"Hail King Jesus"

“Hail King Jesus”

By Richard P. Joseph

When Jesus walked the streets of Jerusalem people were so impressed with his power, his authority, and his miracles that they were planning on seizing him and forcing him to take the throne and save them from the grip of the Romans.  In fact the Devil himself offered the throne to Jesus if he would just fall down and worship him.

John 6:15  Therefore when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take Him by force to make Him king, He departed again to the mountain by Himself alone.

Luke 4:5   Then the devil, taking Him up on a high mountain, showed Him[d] all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. 6 And the devil said to Him, “All this authority I will give You, and their glory; for this has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. 7 Therefore, if You will worship before me, all will be Yours.”

We all know that Jesus rejected man’s plan to place him on the throne of David, but why?  Putting ourselves in their shoes I would be one of those that would be zealous for Israel and would want a righteous king to rule just like we long for a righteous president in our own time.  Fortunately, God had a plan that was much more effective than what us mere men can concoct.  Since Jesus was a descendant of David, he had legal standing to challenge the throne of Israel.  This was taken so seriously by the Sanhedrin that they plotted to kill him in order to avert this action from ever taking place.  All rulers fear the toppling of their throne.  That is one reason that people were absolutely shocked when George Washington did not seek a third term.  The rest of the world could not understand that a leader of a nation would give up his rule by choice(term limits were not imposed at that time).  The world was even more shocked that the United States had a constitution that did not allow one to become a king or a tyrant over the people and even worse yet, no caste system!    All men were created equal according the the United States Constitution.  

Getting back to ancient Israel, Jesus had a right to challenge the throne.  The fear in King Herod (a vassal king to Rome), feared the birth of Jesus so much that he ordered the slaughter of every male child in Bethlehem, two years old and younger.  However, when Jesus was an adult, Caesar did not appoint a king in Jerusalem as he deemed no one fit at the time but rather appointed a procurator.  That allowed the High Priest to yield a considerable amount of power.  The High Priesthood was established by Moses, not as a political office but rather one that was a shadow of the Messiah.  The High Priest  is the one who entered the Holy of Holies each year to atone for the sins of Israel.  However, starting at the time that the Persians ruled over Israel after the first temple was destroyed, the High Priesthood became a political office and the priest who could offer the most money to the king of Persia would become ruler in Israel.  Of course the only way to get more money is to rape the people of taxes until they were ground into the dust. That type of system continued even throughout the Roman occupation period.   Not too much different than us today.  Therefore, when the leadership of the Jews finally determined that this Jewish Carpenter from some out of the way slum town was gaining a massive following, they panicked and brought him before Pilot.  When Pilate asked him if he was indeed a king Jesus answered in the affirmative.  

Then Jesus asked Pilot a funny question;

John 18:34  Jesus answered him, “Are you speaking for yourself about this, or did others tell you this concerning Me?”

You don’t hear many sermons about this passage because it is subjective and obscure but I have an idea what he might be getting at.  It appears that Jesus was asking Pilot if he was afraid of losing his position to him or if the Priests were afraid for themselves.  Obviously, it was the priests that were afraid of losing their luxurious lifestyle to this common man.  Then Jesus assured Pilot that he was not after his earthly throne.  

John 18:36   Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world.

Jesus had no intention of becoming an earthly king even though many people wanted him to be one.  Jesus’ plan from the beginning was to rule from heaven where he could spread his gospel in every part of the earth with no physical restrictions at all.  This brings us to the question of the millennial reign.  People back then were attempting to make him a physical king and those that are still waiting for the millennial reign to occur are doing the exact same thing that they were doing back then; trying to force Jesus to become a physical king on this earth.  That is where the preterist doctrine is useful.

Taking the bible in context it appears that the millennial reign of Christ was the forty year period from 30-70 AD, not some future event.  The millennial reign was something that already occurred when Jesus put down his enemies (the unfaithful Jews) and then began his eternal earthly kingdom where he rules from heaven.  His kingdom on earth will have no end and his heavenly kingdom doesn’t either.  Most ancient Jews used the term “1,000 years” to denote an epic event of an undetermined amount of time.  Looking back we now can determine that it was a 40 year transition period where Jesus and his resurrected elect ruled over Satan's earth and finally put Satan and the unbelievers down.  The futurist doctrine is prone to repeat the exact same mistakes they made in the first century (those that do not know history are bound to repeat it).  That is why I encourage all Christians to engage in studying the historical setting of the bible times in order to be able to interpret scripture in its proper context.  A good historical understanding will help you not make the same mistakes that previous generations made.  It will also make all of the pieces of the biblical puzzle fit together properly without forcing them.  

"All" Millennial

“All” millennial

By Richard P. Joseph

I was trying to find a good sermon on my drive home from work but I have to admit, I am tired of the “tow the line” sermons that make me cringe these days.  I came across Dr. David Jeremiah and he gave a lesson on the millennium.   He correctly interpreted the word as 1,000 years but said nothing about its meaning to first century Jews.  He then went on to explain the top three theories on the millennial reign of Christ.  I think he said postmillennial, premillennial and amillennial.  He said nothing about preterism.  He then chose the one he believed in and I can’t remember which one, I think postmillennial, but don’t quote me.  

After all that he explained that it is a future event.  He rapidly quoted several Old Testament verses to support the idea that there would be such a thing as a millennial reign of the Christ but he forgot one minute detail during his sermon; audience relevance!

Dr. Jeremiah pulled all of those ancient verses out and immediately applied them to modern day United States thinking, never once referring to historical setting, historical occurrences or historical thought.  I cannot tell you how dangerous it is to pull verses out of the bible and attempt to interpret and apply them completely out of context.  That is exactly how cults start up.   Like Ed Stephens always says “context is king”.  The reason there are so many theories about the millennial reign is because they are not based on historical facts, they are based on current thought.  In other words they are just making things up as they go and that is why I am creating a new phrase; “All Millennial”.  

In order to eliminate the All Millennial views one must conduct a research based on Audience relevance.  This is the common research method for serious preterist scholars.   As I study preterist historians and scholars I find them connecting scripture with history, with time relevant documents, with audience relevance and even with a little common sense.  None of those items are ever or rarely mentioned in futurist sermons about eschatological events.   It seems to always be about the “me” doctrine.  The futurists of today are preaching from the “church of what’s happenin’ now”.  I just looked over much of Ed Steven’s studies on this and it focused heavily on audience relevance showing that the millennial reign is most probably the 40 year period between the cross and the fall of Jerusalem although I am beginning to think it might even be during the seven years before AD70.  This type of detective work is necessary in order to fully understand eschatology.  My purpose for this article is not to explain the millennial reign fully but to introduce new people of preterism to the way it is done in our camp.  We don’t just read ancient scripture and pretend we can grasp its full meaning without a basic understanding of the culture in which it was originally written.  Scripture is fully relevant to us today but it must be interpreted from a time relevant stance.  

If you are interested in learning more about the millennium then I suggest you visit www.preterist.org and contact Ed Stevens.  He would love to share his knowledge with you.  Don’t just simply believe what you hear, look into it and find out what you are “not” being told.  Dr. Jeremiah is a great guy and has helped many people but he has bought into the futurist doctrine hook, line and sinker.  I believe he is not helping people when he gives them an American view of scripture instead of a Hebrew view.   As I read more and more ancient literature, my eyes are opened to a better understanding of scripture.  For example, I was reading in the Book of Jubilees and came across this sentence; And we remember the righteousness which the man fulfilled during his life, at all periods of the year; until a thousand generations they will record it, and it will come to him and to his descendants after him, and he hath been recorded on the heavenly tables as a friend and righteous man. 26:20. 

So I ask, does the “thousand” mean an exact thousand years or does it really mean that this greatness will be remembered and celebrated for many generations or otherwise as a notable event? You make the call.  The millennium is just such a phrase.  It does not mean an exact 1,000 years, it more than likely denotes a notable period of time where certain events must occur in order to fulfill prophecy.  Most full preterists assign this as the 40 year transition period between the cross and the end of the age which was finally consummated in the year AD70 thus ushering in the everlasting kingdom of Jesus Christ.  There is always an ongoing study for more clues and mysteries but you can rest assured, we will keep on digging.

Saul & David

Saul & David

By Richard P. Joseph

 

Type, anti-type;  Preterists use this terminology quite a bit to describe the interrelationship between the Old Testament and the New.  The story of Saul and David seems to fit right along those lines of type and antitype.  Chapter eight in the book of 1 Samuel begins the story of the Israelites requesting to be led by a king instead of by divine law and judges.  This is not any different than what is currently going on in the United States as we are a people who are governed by law and by conscience but many are asking for a bigger and more intrusive government which, always in the end, restricts freedom to the average citizen.  When Samuel was asked to anoint a king he let them know in no uncertain terms that this is an offense to God and that the king will abuse his power and restrict your real freedom.  It is a simple fact of life that the further we get from God, the more we need to be governed by man.  John Adams made this clear when he made his famous statement about our constitution which provided liberal amounts of freedom to the citizens.

