Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: xzins; CCWoody; RnMomof7
"How in the world can you say that citing verses specifically saying there are 2 resurrections is conjecture? "

Actually, the passage does ~not~ tell us explicitly what the (assumed) 2nd Resurrection is. The words 2nd Resurrection are not even found in the text. According to the words themselves of Rev 20, we are told that the "living" (~NOT~ 'lived ~again~') and "reigning" with Christ ~IS~ 1st Resurrection. And since John sees two groups of people which is inclusive of people who are alive in the body, this cannot possibly be a reference to a bodily resurrection -only a spiritual resurrection -Regeneration -John 11:25,26!!!

Furthermore, Rev 20:4-6 says ABSOLUTELY ~NOTHING~ about anything taking place on Earth. Furthermore, the Millennium isn't even the point of the passage. It's a sub point. It isn't the main thrust of the text. The insistance of the Pre-Mill position to make the "Millennial Reign" the end-all of Rev 20 is grossly distorting the main point of John's vision at this point. Rev 20:4-6 is all about who John sees, not about the millennial reign.

"How can you say that citing a passage that 5 times uses "1000 years" in 7 verses is conjecture? It's not conjecture; it's simply reading what's there."

No! You bastardize the text by insisting that this passage is mainly about a millennial reign -on earth- when there is no mention of earth until vs 8. John knows very well how to say "on earth". He does so in 5:10 and again in Ch. 22 which is a vivid description of the News Heavens and the New Earth. I would suggest to you to you, that if John had intended to convey that this '1000' years was to take place on earth, he would have said so. That he didn't tells us we shouldn't read that thought into the passage!

Furthermore, there are ~two~ millennia, as I have already pointed out. vs 4 mentions the millennial reign which is concurrent to John's vision. vs 6 mentions a future millennial reign with an all together different description of this reign.

There are also two groups of people John sees. John sees the souls of those who were beheaded and he sees those who did not worship the beast. This is inclusive, quite obviously, of people who are alive in the body and have yet to die. According to 1 Cor 15:51,52, not all will sleep, but all shall be changed. Resurrection of the ~dead~ is NOT applicable to living people. Therefore, this is the resurrection of regeneration spoken of by Christ and recorded by John in John 11:25,26. It cannot possibly be a reference to the Resurrection of the Body. It doesn't say so (remember, Rev 20 does not mention the Resurrection of the ~DEAD~. It never mentions that these folks that John sees "rise again". It just says that they "lived" and "reigned".)

~YOU~ are the one insisting that this verse says things it doesn't remotely say..."earth"...."lived ~again~".... CONJECTURE!

And you are ~not~ reading Rev 20 for what it says! You are completely disregarding what the words themselves say and you continue to insist on inserting words not found in the Greek!

Jean

2,457 posted on 10/18/2002 9:13:35 PM PDT by Jean Chauvin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2437 | View Replies ]


To: Jean Chauvin
Sorry, John, but the case is closed. Rev 5:10 says the bloodbought will be priests reigning on earth. Rev 20:1-10 says that after his reign Christ will reign a 1000 years with those same bloodbought priests on the earth.

It's clear. There's really not any more to say about it. Everyone can read the bible and see I'm telling the truth.

The case is closed. I'll get over your being ashamed of me.

2,458 posted on 10/18/2002 9:45:27 PM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2457 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson