An Analysis on the 144,000 in Revelation

[FreeGrace2]

I doubt it because while you insist that His resurrected body was His glorified and immortal body, He was still on earth as the Word that "dwelt among us"; He ate breakfast with Peter as I pointed out; and He specifically told Mary Magdalene: "Don't cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to my father." So I think it's quite reasonable to come to a conclusion that this was not final form, not until Stephen saw Him sitting at the Father's right hand.

OK, you are welcome to your opinion. But Acts 23:26 says that He was "the first to rise from the dead" and we know that while He walked on earth after the resurrection, His body wasn't mortal. He destroyed death. That means He couldn't die again. That proves His body was glorified.

Even if He did change at the moment, He turned back afterwards, so that transfiguration was temporary whatsoever.

No one disagrees with this. But you claim it was a "vision". The Bible says that Jesus CHANGED (transformed).

In Exodus 34:29-35 Moses was transfigurated too, his face shone bright after he came down from Mount Sinai, that's why I mentioned it. What's the problem with that?

I disagree. Yes, his face shone, though the glory faded over time. That was NOT a transfiguration by any stretch. Or the Bible would have used that word.

If his whole body shone, then you might have a point.

 

[kleronomos]

"And the king said unto her, Be not afraid: for what sawest thou? And the woman said unto Saul, I saw gods ascending out of the earth. And he said unto her, What form is he of? And she said, An old man cometh up; and he is covered with a mantle. And Saul perceived that it was Samuel, and he stooped with his face to the ground, and bowed himself." - 1 Sam 28:13-14 KJV

Was Samuel present in a glorified spirit body or a different kind of spirit body?

Neither, Samuel wasn't present at all. Samuel 'didn't come up'. THERE was NO KIND OF BODY. I don't know how people with 'familiar spirits' bring up evil spirits nor how those visions work but we are only told what they 'said and thought' they saw, so I don't understand why you ASKING ME or are bringing this into the conversation again as you obviously know this.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Yes HE will and I never denied God's Word or His Promises.

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were unwilling! Look, your house is left to you desolate.
For I tell you that you will not see Me again until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.’”

You do not believe the very words of Christ?

"you will not see Me again until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.’”

Do you believe they will say this, and in doing so they will be restored?

And do you believe part of that repentance is seen in the 144000?

I do.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Prophecy MUST be symbolic, because you don't know what you don't know.

No, because if this is true, Anyone can interpret prophecy and no one can prove who is right.

I do not have to know what I do not know. No one could tell that Christ and the suffereing servant were the same person. tet the suffering servant literally filfilled the prophecy spoken of him

It is necessary to use what is current to demonstrate what is in the future, to use what you're familiar with to explain what you're NOT familiar with. God uses a set of consistent code language to express the future in every prophet's vision, like water representing gentile nations and land representing safe sanctuary, you just have to figure out what they are.

Saying prophecy is teaching a symbolic truth is different that saying the head of Gold (babylon) was a literal kingdom.

144000 from the 123 tribes are 144000 people from Israel. We know Israel. and We know where Israel came from. I do not have to know who each induvidual is. or need proof they came from one tribe or another. I just have to know. God said they will repent and be sealed. and trust That God knows what he knpws and try not to question him

 

[DavidTree]

"you will not see Me again until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.’”

Do you believe they will say this, and in doing so they will be restored?

And do you believe part of that repentance is seen in the 144000?

I do.

God's desire, and mine, is that you meditate on what the LORD said(undeniable Truth) in Matt ch23 and Zech ch14 and receive understanding that cannot be doubted.

Peace Brother

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

What passages are you referring to? Clearly not the promises to Abraham and his seed.

Now your just playing Games I have given then to you multiple times. I am not playing these games anymore. You know what passages I am quoting from.

So the land becomes theirs in coownership when they become Christian? That would still mean the promise is Christ's. That would still mean the heir to the promises is Christ and those in Christ.

The land was theres the moment God gave it to abraham. He said they would be strangers in their own land. Please try to study the OT and the covenants God made with abraham and Israel

We weren't talking about salvation. We were talking about the promises, which are Christ's per Gal 3.

Thos promises concerning salvation and the heavenly gift to all mankind.

Not the promise given to one nation

Rome was a Christian empire when they converted, so I'm not sure why that came up, but are you proposing that the promise must be fulfilled in present day? Not even the Talmudic Jews believe that the promises are fulfilled in present day. The point is that if Christians controlled the land, the land promise would be fulfilled per Christian scripture.

A lot of this will depend on whether you perceive there to be a specific timeline for fulfilment of these promises.



You have at the very least simmered your tone down to "your position makes a liar out of God" And insofar as you have done that, I appreciate it.



The promises go to Christ. What doesn't make sense about that?

all we have to do is interpret the word correctly. Rome was christian? Are you catholic? Rome was never a christian nation my friend.

