|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 5:35:14 AM
|
|
|
kelman
Posts: 5482
Status: offline
|
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Retrobyter
quote:
however, in the Resurrection, ALL Isra’el (those who, despite their “blindness in part,” have shown faith in God like faithful Avraham, despite being misled like sheep by faithless shepherds) shall be rescued! There aren't "two" ways to salvation - there is only One Way. Jews, like anyone else, who have not come to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ will not be saved. The "blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in." about which Paul speaks simply means there were some Israelites who believed and some who didn't - blindness in part. Actually, there are as many ways to God’s justification as HE so chooses. Don’t think you may limit God. If He has promised that “ALL Isra’el shall be saved,” then ALL Isra’el SHALL be saved, regardless how YOU or anyone else thinks they should be saved! It’s not I who limits but God Himself who does. He will not violate His own Word. For you to say God has other means of salvation is to deny much of Scripture which says there is only One Way.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
quote:
They have a COVENANT relationship with God THAT CANNOT BE BROKEN!!! Clearly, most in OT Israel were not saved. YOU DID NOT JUST SAY THAT!!! You’ve GOT to be kidding! “Most in OT Israel were not saved??!!! Who made YOU judge and jury?! True, I’m not judge or jury, however, God is and throughout Scripture we see that few in Israel ever came to salvation.
quote:
Don’t you think God powerful enough to save “most in OT Israel?” Be VERY careful how you treat the “apple of God’s eye” OR how your comments translate to an opinion about God! Opinions that belittle God are the very definition of “blasphemy!” Nothing to do with God’s power but with His intent. We see few in OT Israel who were saved. It’s unfortunate that you think posting what can be readily found in Scripture is somehow blasphemous.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
quote:
Rom 2:28-3:7
28 A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29 No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God. This is a refutation of all that you've just said. Being a physical Jew, a descendent of Abraham is of no advantage in becoming saved. Not at all! You’ve conveniently stopped the quoting early! (That’s dishonest, by the way.)
The REST of the passage says the OPPOSITE of what you claim! [/color=#006600]Rom. 3:1-7 Huh? I was addressing Rom 2:28 which says being a natural descendent of Abraham is no advantage to becoming saved and Rom 3 doesn't change that one iota.
quote:
You really NEED to give up your philosophy/theology in favor of the Bible. LOL…I was just about to say the same to you.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
quote:
Notice that these families are VERTICALLY related in the family tree, not horizontally related! This proves that Zechariah 12 occurs AFTER the Resurrection! (This is also the event to which Yeshua` alluded in Matt. 24:30.) Luke gives the lineage of Joseph. I don't see the connection to Zechariah 12:9-14 which is a prophecy about the Jews coming to faith in the Lord. OPEN YOUR EYES!!! Please stop “yelling”. It’s not as if I don’t fully believe that it is, in fact, your eyes which are closed. However, I was too polite to say so, until now.
quote:
All four of the families mentioned in Zech. 12 are mentioned within the lineage of Luke 3! (And frankly, it’s the lineage of Miryam, not Yosef! Yosef’s lineage is found in Matt. 1.) All four of these family names are found there, which means that they span across 28 generations, and all four are said to be present at the same time! This could ONLY be true AFTER the Resurrection! The fact that some families are mention in both passages offers no support for your theories. Why does it surprise you that certain houses of Israel existed into the Lord’s time? There’s abundant evidence that this is the case. These verses are a prophecy concerning the Lord’s crucifixion ”Me whom they pierced, and they shall mourn for him…”
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
quote:
quote:
The "great day", "that day" or "day of the Lord", typified here by David, who will return to fully "save" His people - all believers. No, my friend, Daviyd’s involvement will be much more than just typical. He will LITERALLY be present (through the power of the Resurrection, the Last Adam, the Life-Giving Messiah, Yeshua`) and will be Yeshua`s second in command! And, why not? Who better to reign just below Him than His ancestor and the first king of Isra’el? I’d say he’s had some experience at the job, wouldn’t you? David is historically used to typify the Lord Jesus who is the actuality. David, and others, are very often used in the OT to typify the Lord Jesus Christ. Jer 30 is a prime example of just that as are the following:
Eze 34:23-24 And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd. 24And I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the LORD have spoken it.
Eze 37:24-25 And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them. 25And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.
