Reply to Alfred Brother, as typical, I will tell you that it is an affront for you to post on here and argue for a point to which you wholly ascribe only to refer me to a Jedi-master of some kind. If you are so bold as to adopt a view, become also the same one who can defend it. I ask you again, if the "life" those in the 1st Resurrection are given is the New Birth, then does this mean that those "raised 1000 years later" are given a new birth? If it means they are brought out of graves, then when do those in the 1st Resurrection get their resurrection from graves? Do they get one?
Great Sermon! I will refer you to some one much smarter than myself. Kim Riddlebarger, Mongerism.com. Check out His Amillennialism 101 series. Very good, very good. I can't explain it as well he can. I am sure you are well aware of the main points I was trying make. It is nothing new. Mr. Riddlebarger is a former pre-trib/dispenasatonalist and pre-mil.
Reply to Alfred Do those who are resurrected at the end of the 1000 years get a new birth or just a physical resurrection?
If your answer is that "they get a physical resurrection," doesn't the phrase from 20:4-6 "the rest of the dead lived not again until the 1000 years were finished" seem a little strange? Why would "lived" have two different meanings in two verses' time?
Secondly, Doesn't verse 6 seem to indicate that those who partake in the 2nd Resurrection are actually "under the power of the 2nd death?" If so...is there room for believing this is a resurrection that includes believers?
Great Sermon! Two births physical and spiritual, two deaths spiritual and physical. There also is two resurrections, spiritual and physical and they are separated by an undetermined period of time. The physical or bodily resurrection or general resurrection is for everyone on the last day. The spiritual resurrection is John 3:3-6, that is when we enter the kingdom God. So the event after the 1000 yrs. or the last day is the general resurrection. No, only the believers in Christ are born again. I don't understand the last question.
Reply to Helen You would have a very difficult time convincing Paul that the church is not "true Israel of God." Look at Galatians 3:7 and 6:16.
One more thing, sister. He wouldn't care that you don't like the system...whatever label you give it.
Reply to Alfred Alfred if the "first resurrection" is the "regeneration of the soul" as you say, then what is the event called when those who are raised after the 1000 years "live again?" Are you arguing that they too are "born again?"
Replies to Walter and JHB my humble thanks for listening to the sermon. I guess that application of the text was especially painful for me. I began to wonder if my "skillful application" at the end was my way of becoming loved more (as a preacher), or whether it was my way of loving my neighbor more.
"our hearts are idol factories."
Reply to Teresa Teresa,
"I think" is hardly authoritative.
No, we are not mid-trib.
There are many that heard this 67 minute recording who are quite glad we didn't mention Daniel. Please help me understand at what time we should have dealt with that passage during this recording.
Great Sermon! Looks like over 240 people have listened to this broadcast and not one comment? Maybe you have silenced them with the sobering truth of the choice we were all considering! Thanks Pastor Bill!
Great Sermon! I have only been studying scripture for about 6 yrs. The first 4 I lean heavily on presuppositions. Not anymore, I try and let scripture interpret scripture. On the first resurrection in Rev 20, I believe the bible is pretty clear that regeneration of the soul is the first resurrection. The soul is dead in sins and trespasses, and we have been crucified with Christ and we have been raised with(resurrected) him and are seated in the heaven. Just as Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father. So therefore the second death or physical death of the body has no power over us. The first death was the fall, and the first resurrection was regeneration or the new birth was the first resurrection. We are buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him (resurrected ). I believe this is the correct interpretation of Rev 20.
Great Sermon! I enjoyed your News in Focus segment on the Millennium. I am thankful that you are not defending a position but are interested in the truth. All through your discussion you said it seems the Lord comes after the Millennium. I think you are right. Because, I am Post-Mill. But not a traditional Post-Mill. I would like to send you a couple of articles I have compiled on this subject since you wanted feedback. Let me know where to send it if you are interested.
Great Sermon! I would also like to add my own thoughts, although I am not dogmatic, But, as a former believer in the pre-trib/dispensationalist/pre-mil position. I see no need for a future millennium on THIS present earth. The Church is the True Israel of God. The Jewish remnant i.e. Paul(JEW) is being saved during this age.
Great Sermon! The kingdom of God is a present reality, though not yet consummated. The kingdom has both present and future elements. This age (already) and its future consummation( the not yet and age to come). The prospect of a future kingdom demonstrates that Christ's fulfillment of these Old Testament promises is typological of a more glorious and final kingdom yet to come. Christ's return is not the inauguration of a halfway step on the road to consummation called a "millennium". Christ's return is the consummation. Kim Riddlebarger.
Reply to John E I do indeed believe that the 12 stars are Jacob, Leah and the 12 tribes. That is my favorite of two different views of which I am most acquainted. Regarding, the 1/3 of angels, I must admit, on the recording, I went back to my former view of those stars. I am going to see how I treat it in my commentary and get back to you. Thanks for stopping in.