Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Revelation 20:5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Revelation 20:5 The rest of the dead [the non-believers] did not come to life again until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection. |
Bible Question:
During the Great Tribulation souls will be saved but will be beheaded for their testimony of Jesus and who rejected the mark. Rev 20:5b states, "this is the first resurrection." Could this be better understood by saying these are the last group of people who are saved in the first resurrection since many people who died prior to this time would have already been resurrected in the rapture. ( pre-trib) In other words I take this to mean the first resurrection is for the saints, while the second resurrection is for the lost. |
Bible Answer: Ed.O. You ask a good question but a hard question. The question can be answered by a simple yes or no, but the reason it is so hard is because the way one answers your question is determined by how I first understand a great multitude of other texts. So when I answer, it is going to tell you a lot about how I have already made up my mind prior to coming to this text. Let me give you two reasons this isn't a bad thing. First, it is not so bad of a thing because revelation naturally comes at the end of the entirety of all other inspired authoritative revelation given by God. In other words, the original readers of the letter were 'suppose' to already have many issues of doctrine already established in their mind. This includes many notions about what happens upon Christ's return. These may not have been horribly specific ideas, but they at least had broad brush-strokes such as resurrection, judgment, new creation etc. So we are suppose to have much in place before this passage. Secondly, it is not a bad thing because we 'ought' to interpret unclear texts in light of clear texts. This is not irresponsible reading but good hermeneutics. Yes, first seek to understand the passage on its own merits, but other scripture ought to interpret scripture. Having given those statements I'll give an attempt to sort of kind of answer you. 1.) You are not the firs to suggest your answer. For whatever its worth, other Christians have put the pieces together in the way you have. 2.) I disagree with the premise that there will be a resurrection before the final tribulation. In this case also, I am not the first Christian to suggest this notion. I believe the first resurrection happens at the end, not seven years prior to the end. This of course would allow you to simply read the "first resurrection" as the first resurrection. I encourage you to study, make your educated guesses, and then test those theories further against scripture. It will only lead to further understanding, but I invite you to agree with me that two believers who truly love their Lord can disagree on such difficult issues. In Christ, Beja |