Hosea 3:5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days. There you go again! WHY are you trying to make these passages symbolic??!!! Just believe what they say! Why go through a series of hoops to get the passages to say what you want them to say? I believe every one of these passages are literal! Why should they not be? Give me one good reason! When it comes to believing Scripture vs. believing what someone’s interpretation of Scripture is, guess what I’m going to believe! I’m not “trying to make these passages symbolic” – they simply are, it’s how God wrote the Bible. We know David typifies the Lord Jesus from such passages as Luke 1:33 where it says of the Lord: ”He shall reign over the house of Jacob forever”. So, I agree, it’s a good idea to simply believe Scripture.
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
quote:
quote:
How do you get 1000 years from "there shall be no end"? This is describing the Lord Jesus' reigning over all believers both Jew and Gentile - for all eternity - "shall be no end". Yes! But what you are not understanding is that there are yet a thousand years IN THIS AGE before eternity begins! The problem is you used 2 Peter 3 as evidence yet those passages don't relate to a 1000 year reign in any way. While it is true that 2 Peter 3 does not directly mention the last 1000 years of the 2nd earth and its heavens (its skies), there are enough points of congruency between 2 Peter 3 and Rev. 20-22 to synchronize the two passages. I don’t believe we find any “points” between the two. 2Peter says that this universe will burn-up, nothing about 1000 years and the “fire” of Rev 20 is God’s judgment not the destruction of the universe.
quote:
Are you WILLFULLY blind or were you TAUGHT to be that way? Ah, knock it off, stop insulting me and at least try to act like a gentleman!
_____________________________
.... for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name. Psalm 138:2
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 6:21:51 AM
|
|
|
Stormcrow
Posts: 587
Joined: 12/9/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
I don't presume to know "how" things happen in heaven, and doubt anyone else does either.
that's why the Book of Revelation was written: to "reveal" those things which are happening "in heaven."
Here is where the martyred for Christ dwell now:
quote:
And when He broke the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God, and because of the testimony which they had maintained; and they cried out with a loud voice, saying, " How long, O Lord, holy and true, wilt Thou refrain from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?"
And there was given to each of them a white robe; and they were told that they should rest for a little while longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brethren who were to be killed even as they had been, should be completed also. Revelation 6:9-11 (NASB77)
These are the same who will reign with Christ as His priests during Christ's millennial reign.
What this passage further illustrates is that we are living under the 5th Seal now. But that's a discussion that was held in another thread.
quote:
When unbelievers die they go to heaven
You mean "believers", right?
quote:
...in their soul existence and "reign" with the Lord.
If the souls of the martyred are "under the altar" (a place of sanctuary and protection), how are they said to be "reigning" in heaven?
I did a search for the word "reign." Nowhere does it state in the Bible that believers will reign in heaven. It does, however, say this:
quote:
Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.
And they sang a new song, saying: "You are worthy to take the scroll, And to open its seals; For You were slain, And have redeemed us to God by Your blood Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, And have made us kings and priests to our God; And we shall reign on the earth." Revelation 5:8-10 (NKJV)
That should put to rest any argument as to where believers in Christ will reign with Him.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 6:37:04 AM
|
|
|
Stormcrow
Posts: 587
Joined: 12/9/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
That 1000 years is metaphoric is supported by the context AND the rest of the Bible.
This is merely your opinion and restating it 1,000 times over does not make it true! (And yes, in the sentence I just wrote, 1,000 IS a metaphor for your seemingly endless and baseless assertion on this issue!)
quote:
Unless, you wish to assert that believers are not with the Lord forever, do you? BTW, if you don’t think they’re in heaven where do you think the souls of believers are, exactly?
Of course believers remain with the Lord forever! But just because the Lord returns to Earth to reign for 1,000 years at the close of the "times of the gentiles" DOES NOT MEAN WE STAY IN HEAVEN! We stay with Him! Who do you think comprises the armies of heaven that accompany Him to save Israel???
Oh wait. I forgot. You take that as a metaphor, too. 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 9:08:27 AM
|
|
|
LoyalGypsy
Posts: 2527
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ivardboneless
quote:
ORIGINAL: ENOCH2010
Will the rapture not be considered a resurrection? For the Lord himself will descend with a shout with the voice of the arch angel and the Trump of God. The DEAD in Christ will raise FIRST, then we which are alive and remain will be caught up together, to forever be with the Lord. IMHO this is the FIRST Resurrection, and it takes place AFTER the tribulations of those days. At the END of the 70th week.
