Understand revelation

[mfblume]

What about the KNOWLEDGE issue in Daniel 12, GS?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Joelel

Predators,

At least they graduated. Elders ought to know better, bro, rather than make empty accusations based upon being closed to anything one has not already heard before..

[Joelel]

Originally Posted by mfblume

He sure did! He gave WRATH to those who disbelieved, and SAFETY AND PROTECTION to those who did! The Christians escaped wrath and were safe in Pella.

Interesting how centuries removes these truths, when the early Church believed Jesus' words to such an extent that when Rome surrounded Jerusalem, they fled, feeling Jesus' words about fleeing referred to THEIR DAY. And THEY WERE SPARED DESTRUCTION! Praise God!

Predators [9] Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
[10] And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
[11] And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
[12] That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness

[Joelel]

Originally Posted by ApostolicTexas

So what your saying Joel..you believe in "double fulfillment"?

Nope,Yall are the ones saying this happened back then because it was written to them.

[Joelel]

[QUOTE=ApostolicTexas;400221]

Originally Posted by Joelel

This was Paul speaking to the Church of Thessalonia..they were his audience Joel not you or me

Ok,if you think so.

[Joelel]

Originally Posted by gloryseeker

Okay, that makes sense, but what's the point? If he was speaking directly to them, using the church at Ephesus as an example, but we can apply what he said to our lives then isn't that a mute point?

Do you know preterist teaching ? They think the first resurrection happened back around 40 -70 AD.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Of course the Bible is for us,but it wasn't written directly to us.The Book of Revelation was originally to seven literal churches in Asia minor however the idealism of the book applies to us today.

[mfblume]

When people can discuss civilly, without slanderous remarks of others being predators or liars, there is some semblance of Christianity involved. lol

[Scott Hutchinson]

This is something I've noticed how come REV.20 only speaks a first resurrection I don't see the term second resurrection mentioned in the chapter ?
Also is there a 1,ooo yrs. gap in the first resurrectioned between those are beheaded and who refuse the mark and image of the beast,and the rest of the dead ? See REV.20:4,5

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

This is something I've noticed how come REV.20 only speaks a first resurrection I don't see the term second resurrection mentioned in the chapter ?
Also is there a 1,ooo yrs. gap in the first resurrectioned between those are beheaded and who refuse the mark and image of the beast,and the rest of the dead ? See REV.20:4,5

There is also no mention of a first death, although a second death is mentioned.

My thoughts are that the first resurrection is Christ's resurrection, into which we are baptized when saved. This allows us to say, like Rom 6:13, that we are alive from the dead when saved.

Then we read that those in the first resurrection do not experience the second death. The second death is the lake of fire. So if you are saved (first resurrection) then you will not go to the lake of fire (second death).

So this leaves the second resurrection and the first death.

The second resurrection would be the physical one of 1 Cor 15.

The first death would be physical death.

So the first resurrection is spiritual at salvation and the second resurrection is physical.

The first death is physical and the second death is spiritual.

Thus, a pattern!

My thoughts, anyway.