t7 said:

Your claim is false, Daniel's AOD below that Jesus referenced is "Future" and Antiochus 167BC nor Titus 70AD fulfilled it

Daniel's AOD is future, and the bad guy causing the Abomination and Desolation will be present on earth to the "Consummation" Ultimate End

"Future" Events Unfulfilled

This "Future" figure will be present on earth making (Abomination & Desolation) to the (Consummation) or (The Ultimate End) "Future" Event(s) Unfulfilled

(The Future Consummation)

2 Peter 3:10KJV

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Merriam-Webster

Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signature specifically : the consummating of a marriage

2: the ultimate end

Daniel's AOD (Even Until The Consummation) "Future"!

Daniel 9:27KJV

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

The "consummation" of Dan 9:27, is the consummation of the temple and city of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and not the fire from heaven consummation that is coming.

The context anchor of the timeline is the coming of Jesus, the prince, in 30 AD.

------

Who told you that the AoD didn't happen in the 70 AD ish time period?

The AoD happened when Titus sacrificed a pig on the altar during the destruction of Jerusalem.

[Diaste]

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

Yes it was. Jesus is the firstborn from the dead, Col 1:18, Rev 1:5.

Paul calls Jesus the first 1 Cor 15:23-24.

This is part of the confusion about the events of the timelines.

There are only 2 resurrections to eternal life, Jesus and then those who are His at His coming.

No. Jesus is the firstfruits of the same harvest, the bulk of which comes later when the Lord returns. Splitting this into 2 resurrections is not the view of the text. Especially since it's Rev 20 that reveals the 1st and 2nd resurrection and they are distinct, separated by 1000 years.

So it is not Jesus in the first resurrection and all believers in the 2nd resurrection who live and reign with Christ for 1000 years.

 

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

By understanding that there are only 2 resurrections, we can then place the resurrections shown in the Rev as either the 1st or 2nd resurrection.

Tabitha and Lazarus were both raised from the dead before Jesus was. The two witnesses are raised from the dead before the general resurrection at the last trump. I'm not going to play semantics with the two terms, the concept is the same. 

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

The 1st resurrection of Rev 20 is, literally, the resurrection of Jesus in 33 AD.

The 2nd resurrection of Rev 20 is, literally, the resurrection when Jesus comes for the kingdom, also shown as the second coming for salvation of Heb 9:28. 

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

 

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

The mix up comes from trying to get the Rev 20 passage to fit into the 7 yr/1000 yr timeline, which it doesn't fit.

"The rest of the dead did not come back to life until the thousand years were complete. "

It fits since Rev 20 says it's 1000 years later.

 

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

Think outside what others think.

I suppose that the Scribes and Pharisees said something like, "No serious scholars believe that the carpenter is the Son of God," or, "No serious scholar believes these fishermen, that the kingdom is spiritual and not material."

Serious scholars can be wrong, just ask any Roman Catholic, Baptist, Assembly of God, Lutheran, Methodist, Greek Orthodox, Presbyterian, Mormon, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, or well, you get the picture.  

Irrelevant. The truth can be found anywhere from the wisdom of the old to the mouth of babes. I only reject untruths, that which doesn't align. 

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

Important, chief, foremost, preeminent, are all describing the resurrection of Jesus and no other resurrection.

You're ignoring the scripture. 

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

Ours will be the 2nd resurrection, the resur/rapt.

Then it is the end, 1 Cor 15:23-28, 24.

 

Yes, you know that pretrib is not right, but you are still maintaining that timeline, almost to the letter.

Now that's hilarious.

 

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

The timeline of the statue in Dan 2 is the start.

The Rev timelines are parallel of each other, not necessarily consecutive.

Where the timelines begin and end, and who is the subjects, is almost everything.

You should perhaps read my posts in any of the topics authored by @not an echo in Eschatology. I oppose the pretrib timeline quite strongly. 

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

 

The 2 witnesses timeline is parallel to Rev 20.

Both end at the 2nd coming for the kingdom and salvation, the resur/rapt.