Yes, it's the last step of the first resurrection: "But every man in his own order:
Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming
1 Cor 15:23 (KJV).
Actually it goes like this
Christ =Singular + the dead in Christ
The Firstfruit(s) is Plural = US = we …who are alive
Rapture= Afterward= those who …remain
Those who …remain are = They that are Christ's.... at his coming"
LG
_____________________________
Ex 19:5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice
...So the Persians ask that the 300 drop their arms. Leonidas responds; "Persians! Come and get them!"
300 The Movie
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 10:37:16 AM
|
|
|
Stormcrow
Posts: 587
Joined: 12/9/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
Christ =Singular + the dead in Christ
The Firstfruit(s) is Plural = US = we …who are alive
Rapture= Afterward= those who …remain
Those who …remain are = They that are Christ's.... at his coming"
Christ alone is the "first fruits" of the resurrection:
For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming, then comes the end, when He delivers up the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 1 Corinthians 15:22-24 (NASB77)
"First fruits" refers to the Hebrew Festival of bringing in the "first fruits of the harvest" to God in sacrifice to Him. Christ, therefore, is the "first fruits" of the resurrection: the first to be raised to eternal life in a glorified body but not the last.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 11:06:25 AM
|
|
|
LastHarvest
Posts: 609
Joined: 3/29/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ENOCH2010
Where are all the opinions on this topic?This question puts an end to the pre trib theory.The Bible plainly says when the rapture is,but most people don't like what is says,so they change the word of God to a more pleasant sounding time.
Most 'christians' I have ever known have never taken the time to read the whole Bible. A larger percentage have read the entire New Testament. A larger percent have a makeshift understanding of christian doctrine they have gathered from sermons and bible studies. Many however have no idea that christianity means intimate knowledge of God through prayer, fellowship, and bible study.
So that leaves us in a very small room when we start talking tribulation scenarios. The popularized views of La Haye and Jenkins do not hold up to strong scriptural anlaysis in my opinion.
Regarding people not wantint to see a post-trib or mid-trib, or pre-wrath scenario is it so hard to understand. We in America especially want a form of christianity that puts us on the golf course by 10 AM with frequent updates about our fattening 401k dropped in by blackberry. We cannot handle the truth, just as Paul said. We have itching ears seeking a message we want to hear. So any teaching about self-sacrifice or suffering for the cause (tribulation or not) is lost in translation.
Now more to your question, the first resurrection is mentioned in Revelation 20 and it is composed of tribulation saints for sure. Some say it is also composed of the OT saints but I am not sure that is in the passage. The point is those not raptured of the church who died in the tribulation against the Antichrist are raised then and reign with Christ for a thousand years. so, as it is written in Rev 20 the story of first ressurection does not imply any particular rapture scenario.
Recall in Rev 15 it says 'blessed are those who die in the Lord from now on for their deeds follow after them.' In other words there are those hold-outs from the mark who are still being martyred during the bowl judgments. This again does not say anything about the Rapture.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 11:15:59 AM
|
|
|
ivardboneless
Posts: 129
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LoyalGypsy
quote:
ORIGINAL: ivardboneless
quote:
ORIGINAL: ENOCH2010
Will the rapture not be considered a resurrection? For the Lord himself will descend with a shout with the voice of the arch angel and the Trump of God. The DEAD in Christ will raise FIRST, then we which are alive and remain will be caught up together, to forever be with the Lord. IMHO this is the FIRST Resurrection, and it takes place AFTER the tribulations of those days. At the END of the 70th week.
Yes, it's the last step of the first resurrection: "But every man in his own order:
Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming
1 Cor 15:23 (KJV).
Actually it goes like this
Christ =Singular + the dead in Christ
The Firstfruit(s) is Plural = US = we …who are alive
Rapture= Afterward= those who …remain
Those who …remain are = They that are Christ's.... at his coming"
LG
Except He is telling us Christ is the firstfruits of the first resurrection, differentiating the firstfruits of the first resurrection from the firstfruits of Rev 14, who are the firstfruits of the resurrection of judgment.
