Featured Who Has Part in The First Resurrection?

Your argument does not make sense to me.
Esther is an OT book. There was no church in the OT. Remember the word "church" is ekklesia and simply means "assembly."
When we speak about the Church in the book of Revelation (esp. chapters 6-19 we speak of believers in Christ, the Bride of Christ, the kingdom of God, the family of God, etc. We are speaking of NT believers. They are not there. All NT believers, the bride of Christ, were taken out of the world before the Tribulation began. They are in heaven with Christ.

Now look what happens in chapter 19:
Revelation 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
--Here is the Second Coming of Christ at the end of the Tribulation. He is coming in righteousness and will judge and make war against all those who are gathered against Israel.

Revelation 19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
--He is coming with armies that have been with him in heaven for some time.

Revelation 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
--Now he is coming to earth as KING, and will reign as KING.

Who are the armies in heaven? They are the saints which were raptured seven years ago. Go back a couple of chapters:
Revelation 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
They are the "called, chosen, and faithful." That cannot be said of angels, only believers.

Look just a few verses before 19:14:
Revelation 19:7-9 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.
--Already in heaven, just preceding this great event, is the marriage supper of the Lamb. Here the bride and the bridegroom celebrate. What does "fine linen" represent? It represents the righteousness of the saints--that is us.

Again, verse 14:
Revelation 19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
--Christ is coming with the saints (that were previously raptured) to take vengeance on those that obeyed not the gospel, and are the enemies of Israel.

Revelation 19:19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
Revelation 19:20-21 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

 

They do. Next.

Psa 78:25
25 Man did eat angels 'food:
he sent them meat to the full.

Unless you wanna see the poetic liscense here, and say that "falling from heaven" could be expressed, poetically, as "angel food".

Either way, He once again differentiates between Man and Angel.

 

Chapter and verse please.
Where do you get such an idea as that? It must come from the heretic Origen who taught people to interpret the Bible allegorically. BTW, lest you think I use that word glibly, even the RCC considered Origen a heretic, and many considered him the father of Arianism.

That simply means that he was writing to the believers that were alive at that time. But Scripture as a whole is written to believers living at the time it was written, and yet it is not a static book; it is living and relevant for us all.

In your opinion; verse 19 says differently:
Revelation 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

If we apply a strict literal interpretation, which is indicated for this passage, the things which are could represent only those events that are ongoing during the time that John is writing,[/quote]
The thing which are, which were present during John's time were the churches in chapters 2 and 3.

I never said anything about the entire church age except to mention that it is not existent after chapter four.

And why should this be incredible to you? In each church there are characteristics of different churches that exist today. Would you deny that there are some churches that:
--Have lost their first love,
--are neither cold nor hot, but are lukewarm.

Your opinion and you are entitled to it; but it is not common sense as the world is not undergoing the wrath of God is it?

I don't. Daniel's 70th week is between chapters 6 and 19.

And some things (chapters 2 and 3) did shortly come to pass.
It also speaks of a new heaven and a new earth. Have those been created yet? No. Not all things have been fulfilled yet, have they?

 

If you don't want to be accused of holding "tradition" then don't accuse others (me) of doing so. I am simply throwing the same back at you. Now you are offended because I use the same language you use toward me, and yet you don't think I should be offended? Where is the logic in that?
As I said, I believe the Word of God, not tradition, as you accuse me of. And every time you accuse me I will throw the same back at you just to show what you are doing.

So you believe the world ends three times? Does it or does it not? Be clear!
As I said previously there is a "general chronology" to the book. There are some exceptions. The world ends but once.

I am not dishonest at all. You said "your tradition" right? The fact is I don't believe in tradition, so it must be you. I have already explained this to you. You are the one that needs to be rationale here and stop hurling the insults.

The Mount of Olives does not have to be in this exact text.
When he comes the Second time he will come to the Mount of Olives.

Zechariah 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
--Clear enough.
Now go back and read 1Thes.4:16-18. Both events cannot happen at the same time. He cannot come "to the clouds" and land on the Mount of Olives at the same time. Have you studied physics?

The world doesn't end three times, does it. Just because you think it is suggested doesn't mean that it happens.

 

That does nothing to explain the physical bodies that ate with Abraham...unless you are going to tell me the men visiting Abraham was also only poetic.

 

Which is totally irrelevant to: pretribulation, Millennial Kingdom, Great Tribulation, the Second Coming, and all other aspects of eschatology. The Book of Esther is a complete red herring.

Again, reconcile 1Thes.4:16-18 and 2Thes.1:6-10. Funny thing how you guys can't do that.
The event described in 1Thes.4 occurs at the beginning of the Tribulation. Prove that it doesn't. None of those believers are present in chapters 6 to 19. If they are demonstrate it.
The event described in 2Thes.1:6-10 is the same event described in Revelation 19 where Christ comes in judgment.
You can't reconcile these two separate comings, and until you can, you should keep quiet about your sarcastic remarks "only in the mind of dispensationalists."
Address the Scripture I gave. Prove me wrong. Or keep quiet.

 

No I do not understand. You said:
"The command is worded so as to indicate completeness or perfection."
Hogwash! This is your opinion and you probably got it from someone who delves into numerology.

More name-calling. You can't deal with Scripture so you refer back to names.
Read the link I gave you.
http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/dispensation.htm

He gives you numerous ECF and others that believe in a pre-trib rapture as well as dispensationalism.

Where did that come from? I am not hyper-dispensational.

That is not true. I am totally against the allegorical method of interpretation. It is the method of interpretation that Preterists use. It is the method of interpretation that originated with Origen. I do not apologize pointing out that the early church did not use this method, but that Origen, a heretic (even by RCC standards) invented the allegorical method of interpreting the Bible. It is a method that should not be used if one wants to rightly divide the Word of Truth. It leads to all kinds of false doctrine, and gets one there very quickly.

What you believe is false. You keep repeating this false history over and over again. You refuse to be educated. Read the link I gave you and see how wrong you are about dispensationalism. How can you know anything about it, unless you read it from their point of view?

I told you clearly: I questioned your use of logic, not your salvation. If you are not willing to accept my word for it, what can I do?

 

"The command is worded so as to indicate completeness or perfection."
Because that is what someone into numerology would say.
7 is the number for perfection.
10 is the number for completion.
Etc., etc.
I don't buy into that stuff. I believe it is all nonsense.

So when you say "The command is worded so as to indicate "completeness or perfection" where did you get that exact wording? I don't think it was your wording. I think it came from someone else who is familiar with numerology, or perhaps you said with numerology in your thinking.

It wasn't a dark alley. It came from the way you phrased that statement.

 

Rev 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

Rev 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

Maybe, "the things which are," is the Lord's day as in the day of the Lord.

A day of wrath.

 

Who has part in the First Resurrection?

Jesus is the Firstfruit of them which slept(1 Cor. 15:20).

Who are the ones that sleep?

When Stephen was stoned and gave up the ghost, it said he fell asleep(Acts 7:60). In 1 Thess. 4, Jesus is going to bring back with Him in the cloud, the souls that were asleep. Now, I don't think that being asleep is the same as when we sleep at night. I tend to believe we are resting from our labors, resting around the throne of God.


So, personally, I believe those who have part in the First Resurrection are those that He chose from the foundation of the world, given to the Lamb to atone for their sins, to redeem from amongst the accursed.

 

I moved from the modern evangelical default position of Dispensational Premil, to PreWrath, Historic Premil and then took a long break from the study of eschatology. I jumped into a study of the covenants and realized I could no longer, after understanding the covenants and the Pauline epistles, hold to anything but Amil.

jm

 

What is amill? a means no. Mill means Millennium.
Do you believe there will be no millennium at all? That certainly is contrary to Scriptures.

 

The same could be said of amill.