 

[Rhomphaeam]

No, I have NOT "excluded myself" from that. I have explained numerous times on this thread that there is NO "rapture" in the commonly understood sense; that Jesus comes to the clouds, resurrects all believers and then takes them to heaven.

What is true is that Jesus comes to the clouds, and gives ALL believers glorified bodies. What isn't true is that He will take them up to heaven. I hope this helps clarify my actual view.

So? The passage is about AFTER the Tribulation.

This seems more like word games than anything. When Jesus comes back, one could describe the joining of the dead saints from heaven and the living saints from earth as a gathering OR as a "catching UP". Doesn't matter a bit.

Yes, different words. So what? The SAME concept applies.

The Strong number for "gather" in Matt 24:31 is 1996. The Strong number for "gather" in 2 Thess 2:1 is 1997. So they are closely related.

Sorry, but I'm not seeing a point here. Could you explain "some American brethren"?

Thanks.

1 Thessalonians 4:17 is harpazo (ἁρπάζω) in its lexical form - and morphologically conjugates to αρπαγησομεθα in the manuscript.

If you had said that harpazo (ἁρπάζω) was akin to harpax (ἅρπαξ) then that would be true - even though harpax (ἅρπαξ Lexical) is used by the Lord to speak of ravenous wolves in Matthew 7:15 and morphologically conjugates to αρπαγες in the manuscript.

Whereas, episunago (ἐπισυνάγω Lexical) and is your reference to the Strongs lexical number 1996. In the manuscript this lexical root morphologically conjugates to επισυναξουσιν.

So just to be clear then, brother.

harpazo (ἁρπάζω) is the lexical root of the domain in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and is Strongs number 726.

No connection or semantic link to Strongs number 1996.

As to the concept as you use the expression - concepts are not the primary aim of language - not even the Word of God. Language is to communicate semitic domains and then precise meanings. Concepts are too vague and wooly.

Just like my American brethren comment - you would have me believe. Explain nothing when what is said is perfectly clear already.

Hope that helps.

 

[DavidTree]

Now your just playing Games I have given then to you multiple times. I am not playing these games anymore. You know what passages I am quoting from.




The land was theres the moment God gave it to abraham. He said they would be strangers in their own land. Please try to study the OT and the covenants God made with abraham and Israel



Thos promises concerning salvation and the heavenly gift to all mankind.

Not the promise given to one nation




all we have to do is interpret the word correctly. Rome was christian? Are you catholic? Rome was never a christian nation my friend.

Review Genesis and the Promise that God made to Abraham - meditate on it with Gospel of John , Acts , Romans ,Galatians

 

[Absolutely]

FreeGrace2 said:
"""No, I have NOT "excluded myself" from that. I have explained numerous times on this thread that there is NO "rapture" in the commonly understood sense; that Jesus comes to the clouds, resurrects all believers and then takes them to heaven."""

Provide a verse that excludes that, or says, " no believers go to heaven in the rapture"

Yes show us the verse stating they do not continue on to heaven.

do that.

Yawn

 

[Absolutely]

1 Thessalonians 4:17 is harpazo (ἁρπάζω) in its lexical form - and morphologically conjugates to αρπαγησομεθα in the manuscript.

If you had said that harpazo (ἁρπάζω) was akin to harpax (ἅρπαξ) then that would be true - even though harpax (ἅρπαξ Lexical) is used by the Lord to speak of ravenous wolves in Matthew 7:15 and morphologically conjugates to αρπαγες in the manuscript.

Whereas, episunago (ἐπισυνάγω Lexical) and is your reference to the Strongs lexical number 1996. In the manuscript this lexical root morphologically conjugates to επισυναξουσιν.

So just to be clear then, brother.

harpazo (ἁρπάζω) is the lexical root of the domain in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and is Strongs number 726.

No connection or semantic link to Strongs number 1996.

As to the concept as you use the expression - concepts are not the primary aim of language - not even the Word of God. Language is to communicate semitic domains and then precise meanings. Concepts are too vague and wooly.

Just like my American brethren comment - you would have me believe. Explain nothing when what is said is perfectly clear already.

Hope that helps.

Is that illustrating different types of "gatherings", or is it a "fyi"?

 

[Absolutely]

OK, you are welcome to your opinion. But Acts 23:26 says that He was "the first to rise from the dead" and we know that while He walked on earth after the resurrection, His body wasn't mortal. He destroyed death. That means He couldn't die again. That proves His body was glorified.


No one disagrees with this. But you claim it was a "vision". The Bible says that Jesus CHANGED (transformed).


I disagree. Yes, his face shone, though the glory faded over time. That was NOT a transfiguration by any stretch. Or the Bible would have used that word.

If his whole body shone, then you might have a point.