It is Christ, the firstfruits
Afterwards His at His coming.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 11:30:02 AM
|
|
|
Montana Marv
Posts: 427
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
Enoch2010
Who holds back the lawless one, the man of sin of 2 Thes 2:7,8.
In Christ
Montana Marv
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 11:31:18 AM
|
|
|
ivardboneless
Posts: 129
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Stormcrow
quote:
Christ =Singular + the dead in Christ
The Firstfruit(s) is Plural = US = we …who are alive
Rapture= Afterward= those who …remain
Those who …remain are = They that are Christ's.... at his coming"
Christ alone is the "first fruits" of the resurrection:
For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming, then comes the end, when He delivers up the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 1 Corinthians 15:22-24 (NASB77)
"First fruits" refers to the Hebrew Festival of bringing in the "first fruits of the harvest" to God in sacrifice to Him. Christ, therefore, is the "first fruits" of the resurrection: the first to be raised to eternal life in a glorified body but not the last.
The Author speaks of two firstfruits for a reason.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 11:40:16 AM
|
|
|
ivardboneless
Posts: 129
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
Enoch2010
Who holds back the lawless one, the man of sin of 2 Thes 2:7,8.
In Christ
Montana Marv
Allow me:
The other lion's whelp, and Michael stands again.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 12:32:27 PM
|
|
|
Montana Marv
Posts: 427
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ivardboneless
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
Enoch2010
Who holds back the lawless one, the man of sin of 2 Thes 2:7,8.
In Christ
Montana Marv
Allow me:
The other lion's whelp, and Michael stands again.
ivardboneless
Scripture Please.
In Christ
Montana Marv
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 12:33:21 PM
|
|
|
Stormcrow
Posts: 587
Joined: 12/9/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
The Author speaks of two firstfruits for a reason.
I don't see two "firstfruits" in the passage I cited. Christ is the "firstfruits" of the resurrection. Period. After Christ come those who are His at His coming.
"Firstfruits" is a reference to the harvest sacrifice. It's only plural in reference to the OT usage, not because there are multiple "firstfruits" in the resurrection.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 1:20:30 PM
|
|
|
Retrobyter
Posts: 812
Joined: 8/23/2007
From: Florida
Status: offline
|
Shalom, kelman.
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
quote:
ORIGINAL: Retrobyter
And HERE is where we differ the most. Believers who have died do NOT "reign with the Lord in heaven prior to the second resurrection" (or the first resurrection, either, for that matter. Rev. 20:4-6)! How does one "reign" without a body? How does one do ANYTHING without a body?! I don't presume to know "how" things happen in heaven, and doubt anyone else does either. However, I do know what Rev 20:4 and the rest of the Bible says. When unbelievers die they go to heaven in their soul existence and "reign" with the Lord. The verse is speaking about the “souls under the altar” awaiting the consummation of the last day when all believers who are in heaven in their soul existence will be reunited with their glorious spiritual resurrected bodies Rev 6:10 ”And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?”
Paul declares that if he were dead he'd be with the Lord and, of course, that can only mean in his soul existence. So, he too(as a soul under the altar) awaits the resurrection of his body.
2Cor 5:8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
The Lord Jesus tells the thief he would be with Him in paradise to day - body in the tomb, the soul in heaven:
Luke 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
Look, I understand that Luke 23:43 and 2 Cor 5:8 sound like we are immediately in the Lord's presence at death. I'm not saying that isn't true, but it's not to "Heaven" we would go but to the New Jerusalem (perhaps, still under construction)! But, it could also be that we have a gap in consciousness from the moment of death to the moment of resurrection. Some people call this erroneously "soul sleep," but it is one possibility of how these verses could be realized. I'm not going to be dogmatic on either point of view; in truth, we are stuck with the fact we are dealing with "Hadees" or "Sh'owl," which some people write "Hades" or "Sheol." BOTH words mean the "unseen" or the "unknown" and that's truly as much as we can say about it on this side.
There are a lot of opinions, but that's all they are: opinions. There's no definitive information outside of what little has been revealed in Scripture. However, one thing we DO have that can influence our belief systems is the terminology.
Before one can make intelligent statements about a "soul existence," one must first understand what the "soul" and the "spirit" are. To truly understand these terms, one may not just do a concordance search on these two words, look up all the verses that use them, and draw a conclusion based on what they find. One absolutely MUST go back to the original languages and look at their original, fundamental meanings:
OT:5315 nephesh (neh'-fesh); from OT:5314; properly, a breathing creature, i.e. animal of (abstractly) vitality; used very widely in a literal, accommodated or figurative sense (bodily or mental):
KJV - any, appetite, beast, body, breath, creature, dead (-ly), desire, [dis-] contented, fish, ghost, greedy, he, heart (-y), (hath, jeopardy of) life (X in jeopardy), lust, man, me, mind, mortally, one, own, person, pleasure, (her-, him-, my-, thyself-), them (your)- selves, slay, soul, tablet, they, thing, (X she) will, would have it.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)
Whereas the English word "soul" occurs 484 times in the OT, the Hebrew word "nephesh" (or "nefesh") occurs 754 times (according to Englishman's Concordance)! What happened? Where did the other 270 times go? They were translated as something OTHER THAN "soul." They were translated as the other words you see above following the "KJV -" tag! Here's the first occurrence of the word "soul" (although NOT the first occurrence of the word "nefesh"):
Gen 2:7
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
KJV
Notice the point of this verse: YHVH Elohiym BREATHED into his nostrils the BREATH of life, and man became a living BREATHING-CREATURE! It is NOT about his "immaterial part"; it's about his BREATH!
What is the first occurrence of the word "nefesh?" The first TWO are back to back:
Gen 1:20-21
20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
KJV
So, do animals have a "nefesh?" You bet! We can see it again in verse 24:
Gen 1:24
24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
KJV
Now, look at the word for "spirit":
OT:7307 ruwach (roo'-akh); from OT:7306; wind; by resemblance breath, i.e. a sensible (or even violent) exhalation; figuratively, life, anger, unsubstantiality; by extension, a region of the sky; by resemblance spirit, but only of a rational being (including its expression and functions):
KJV - air, anger, blast, breath, cool, courage, mind, quarter, side, spirit ([-ual]), tempest, vain, ([whirl-]) wind (-y).
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)
So, according to James Strong (or one of his colleagues), the Hebrew word "ruwach" primarily means "wind." Then, because it resembles the "wind," it can also mean "breath" and by that he means a "breath" you can feel or even a "violent breath," a "blast of air!" Only figuratively does it extend to the other translations: life, anger, or "unsubstantiality," which means not-being-able-to-touch-something, like the mist. Then "by extension" or stretching out that figurativeness, it can also mean a "region of the sky." Then "by resemblance" it can also figuratively refer to the "spirit," (I assume he means the "immaterial part of a person") and he adds, "but only of a rational being." That would imply "of God, of angels, of human beings, but not of animals."
The first occurrence of the English word "spirit" is in Gen. 1:2:
Gen 1:2
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
KJV
However, is that how the Hebrew word "ruwach" is used? From Englishman's Concordance, we learn that the word was also used in Gen. 7:15 and 22:
Gen 7:13-22
13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark;
14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort.
15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.
16 And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the Lord shut him in.
17 And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.
18 And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters.
19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:
22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
KJV
Therefore, it is also a word used of the animals as well as "rational beings."
Here's the conclusion: Of the Hebrew words, "nefesh" and "ruwach," both apply to both humans and animals. (Only "ruwach" applies to God.)
In a very literal, physical, natural sense, we--humans and animals--HAVE breaths and ARE breathing creatures. Therefore, we HAVE "ruwachiym" ("ruw'chiym") and ARE "nefeshiym" ("naf'shiym"). Thus, we HAVE "spirits" and ARE "souls," but ONLY while we are BREATHING!
Furthermore, we can find out the same information about these words' Greek counterparts: namely, "pneuma" and "psuchee," respectively. We HAVE "pneumata" and ARE "psuchai," but ONLY while we are BREATHING!
Here's what these concepts do for us:
They tell us that the "souls under the alter" ARE ALIVE by that point in time (unless this is a vision within the vision)!!! They may have been dead, but unless they are dead bodies on life support systems, they have already been resurrected by Rev. 6:10 because they are BREATHING CREATURES! Kind of hard to do without nostrils and lungs! (All "creature" means, btw, is a "created being"; it doesn't mean "monster," as in a scary "creature feature.")
