To: BibChr; Jerry_M; OrthodoxPresbyterian; RnMomof7
I respectfully recommend that you forget about whether this thing is preteristic or that thing is preteristic--and focus on what the 1000 years in Revelation 20 really is. That means that we need to figure out what the "first resurrection" in Revelation 20 really is.
(And I would not trust an RC priest to present it, RnMom.)
After I became convinced concerning the first resurrection, a lot of other things fell into place for me. I am now a partial preterist.
96 posted on
01/14/2002 4:49:04 PM PST by
the_doc
To: the_doc
After I became convinced concerning the first resurrection, a lot of other things fell into place for me. I am now a partial preterist. I kmow exactly what you mean. But, when I became convinced concerning the second resurrection, a lot of other things fell into place for me. I am now a Moonie.
98 posted on
01/14/2002 4:53:40 PM PST by
don-o
To: the_doc
After I became convinced concerning the first resurrection, a lot of other things fell into place for me. I am now a partial preterist.
So far, it is salvation and those who actually raised with Christ after His first resurrection.(Matt 27)
I believe it is the one spoken by Christ Himself to Martha when He raised Lazarus "...though he die, yet shall he live!"
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson