On another thread Theonomy said:

Originally posted by Theonomy

So it seems to me that Premillennialism says that Christ's enemies will be subdued a whole millennium after the resurrection of the saints, but in the New Testament, Christ's enemies will have all been subdued by the time the saints are raised.

The New Testament makes it plain that all of Christ's enemy will NOT be subdued by the time of the "first resurrection".The following verses are in regard to the first resurrection:

"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection" (Rev.20:4,5).

Those who will be beheaded will live and reign with Christ all during the 1000 years in their resurrected bodies.And John calls the event when they are first resurrected "the first resurrection".So these verses are describing a resurrection of saints.

And then we see that after this resurrection that death has not been defeated:

"And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth...And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them" (Rev.20:7-9).

So the New Testament does not teach that "Christ's enemies will have all been subdued by the time the saints are raised".

In Christ,
Mickey

Originally posted by Mickey

On another thread Theonomy said:

The New Testament makes it plain that all of Christ's enemy will NOT be subdued by the time of the "first resurrection".The following verses are in regard to the first resurrection:

"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection" (Rev.20:4,5).

Those who will be beheaded will live and reign with Christ all during the 1000 years in their resurrected bodies.And John calls the event when they are first resurrected "the first resurrection".So these verses are describing a resurrection of saints.

And then we see that after this resurrection that death has not been defeated:

"And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth...And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them" (Rev.20:7-9).

So the New Testament does not teach that "Christ's enemies will have all been subdued by the time the saints are raised".

In Christ,
Mickey

Well like a good little DF just add as many resurrections as you need Mickey.

What is Jesus king of now Mickey?

I guess this means that Mickey cannot answer 1 cor 15 as posed.

Originally posted by Darth Xena

I guess this means that Mickey cannot answer 1 cor 15 as posed.

I was afraid the Theonomy was going to cry if he didn't get his way in regard to not allowing any verses except for the ones he approves so I took his advice to start another thread.

He makes a statement about what he thinks that the New Testament teaches but when I use verses out of the New Testament that proves he is wrong he will not address those verses.Then he threatens to try to delete any mention of those verses.

Besides that I have already answered 1Cor.15 and there is nothing there that demonstrates that pre-mil is in error.

On the other hand,the verses out of Rev.20 proves that Theonomy's ideas are wrong when he said:

"So it seems to me that Premillennialism says that Christ's enemies will be subdued a whole millennium after the resurrection of the saints, but in the New Testament, Christ's enemies will have all been subdued by the time the saints are raised."

In Christ,
Mickey

Can't handle a discussion that doesn't allow you to go off on rabbit trail eh Mickey. Didn't think so. Actually I am glad you abandoned that thread, perhaps a good premill explanation can get offered now.

Originally posted by Darth Xena

Can't handle a discussion that doesn't allow you to go off on rabbit trail eh Mickey. Didn't think so. Actually I am glad you abandoned that thread, perhaps a good premill explanation can get offered now.

On a rabbit trail?

How is quoting verses that go directly to the heart of the discussion considered going off on a rabbit trail.

Dee Dee,all of your posts are examples of someone going off on a rabbit trail.You never address the topics at hand with Scriptures but instead all you can offer are your snide remarks.Look at your posts on this thread.You have not offered anything in regard to the topic at hand,but instead all of your remarks are designed to denigrate me.

In Christ,
Mickey

That's funny since numerous people in fact think I do. I am merely responding to you in kind Kettle. Care to have witnesses against you that I NEVER address the topics at hand? You act like a trollish embarassment to the futurists on this board that I respect.

Originally posted by Darth Xena

That's funny since numerous people in fact think I do. I am merely responding to you in kind Kettle.

No,you don't respond in kind kettle.

I address the verses which you use to attempt to prove your point.And you do not do the same.For example,just look at your remarks on this thread.

You have offered nothing of substance.

You act like a trollish embarassment to the futurists on this board that I respect.

The Scriptures I offer on this forum should be an embarassment to all the preterists.But just like you they cannot be embarassed,no matter how many Scriptures are offered to prove that their ideas are nothing but fables invented by men.

Do you have anything of substance to add to this thread,Dee Dee?Or will you prove me right and continue your efforts to somehow undermine my credibility by your petty remarks without offering any Scriptures to answer the topic of this thread?

In Christ,
Mickey

I am waiting for you to have to guts to continue to interact with Theonomy. Otherwise, your inane goading just makes me

Originally posted by Darth Xena

I am waiting for you to have to guts to continue to interact with Theonomy. Otherwise, your inane goading just makes me

If you had nothing of substance to contribute to this thread why did you come on here in the first place?

In Christ,
Mickey

Engaging you in your own tactics (I will now go to wait for you on theonomy's thread, which of course if you avoid, means you can't answer - sound familiar Mickey?)

Originally posted by Darth Xena

Engaging you in your own tactics (I will now go to wait for you on theonomy's thread, which of course if you avoid, means you can't answer - sound familiar Mickey?)

Have you not noticed that it is my post which is the last post on that thread?But you can somehow turn that around and say that I am "avoiding" that thread.You prove that you have lost touch with reality,Dee Dee.

And let us take a look at the words which Theonomy ended his initial post on his thread:

"So it seems to me that Premillennialism says that Christ's enemies will be subdued a whole millennium after the resurrection of the saints, but in the New Testament, Christ's enemies will have all been subdued by the time the saints are raised."

When I use verses from the "New Testament" that speak specifically of a resurrection and speaks specifically of Christ's enemies all of a sudden those verses are "off topic".

Go ahead and continue to insist that I am avoiding that thread,Dee Dee.Perhaps there are some peole who will believe you despite the fact that my post is the last post on that thread.

In Christ,
Mickey

Originally posted by Mickey

On another thread Theonomy said:

The New Testament makes it plain that all of Christ's enemy will NOT be subdued by the time of the "first resurrection".The following verses are in regard to the first resurrection:

"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection" (Rev.20:4,5).

Mickey, why have you made the choice to misrepresent me? That's a disappointing tactic.

Please quote one - just one - example where I claimed that all of Christ's enemies will be subdued by the time of the first resurrection. One example will be sufficient for me to admit that I said it. One is all I am asking for.

Those who will be beheaded will live and reign with Christ all during the 1000 years in their resurrected bodies.And John calls the event when they are first resurrected "the first resurrection".So these verses are describing a resurrection of saints.

That's correct. But who says this is the physical resurrection of the dead that will occur when Jesus returns? Or are you hoping I'll justr accept futurism for the sake of argument? What an unusual assumption.

Come on, don't make me do the work for you - defend a futurist reading of Revelation 20!

Originally posted by Theonomy

Mickey, why have you made the choice to misrepresent me? That's a disappointing tactic.

Please quote one - just one - example where I claimed that all of Christ's enemies will be subdued by the time of the first resurrection. One example will be sufficient for me to admit that I said it. One is all I am asking for.

You said by the time "the saints are raised":

So it seems to me that Premillennialism says that Christ's enemies will be subdued a whole millennium after the resurrection of the saints, but in the New Testament, Christ's enemies will have all been subdued by the time the saints are raised.

In the first resurrection the saints are raised.

That's correct. But who says this is the physical resurrection of the dead that will occur when Jesus returns? Or are you hoping I'll justr accept futurism for the sake of argument? What an unusual assumption.

Are you really saying that this verse is not in regard to a "physical resurrection"?:

""And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years (Rev.20:4).

I have heard it all now!

You can't even realize that this verse is in regard to a "physical resurrection",despite the fact that John speaks of them being "beheaded" and then he says that they "lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".

Are we supposed to believe that they will reign with Christ in bodies that have no head ad in bodies that are dead?

Is that what you believe?

In Christ,
Mickey

Originally posted by Mickey

You said by the time "the saints are raised":

In the first resurrection the saints are raised.

So you can't quote me as saying that prior to the first resurrection, God's enemies will be subdued? Then why don't you simply apoogise for the mistaken accusation?

I understand that you think the future physical resurrection of the saints is "the first resurrection," but you must not attribute your beliefs to me. I would never say that prior to the first resurrection of Revelation 20, all God's enemies are subdued. Please admit that I never said this, then we may continue with honest discussion.

Are you really saying that this verse is not in regard to a "physical resurrection"?:

""And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years (Rev.20:4).

I have heard it all now!

Are you really saying that you won't defend your futurist reading of Revelation 20?

I've heard it all now!

You can't even realize that this verse is in regard to a "physical resurrection",despite the fact that John speaks of them being "beheaded" and then he says that they "lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".

You can't even realise that in apocalyptic imagery, the thing being representd is not the thing representing it? e.g. jesus is not a lamb, the "beasts" do not represent beasts, the stars represent angels, the lampstands.... etc.

Are we supposed to believe that they will reign with Christ in bodies that have no head ad in bodies that are dead?

Is that what you believe?

Are we supposed to just accept that futurism is true, and then just accept what follows from a futurist reading of this passage? Is that what you believe?

Defend a futurist reading of Revelation 20. After you've done that successfully, I will be able to see if you've successfully shown that the first resurrection is a physical resurrection in the future.

However, elsewhere at Theologyweb you've apparently denied that the resurection of the saints will physical, calling it "spiritual" in contrast to "physical," so this will be a remarkable turnabout indeed.