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
quote:
Why do you think the resurrection is so important, if we don't really need our bodies? I didn't say we don't "really need" our resurrected spiritual bodies and it’s dishonest of you to imply that I did. The glorified resurrected body is God's promise to us and the culmination of our salvation, however, until that time we are at home with the Lord in our soul existence.
I meant no offense; however we don't get our glorified, resurrected bodies until they are first resurrected out of the graves. Then they are transformed into those glorified, immortal, incorruptible bodies. All I was trying to do was nip the thought in the bud that we could somehow have glorified, immortal, incorruptible, "spiritual" bodies in Heaven BEFORE the resurrection. I'm not saying that's what I thought you believed; I just didn't want someone else to come up with that theory.
However, now we need to talk about the word "spiritual." The Greek word is "pneumatikos," the adjective form of "pneuma," which we've already discussed primarily means "wind" and by "breath." That does NOT mean that the bodies are made out of "breath" or the figurative, immaterial equivalent which we call "spirit." This is found in Paul's discourse on the resurrection in I Cor. 15:35-54:
1 Cor. 15:35-54
35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:
38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.
39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
KJV
There are several contrasts, especially in the Greek, within this passage:
The body which dies vs. the body which comes to life (analogy of the grain of wheat)
The various glories or brightnesses:
Of terrestrial:
Various fleshes:
Human beings vs. fish vs. beasts vs. birds
Of celestial:
Sun vs. moon vs. stars with variations
Corruption vs. incorruption
Dishonor vs. glory
Weakness vs. power
Natural vs. spiritual
First man Adam vs. last Adam
Living soul vs. quickening spirit
of the earth vs. of the heaven
earthy vs. heavenly
the image of the earthy vs. the image of the heavenly
flesh and blood vs. that which may inherit the Kingdom of God
Corruption vs. incorruption (again)
Mortal vs. immortality
In Greek, these translate to...
The “soma” which “apathenee” (it-dies) vs. the “soma” which “zoo-opoieitai” (it-is-brought-to-life)
Various forms and levels of “doxee” (“glory”).
Epigaia: (Upon/above the earth):
Ou pasa sarx hee autee sarx (Not all flesh the same flesh)
Anthroopoon vs. kteenoon vs. pteenoon vs. ichthuoon
Epourania: (Upon/above the sky):
Heeliou vs. seleenees vs. asteroon: asteer gar asteros diaferei en doxee (for a-star to-star differs in brightness)
Fthora vs. aftharsia
Atimia vs. doxee
Astheneia vs. dunamei
Sooma psuchikon vs. sooma pneumatikon
Prootos anthroopos Adam vs. eschatos Adam
Psucheen zoosan vs. eis pneuma zoo-opoioun
Ek gees vs. ex ouranou
choikos vs. epouranios
choikoi vs. epouranioi
Teen eikona tou choikou vs. teen eikona tou epouraniou
Sarx kai haima vs. kleeronomeesai Basileian Theou
Ftharton vs. endusasthai aftharsian (kleeronomei)
Thneeton vs. endusasthai athanasian
Focusing on "Sooma psuchikon vs. sooma pneumatikon," the contrast is between a "breathing body" and a "windy body!" It is not contrasting the MATERIAL out of which each body is made; it is contrasting how STRONG each body is!
Anyway, I'll answer the rest later. This is long enough. As you said, "These posts are way too long as it is."
In the Messiah's love,
Roy
_____________________________
The avatar above is a Venn diagram of the Kingdom from the sky. Yeshua`s Kingdom is in green, both dark green and light green.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 6:54:50 PM
|
|
|
LoyalGypsy
Posts: 2527
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Stormcrow
quote:
Christ =Singular + the dead in Christ
The Firstfruit(s) is Plural = US = we …who are alive
Rapture= Afterward= those who …remain
Those who …remain are = They that are Christ's.... at his coming"
Christ alone is the "first fruits" of the resurrection:
For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming, then comes the end, when He delivers up the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 1 Corinthians 15:22-24 (NASB77)
"First fruits" refers to the Hebrew Festival of bringing in the "first fruits of the harvest" to God in sacrifice to Him. Christ, therefore, is the "first fruits" of the resurrection: the first to be raised to eternal life in a glorified body but not the last.
Greetings
If the "First fruits" refers to the Hebrew Festival of bringing in the "first fruits of the harvest"
That is us correct?
