From: Paul S. Dixon (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Oct 20 1997 - 14:21:13 EDT
On Mon, 20 Oct 1997 07:22:59 -0400 Jonathan Robie
>At 10:55 PM 10/18/97 EDT, Paul S. Dixon wrote:
>>Yes, but if we broaden it a bit, I think the difficulty with the
>>ingressive aorist becomes more evident. John says he saw TAS YUCAS ...
>>KAI EZHSAN KAI BASILEUSAN META TOU CRISTOU CILIA ETH. Just how >>is it
that these YUCAS come alive? If we take YUCAS as "souls" (so most
>>[all?] translations), then how is it that these souls, which are
>>already alive, come to life?
>I do not know that these souls "are certainly already alive". Look at
>Rev 20:5: hOI LOIPOI TWN NEKRWN OUK EZHSAN ACRI TELESQHi TA CILIA >ETH.
The rest of them did not "come to life" until the thousand years were
>finished, and this group includes Christians. Before the thousand years
>finished, they did not live.
Yes, if you assume an ingressive aorist, then you are right. Of course,
if you assume an ingressive aorist, then the first resurrection is
physical. But, aren't we discussing the question whether the aorist is
ingressive or not? It is not ingressive, because if we assume it is,
then a physical resurrection interpretation follows.
>I don't know what souls do between the time of death and the final
>resurrection, but the structure of Rev 20:4-5 is KAI EZHSAN..CILIA ETH
>/ hOI LOIPOI TWN NEKRWN OUK EZHSAN ACRI TELESQHi TA CILIA ETH. It >must
be clear that the second group was not alive before this, so I can see no
>reason to object to the possibility that the first group wasn't either,
>EZHSAN means the same thing both times. There seems to be a notion that
>souls wait until their resurrection.
Again, if we assume that ACRI TELESQHi TA CILIA ETH means that after the
1000 years, the rest of the dead, hOI LOIPOI TWN NEKRWN, lived or came
alive, EZHSAN, then we will end up with a physical resurrection.
But, if we don't assume this, and go only with what the text says, the
idea being that the rest of the dead lived not (or, did not come alive)
throughout the thousand year period of time (whether this refers to a
literal 1000 year period of time, yet future, or figuratively to either
the time between the 2 advents of Christ or to the eternal life state of
the believer begun at his conversion and extending into eternity), with
no necessary implication they ever came alive (we've already discussed
this), then a physcial resurrection does not follow. Now, this is not to
say there is no physical resurrection of the rest of the dead. There is
(Jn 5:29). But, this may not be what John has in mind here.
If by TAS YUCAS (20:4) John meant "souls" and not "bodies," and if these
souls were already alive (cf 6:9 and Jn 11:25-26), then it seems most
unlikely that John saw them come alive spiritually either again, or
initially, (if EZHSAN be taken ingressively). Now, is there any
indication John is making a transition from being alive spiritually (TAS
YUCAS) to being alive physically later in the verse? I don't see any
These considerations, coupled with the fact John contrasts the first
resurrection with the second death which is spiritual (20:13-14), leads
me to suspect the first resurrection is spiritual and that EZHSAN should
be taken constatively.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:34 EDT