[Iscool]

Not throwing anything away, I’m just explaining that, since Scripture can’t contradict itself, any interpretation that tries to stretch the first resurrection out into multiple events separated by some period of time is not compatible with Scripture, and therefore, not worthy of consideration. If your interpretation creates contradictions, then clearly your interpretation is wrong, because Scripture is not self-contradictory.

How can you be a critic when you obviously don't have a clue what I'm talking about???

[Boogieman]

Your original comment was already contradictory. You say the firstfruits are part of the first resurrection. That cannot be correct, because they are already in heaven in Rev. 16. Shortly after John sees them, he hears:

“Then I heard a voice from heaven say, “Write this: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.””

Rev. 16:13

How can the firstfruits be a part of the first resurrection, if this statement shows the resurrection hasn’t happened yet? There are only two general resurrections, one for the righteous, and one to judgement. So those who die after the first resurrection are not blessed, far from it. This is a major contradiction just in your original post, so there is no need to delve any further into your theory to see that it is flawed.