How can Christ, therefore be the "first fruits" of the resurrection:
when it is He who is going to be bringing in the harvest and present US to the Father
Paul mentioned that Jesus is a worker in the field...
2Cr 6:1 We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.
It seems like the order...goes something like this
God in the likeness of the head of the house, presented His SON/LAMB for the offerings as any head of the households would have John 1:29
John 12:24 Most assuredly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it produces “’much grain.”
Therefore
The first fruits of that grain; in the time of the harvest; has to be presented to God first
LG
< Message edited by LoyalGypsy -- 6/29/2010 9:00:07 PM >
_____________________________
Ex 19:5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice
...So the Persians ask that the 300 drop their arms. Leonidas responds; "Persians! Come and get them!"
300 The Movie
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 8:44:33 PM
|
|
|
Stormcrow
Posts: 587
Joined: 12/9/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
How can Christ, therefore be the "first fruits" of the resurrection:
when it is He who is going to be brining in the harvest and present US to the Father
I'm just citing what the Bible actually says with no doctrine layered on top of it.
If the Bible says Christ is the "firstfruits", I'm not going to argue with it.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 9:05:10 PM
|
|
|
ENOCH2010
Posts: 135
Joined: 6/21/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
Enoch2010
Who holds back the lawless one, the man of sin of 2 Thes 2:7,8.
In Christ
Montana Marv
I know the pre tribers think this refers to the Holy Spirit,But my opinion is, this is the Watcher Michael that is given the key,so I think it is him that restrains .
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 9:22:04 PM
|
|
|
ivardboneless
Posts: 129
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LoyalGypsy
quote:
ORIGINAL: ivardboneless
quote:
ORIGINAL: ENOCH2010
Will the rapture not be considered a resurrection? For the Lord himself will descend with a shout with the voice of the arch angel and the Trump of God. The DEAD in Christ will raise FIRST, then we which are alive and remain will be caught up together, to forever be with the Lord. IMHO this is the FIRST Resurrection, and it takes place AFTER the tribulations of those days. At the END of the 70th week.
Yes, it's the last step of the first resurrection: "But every man in his own order:
Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming
1 Cor 15:23 (KJV).
Actually it goes like this
Christ =Singular + the dead in Christ
The Firstfruit(s) is Plural = US = we …who are alive
Rapture= Afterward= those who …remain
Those who …remain are = They that are Christ's.... at his coming"
LG
Watch.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 9:35:31 PM
|
|
|
ivardboneless
Posts: 129
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
quote:
ORIGINAL: ivardboneless
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
Enoch2010
Who holds back the lawless one, the man of sin of 2 Thes 2:7,8.
In Christ
Montana Marv
Allow me:
The other lion's whelp, and Michael stands again.
ivardboneless
Scripture Please.
In Christ
Montana Marv
You're not the only one who doesn't know of the other lion's whelp. Look at Deut 33:22 in the Anchor Bible Commentary, too.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 9:45:05 PM
|
|
|
ivardboneless
Posts: 129
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Stormcrow
quote:
The Author speaks of two firstfruits for a reason.
I don't see two "firstfruits" in the passage I cited. Christ is the "firstfruits" of the resurrection. Period. After Christ come those who are His at His coming.
"Firstfruits" is a reference to the harvest sacrifice. It's only plural in reference to the OT usage, not because there are multiple "firstfruits" in the resurrection.
It's a matter of the whole of scripture, not a single passage. There is the firstfruits of 1Cor 15:23 and the 144,000 firstfruits of Rev 14:4 here when He arrives.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 9:51:02 PM
|
|
|
ivardboneless
Posts: 129
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
quote:
ORIGINAL: ivardboneless
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
Enoch2010
Who holds back the lawless one, the man of sin of 2 Thes 2:7,8.
In Christ
Montana Marv
Allow me:
The other lion's whelp, and Michael stands again.
ivardboneless
Scripture Please.
In Christ
Montana Marv
You'll find the whelp in Deut 33:22, and you'll find Michael needing to stand in Dan (12:1). You'll find several verses of Christ's enemies being put under His feet before He returns, and you'll find peace being taken from the earth in Rev 6.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/29/2010 10:01:00 PM
|
|
|
ENOCH2010
Posts: 135
Joined: 6/21/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ivardboneless
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
quote:
ORIGINAL: ivardboneless
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
Enoch2010
Who holds back the lawless one, the man of sin of 2 Thes 2:7,8.