 

[Absolutely]

OK, you are welcome to your opinion. But Acts 23:26 says that He was "the first to rise from the dead" and we know that while He walked on earth after the resurrection, His body wasn't mortal. He destroyed death. That means He couldn't die again. That proves His body was glorified.


No one disagrees with this. But you claim it was a "vision". The Bible says that Jesus CHANGED (transformed).


I disagree. Yes, his face shone, though the glory faded over time. That was NOT a transfiguration by any stretch. Or the Bible would have used that word.

If his whole body shone, then you might have a point.

Most of this is correct.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Neither, Samuel wasn't present at all. Samuel 'didn't come up'. THERE was NO KIND OF BODY. I don't know how people with 'familiar spirits' bring up evil spirits nor how those visions work but we are only told what they 'said and thought' they saw, so I don't understand why you ASKING ME or are bringing this into the conversation again as you obviously know this.

This is untrue. The Bible DOES NOT SAY "what they 'said and thought' they saw. This is a copout of what was clearly said.

Saul spoke WITH Samuel. Not that he thought he did. The witch SAW Samuel and described him. The Bible SAYS that Samuel spoke with Saul.

I guess people just read what they want to read.

This was the ONLY real and legitimate seance ever. God did it for a purpose. To tell the knucklehead that he would die the next day and be with Samuel. Which happened just as Samuel said to Saul.

 

[FreeGrace2]

1 Thessalonians 4:17 is harpazo (ἁρπάζω) in its lexical form - and morphologically conjugates to αρπαγησομεθα in the manuscript.

Point, please.

If you had said that harpazo (ἁρπάζω) was akin to harpax (ἅρπαξ) then that would be true - even though harpax (ἅρπαξ Lexical) is used by the Lord to speak of ravenous wolves in Matthew 7:15 and morphologically conjugates to αρπαγες in the manuscript.

Whereas, episunago (ἐπισυνάγω Lexical) and is your reference to the Strongs lexical number 1996. In the manuscript this lexical root morphologically conjugates to επισυναξουσιν.

So just to be clear then, brother.

So two words that are 1 digit apart according to Strong's isn't significant?

harpazo (ἁρπάζω) is the lexical root of the domain in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and is Strongs number 726.

No connection or semantic link to Strongs number 1996.

I wasn't even addressing #726. I showed the Strongs number in Matt 24 was 1996 and in 2 Thess 2:1 was 1997. That's what I was addressing. You are focused on something quite different, it appears.

As to the concept as you use the expression - concepts are not the primary aim of language - not even the Word of God. Language is to communicate semitic domains and then precise meanings. Concepts are too vague and wooly.

Just like my American brethren comment - you would have me believe. Explain nothing when what is said is perfectly clear already.

Hope that helps.

Nope. Sorry. Not clear at all. You didn't even address the 2 verses I addressed.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
"""No, I have NOT "excluded myself" from that. I have explained numerous times on this thread that there is NO "rapture" in the commonly understood sense; that Jesus comes to the clouds, resurrects all believers and then takes them to heaven."""

Provide a verse that excludes that, or says, " no believers go to heaven in the rapture"

Yes show us the verse stating they do not continue on to heaven.

do that.

Yawn

Sure. Go ahead and yawn all you want. You're the one without a verse showing Jesus taking glorified believers to heaven, which would be the very FOUNDATION of the rapture theory.

And you know there aren't any. Which is why you are forced to appeal to a parable that says NOTHING about a rapture, or Noah, which Jesus used to emphasize HOW PEOPLE WERE LIVING just before the flood and equating that with how unbelievers will be living just before He comes again.

 

[Rhomphaeam]

The Strong number for "gather" in Matt 24:31 is 1996. The Strong number for "gather" in 2 Thess 2:1 is 1997. So they are closely related.

episunagoge (ἐπισυναγωγή, 1997), “a gathering together,” is used in 2 Thess. 2:1, of the “rapture” of the saints. Vines Expository Dictionary.

Point accepted regarding your post and my mistaken misreading of the line above as cited [your line you understand].

 

[kleronomos]

Good Morning
You disagree with what specifically? This is important to know.

I do not AGREE WITH
THE DUST FROM THE DECAY AND ROT OF THE SINFUL FLESH SOWN
AS BEING THE MAKE UP OF AN ETERNAL GLORIFIED BODY

I also disagree with ALL verses of HIS COMING being about the 2nd Advent seen by the world.

The ONLY pre trib 'rapture' I believe in is when the 'flesh body' OF A SAVED SOUL/SPIRIT dies, is sown and rises is the the spiritual body, just like it is written.

I believe that every seed has a body, just like it is written, and no one becomes 'disembodied'.

I believe that we are raised in glory, just like it is written.

I believe everyone rises in a different 'GLORY', just like it is written.

