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
“I never said I was a “literalist.” That label is claimed by the dispy/futurist crowd, of which you are a part.”
Oh well, excuse me for using the wrong term. The point still stands that you can’t, by your own stated principles of interpretation, read “in heaven” into those verses. For proof of your stance, I submit, from the OP:
“I will not attempt to spiritualize John’s words. I will assume he meant exactly what he wrote: heaven when writing of heavenly things; earth when writing of earthly things; a short time when writing of a short time; and a thousand years when writing of a thousand years. “
“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.”
No, the verse say they will meet the Lord in the air, not that they will remain with the Lord in heaven. You’re not following your own principles. Meet means meet, not stay. Air means air, not heaven. Be consistent.
“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?”
Since the Bible says the entire world will witness the second coming and first resurrection, and not only the Christians, there would have been plenty 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.”
Not really. Countless cities have been destroyed throughout history, and it’s rare to even have one eye-witness record. It would be more unusual, for the time, if we had an abundance of such records.
“I’ll tell you why. That was not John, but a false apostle claiming to be John (we were warned about false apostles.)”
Now I’m going to have to take a page from your playbook and say: prove it!
“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.”
Jesus never said that it already happened, only that it would happen. You are the one interpreting a time frame into his words as to when it would have happened. Jesus gave us no date.
“That is truly a cult-like, red-herring argument.”
Nope, it’s simple logic. If the first resurrection has happened, as you say, then the Christians are with Christ forever. If you are still here, then you either can’t be correct about the resurrection, or you aren’t a Christian. You can’t play it both ways.
I understand you may want to dismiss the argument by calling it names, but that is only because you have no logical response to the argument.
“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!”
Yes, all Christians are saints, as the Bible says. Also, again, the verse in Thessalonians makes none of those limitations, so you are again violating your own principles of interpretation in an attempt to wish away something inconvenient to your cherished ideology.
“Therefore, I recommend you clean up your act and quit slandering Christians, or you might not be found worthy to avoid the second death.”
Well, by your own argument, you can’t be a Christian. They’re all with Jesus now, according to you.
“True Christians? No.”
Well, since being part of the first resurrection is the only sure way to avoid such a risk, you again confirm that your interpretation wouldn’t allow there to be any Christians living today. If the first resurrection has happened, and the first resurrection is the only way to avoid such a risk, and if all true Christians are not at such risk, then all true Christians were part of the first resurrection, and there must be none left. QED.