In Christ
Montana Marv
Allow me:
The other lion's whelp, and Michael stands again.
ivardboneless
Scripture Please.
In Christ
Montana Marv
You'll find the whelp in Deut 33:22, and you'll find Michael needing to stand in Dan (12:1). You'll find several verses of Christ's enemies being put under His feet before He returns, and you'll find peace being taken from the earth in Rev 6.
I think Marv should also read Dan.10:12 -21 and Rev.20:1-3
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/30/2010 12:43:17 AM
|
|
|
Montana Marv
Posts: 427
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
Sorry
But Michael is the protector of Israel, Daniels people (Dan 12:1). Absolutely no scriptural references about Michael protecting the Church. It is the HS who protects the Church, and indwells believers.
In Christ
Montana Marv
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/30/2010 12:35:20 PM
|
|
|
Retrobyter
Posts: 812
Joined: 8/23/2007
From: Florida
Status: offline
|
Shalom, Montana Marv.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
Sorry
But Michael is the protector of Israel, Daniels people (Dan 12:1). Absolutely no scriptural references about Michael protecting the Church. It is the HS who protects the Church, and indwells believers.
In Christ
Montana Marv
Quick question: Are you bumping Michael UP to the Holy Spirit's level, or bumping the Holy Spirit down to Michael's level? OR are you trying to say that the Church is that much better than Isra'el?
In the Messiah's love,
Roy
_____________________________
The avatar above is a Venn diagram of the Kingdom from the sky. Yeshua`s Kingdom is in green, both dark green and light green.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/30/2010 1:03:53 PM
|
|
|
Montana Marv
Posts: 427
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Retrobyter
Shalom, Montana Marv.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
Sorry
But Michael is the protector of Israel, Daniels people (Dan 12:1). Absolutely no scriptural references about Michael protecting the Church. It is the HS who protects the Church, and indwells believers.
In Christ
Montana Marv
Quick question: Are you bumping Michael UP to the Holy Spirit's level, or bumping the Holy Spirit down to Michael's level? OR are you trying to say that the Church is that much better than Isra'el?
In the Messiah's love,
Roy
Roy
I am saying what I am saying.
Michael is the protector of Israel, in the time described by Dan 12:1 - At that time, Michael the great prince who protects your people will arise. There will be a time of distress such has not happened from the beginning of the nations, but at that time your people (Israel) - everyone who's name is found written in the book will be saved.
The Church is that much better than ALL. For the Church is the Bride of Christ. But then Israel has been compared as a Bride of God if you read Hosea.
The HS indwells believers (Jew or Gentile). The HS does not indwell non believing Jews. These are those who need to be protected by Michael during the time of great distress.
In Christ
Montana Marv
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The first Resurrection - 6/30/2010 1:16:09 PM
|
|
|
ivardboneless
Posts: 129
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
quote:
ORIGINAL: Retrobyter
Shalom, Montana Marv.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Montana Marv
Sorry
But Michael is the protector of Israel, Daniels people (Dan 12:1). Absolutely no scriptural references about Michael protecting the Church. It is the HS who protects the Church, and indwells believers.
In Christ
Montana Marv
Quick question: Are you bumping Michael UP to the Holy Spirit's level, or bumping the Holy Spirit down to Michael's level? OR are you trying to say that the Church is that much better than Isra'el?
In the Messiah's love,
Roy
Roy
I am saying what I am saying.
Michael is the protector of Israel, in the time described by Dan 12:1 - At that time, Michael the great prince who protects your people will arise. There will be a time of distress such has not happened from the beginning of the nations, but at that time your people (Israel) - everyone who's name is found written in the book will be saved.
The Church is that much better than ALL. For the Church is the Bride of Christ. But then Israel has been compared as a Bride of God if you read Hosea.
The HS indwells believers (Jew or Gentile). The HS does not indwell non believing Jews. These are those who need to be protected by Michael during the time of great distress.
In Christ
Montana Marv
But doesn't Michael stand because he wasn't standing?
Doesn't he need to resume protecting Israel because the one who makes the Lord's enemies His footstool before He returns has been taken away?
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