I believe to be found NAKED is "one kind of glory' and is dishonorable yet still SAVED, and to be found as a vessel of GOLD and with honor is GOOD, and another kind of glory.

I believe our prayers and righteous acts are some of the determining facts in the various 'glories' to be found.

I believe God we are given two bodies, just as written, so that we are never without one.

I believe 'disembodied spirits' are demons.

I believe the FIRST RESURRECTION comes from accepting the gift of Salvation in THIS LIFE and resurrecting by passing through death (much like the 'alive and remaining' will do)

I believe the SECOND resurrection comes from being found written in the book of life ON JUDGMENT DAY.

I believe that ALL who are not SAVED when Christ returns experience their FIRST DEATH, a requirement for a SECOND.

I believe the 'dead' who are raised AT THE RETURN OF CHRIST are NOT THE SAVED (since they are returning) BUT THE 'NATIONS'

I believe the the alive and remaining are 'gathered with' those returning, not the 'dead' that have risen.

I believe when Christ returns ALL will have become LIKE THE ANGELS in heaven as far as death and marriage and birth is concerned, because in that moment HEAVEN will be on EARTH and no flesh and blood earth bodies belong in heaven.

I believe WE make up 'the army' that returns with Christ. I don't think there are saints and angels and horses and armies coming to earth to set FORTH THE LORDS DAY by starting it off WITH A PAUSE

for the some 5 billion disembodied spirits to be sent forth to look for their 'old, dead, worm food and diseased flesh made from dust of the fallen earth bodies' to

'PUT BACK ON' to finally be called

"GLORIFIED",

while in the blink of an eye the alive and remaining are CHANGED into their GLORIFIED BODIES.

I believe God is about order and laws and is super efficient and doesn't like chaos.

Maybe because I personally would rather be constructed of 'incorruptible spiritual matter' than the dirt of earth for eternity.

 

[DavidTree]

I do not AGREE WITH
THE DUST FROM THE DECAY AND ROT OF THE SINFUL FLESH SOWN
AS BEING THE MAKE UP OF AN ETERNAL GLORIFIED BODY

I also disagree with ALL verses of HIS COMING being about the 2nd Advent seen by the world.

The ONLY pre trib 'rapture' I believe in is when the 'flesh body' OF A SAVED SOUL/SPIRIT dies, is sown and rises is the the spiritual body, just like it is written.
...........

So you reject the Word of God that declares the Dead Bodies of the Saints are Resurrected at His Coming.

Brothers, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who sleep in death, so that you will not grieve like the rest, who are without hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, we also believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep/died in Him.

15By the word of the Lord, we declare to you that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who have fallen asleep.
16For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a loud command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will be the first to rise.= dead bodies in the dust/grave
17After that, we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord.
18Therefore encourage one another with these words.

Your dead shall live;
Together with my dead body they shall arise.
Awake and sing, you who dwell in dust;
For your dew is like the dew of herbs,
And the earth shall cast out the dead. - Isa ch26

Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split,
and the graves were opened;
and many bodies of the saints who had died were raised;
and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.
Matt ch27

Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them.
And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books.
The sea gave up the dead who were in it,
and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them.
And they were judged, each one according to his works. Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.
Rev ch20

WAKE UP to TRUTH and REJOICE

 

[kleronomos]

This is untrue. The Bible DOES NOT SAY "what they 'said and thought' they saw. This is a copout of what was clearly said.

Saul spoke WITH Samuel. Not that he thought he did. The witch SAW Samuel and described him. The Bible SAYS that Samuel spoke with Saul.

I guess people just read what they want to read.

This was the ONLY real and legitimate seance ever. God did it for a purpose. To tell the knucklehead that he would die the next day and be with Samuel. Which happened just as Samuel said to Saul.

A COPOUT? While it is true I don't know much about how MEDIUMS OR 'SEANCE' WORK,

I KNOW no one RISES FROM THE DEAD, BUT BY THE POWER OF THE LORD.

THE QUESTION I WAS ASKED WAS about the KIND OF BODY he was in.

MY ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION WAS

"Neither, Samuel wasn't present at all. Samuel 'didn't come up'. THERE was NO KIND OF BODY. I don't know how people with 'familiar spirits' bring up evil spirits nor how those visions work but we are only told what they 'said and thought' they saw, so I don't understand why you ASKING ME or are bringing this into the conversation again as you obviously know this"


SO YES, PEOPLE JUST READ WHAT THEY WANT TO READ.


SO, you answer the question I was asked
Was Samuel present in a glorified spirit body or a different kind of spirit body?

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Review Genesis and the Promise that God made to Abraham - meditate on it with Gospel of John , Acts , Romans ,Galatians

I have, And not just in Genesis. But the rest of scripture.

You should read the rest of scripture And determine how to properly interpret all the different coveants between God and Abraham and Israel. so you can properly determine which part and which covenant goes where