“That is, they are forever in heaven with the Lord.”
Ah, remember, we have gone over this point before. You’re a literalist, so you can’t read “in heaven” into those verses. They’ll be with the Lord, but the verses don’t specify where that will be. Better be consistent with your interpretive principles, because if you insist on being wrong, at least you can aspire to be consistent.
“Besides, that is the “first resurrection” of AD 70, appropriately named in Revelation 20: not the second or general resurrection, also mentioned in Revelation 20.”
I agree, that is the first resurrection, when all dead Christians are resurrected, and all living Christians are transformed and go to the Lord as well. You say that happened in 70 AD, yet nobody bothered to record this event, and somehow there has never been an interruption in the presence of Christians on Earth.
“Certainly you can come up with a better argument than that in your pretense that I am not a Christian.”
You’re the one making the argument, when you say the first resurrection has already happened. You are still here, so you must have missed the boat on the first resurrection, and therefore, you are not a Christian. If the first resurrection has happened, then as you have told us in your last post, the Christians are with the Lord forever.
Revelation tells us that, for those who are part of the first resurrection, the second death (the lake of fire) has no power over them. The converse then must be true. Those who are not part of the first resurrection are at risk of hellfire. Do you believe that Christians are at such risk?
I never said I was a "literalist." That label is claimed by the dispy/futurist crowd, of which you are a part.
>>>They’ll be with the Lord, but the verses don’t specify where that will be.<<<
Actually, it does:
"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air . . ." (1 Th 4:17 KJV)
I suspected you were experiencing reading comprehension difficulties.
>>>Better be consistent with your interpretive principles, because if you insist on being wrong, at least you can aspire to be consistent.<<<
You must be talking to yourself.
>>>I agree, that is the first resurrection, when all dead Christians are resurrected, and all living Christians are transformed and go to the Lord as well. You say that happened in 70 AD, yet nobody bothered to record this event, and somehow there has never been an interruption in the presence of Christians on Earth.<<<
Who was left to record it, if all were resurrected, except for the millions slaughtered by the Roman Armies, and those who had fled to Pella? Again, who was left to record it?
Don't you think it strange there is no eye-witness record of the destruction of Jerusalem, except by a Jewish priest who was spared by the Roman armies. What about John? It is claimed he lived to the end of the century. Why did he not write even a whisper about it?
I'll tell you why. That was not John, but a false apostle claiming to be John (we were warned about false apostles.) St. John was resurrected along with his fellow Saints.
>>>You’re the one making the argument, when you say the first resurrection has already happened.<<<
I am in good company. Jesus prophesied in several ways that he was coming in his own generation. I believe I mentioned some of them in my article.
>>>You are still here, so you must have missed the boat on the first resurrection, and therefore, you are not a Christian.<<<
That is truly a cult-like, red-herring argument.
>>>"If the first resurrection has happened, then as you have told us in your last post, the Christians are with the Lord forever.<<<
Only the saints, the earliest Christians, and holy men of old were resurrected in the first resurrection. Do you think you are a saint? LOL!
>>>Revelation tells us that, for those who are part of the first resurrection, the second death (the lake of fire) has no power over them. The converse then must be true.<<
That is true. Therefore, I recommend you clean up your act and quit slandering Christians, or you might not be found worthy to avoid the second death.
>>>Those who are not part of the first resurrection are at risk of hellfire. Do you believe that Christians are at such risk?<<<
True Christians? No. Of course, Jesus gave us examples of those who would be rejected, including some who claimed righteousness (e.g., the self-righteous.) Perhaps you recall some of those examples by the Lord.
Philip