No. The 2Ws are in the 1st half and are taken to heaven sometime around the midpoint after their 1260 day allotment is finished.

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

 

Who told you that the AoD didn't happen in the 70 AD ish time? Some scholar?

The AoD happened when Titus sacrificed a pig on the altar when Jerusalem fell.

It's a pretty well known historical fact Antiochus IV Epiphanes is the one who killed the pig on the altar, and erected a false god in the holy of holies, and compelled the Jews to worship it. 

Titus gave explicit instructions not to harm the Temple and in fact did not want to wipe out the Jews. It was X Fretensis, conscripts into the Roman war machine from Syria, that started the fires around the Temple which then burned the Temple. Bloodlust erupted and even Titus could not stop it and the Temple was destroyed.

No pig was slaughtered by Titus on the altar, nor did he erect a false god in the Temple. That was all AE IV in 167 BC.

There has been no A of D since Jesus prophesied of one on the Mount of Olives.

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

All those things associated with it already happened.

The Roman Antichrist has deceived souls into thinking that the Antichrist hasn't been revealed yet, but he has been here, over Israel, for 2000 years ish.

Roman? That's a pretrib notion. The beast will come from the east.

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

The scriptures cannot be broken, the iron of the statue in Dan 2 is continual, without interruption, until the toes end. 63 BC until 1967, that iron is Rome, still with us today.

Not Rome.

8 hours ago, abcdef said:

You can understand the timelines, but you must abandon the pretrib 7 year timeline and accept the Dan 2 and Dan 7 timelines.

That is, instead of trying to place things in the pretrib timeline, place them first, in the Dan 2 timeline.

I do. It's most other who do not. 

[truth7t7]

15 hours ago, abcdef said:

The "consummation" of Dan 9:27, is the consummation of the temple and city of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and not the fire from heaven consummation that is coming.

The context anchor of the timeline is the coming of Jesus, the prince, in 30 AD.

------

Who told you that the AoD didn't happen in the 70 AD ish time period?

The AoD happened when Titus sacrificed a pig on the altar during the destruction of Jerusalem.

No Daniel's AOD didn't take place in 70AD as reformed preterist eschatology claims, No Titus wasn't the Antichrist in fulfillment of Matthew 24:15 or Daniel 9:27 the event is "Future" unfulfilled

Below in Matthew 24:15 we see Daniel's AOD seen in Daniel 9:27, you will closely note this AOD starts "The Great Tribulation" seen in Matthew 24:21 below, you will closely note that Jesus Christ in his "Second Coming" takes place "Immediately After The Tribulation" as is clearly taught in Matthew 24:29-30 below

1.) Daniel's AOD

2.) The Great Tribulation

3.) The Second Coming

Food For Thought?

Matthew 24:21 below teaches of a time of trouble never seen before in earth's history, World War II where 70 million died, including 6 million Jews, this silences the claim of 70AD Jerusalem in Roman armies in destruction being fulfillment

Don't forget Jesus will destroy the antichrist with the brightness of his coming 2 Thessalonians 2:8 "Future", while Titus died long ago of a fever, in the same farmhouse his father died in 

Conclusion: Jesus Christ didn't return in 70AD, immediately after a claim of Daniels AOD and a Great Tribulation, the events are future and are all tied together inseparable

Jesus Is The Lord

Matthew 24:15-30KJV

15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.

24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

25 Behold, I have told you before.

26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.

27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.

29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Edited February 19, 2023 by truth7t7

[WilliamL]

8 hours ago, Diaste said:

No. Jesus is the firstfruits of the same harvest, the bulk of which comes later when the Lord returns

Exactly. As Paul put it, "that He should be the firstborn among many brethren." Rom. 8:29

8 hours ago, Diaste said:

17 hours ago, abcdef said:

you know that pretrib is not right, but you are still maintaining that timeline, almost to the letter.

Now that's hilarious.

He's really proficient at making this accusation, as well as others, without ever bothering to provide a lick of evidence. Which is why I have decided that it's a waste of time to try to get into a rational discussion with him.