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.  John Adams

Adams knew that freedom was unique to Christianity and that only if people lived by strong Christian ethics that they can remain free.  Once that morality is gone then our constitution, which allowed freedom based on our good morals, would need to be replaced by a tyrannical dictator.  That is why non-Christian nations really do need a strong dictator to keep the peace.   So, to keep the peace, Samuel gave them a king.

Samuel chose a king that represented the ideals of man.  

1 Samuel 9:2 And he had a choice and handsome son whose name was Saul. There was not a more handsome person than he among the children of Israel. From his shoulders upward he was taller than any of the people.

Saul was the son of Kish, a man of powerful influence.  Saul had the ingredients to succeed and was an intimidating figure to come up against.  Although Saul had some success in defending Israel against their enemies he also became puffed up and disobeyed some of God’s commands which began his downfall.  One thing that Saul was adamant about was that his lineage, like the other kings of the earth did, would remain in power.  This is the ultimate greed of men that they would live in power and riches while their subjects work day and night to keep the status quo.  Thank God that the United States ended the cast system.  So when Saul found out that his son Jonathan respected the right of David to receive the kingship after Saul, Saul cursed Jonathan and began a campaign to kill David.  

1 Samuel 20:30 Then Saul’s anger was aroused against Jonathan, and he said to him, “You son of a perverse, rebellious woman! Do I not know that you have chosen the son of Jesse to your own shame and to the shame of your mother’s nakedness? 31 For as long as the son of Jesse lives on the earth, you shall not be established, nor your kingdom. Now therefore, send and bring him to me, for he shall surely die.”

Of course in English we have shortened that by calling someone an “sob”.  My father used to cuss in very dramatic form in the arabic tongue and when something went wrong he would immediately curse my mother using very descriptive language including body parts and immoral professions.  He would never blame himself, he always took the cowardly way out and blamed the woman.  It is not hard for me to understand the colorful language of the bible being that my father used very similar and sometimes outlandish vernacular during his cursing outrages all in arabic.  Of course, that is the extent of my understanding of that language as he spoke to us in english.  So Saul thought the kingship belonged to him instead of to God and that was his downfall.

In the long run, David became king upon Saul’s death and God called David a man after his own heart.  This was not because David was perfect, as we all know he wasn’t.  It was because David was a man of praise.   Saul represented the ways of man whereas David represented the glory of God.  It was through David’s lineage that the messiah would come forth from, not Saul.  

When Jesus finally did appear from the house of David he was to become a king of a kingdom which will have no end.  Saul’s kingdom came to an end and David’s reign commenced and is flourishing today.  Saul represented the kingdom in which the law ruled but David represents the kingdom in which the Holy Spirit rules.  The mission of Jesus was to become the fulfilment of the old fleshly kingdom and to usher in the new spiritual kingdom.  Jesus often used wine to represent this transaction.  

John2:9

When the master of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and did not know where it came from (but the servants who had drawn the water knew), the master of the feast called the bridegroom. 10 And he said to him, “Every man at the beginning sets out the good wine, and when the guests have well drunk, then the inferior. You have kept the good wine until now!”

Mark 2:22

And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine bursts the wineskins, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But new wine must be put into new wineskins.”

Jesus, using parabolic language was warning the people that there was soon to be a major change concerning Israel and the world.  There would soon be a shift from old to new, from flesh to spirit, from slavery to freedom and from law to conscience.  Fleshly Israel was about to run it’s course and Spiritual Israel was to replace it.  The kingdom of Saul was ending and the kingdom of David was starting.  

I write this article because of the chatter I hear on facebook.  Just like I have been hearing my entire life, those that do not understand scripture are blowing their trumpets proclaiming the end is coming; again!  Every time a new president is elected I hear the same crap.  Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama and now Trump have all been called the anti-Christ or the beast or the dragon or the head of the one world government or the one who will cause Israel to build its third temple so that it can be blown to smithereens by a nuclear blast from Russia etc etc etc.   

Not that there isn’t things to worry about but they need to get their story straight but of course that will never happen because they make it up as the go.  Each generation, or every 4 years to be exact, comes up with it’s skewed interpretation of eschatology based solely on faulty biblical interpretation.  That is why the preterist message must be presented to the world.  It is high time the Christian world become familiar with the idea that Jesus was correct when he predicted his return in the first century and actually fulfilled his promise.  There is no future return of Christ to this earth as far as an eschatological event is concerned.  It is actually a shock to people when I tell them that Jesus did not make a mistake, he was actually right.  It is sad that I have to explain this to people.  I encourage you to read all of these articles and re-read the entire New Testament keeping in mind the idea that Jesus and the apostles were inspired and we are not.   Then get back with me and let me know how it goes.

Behold, The Lamb of God

Behold, the Lamb of God

By Richard P. Joseph

It appears that there is an ongoing controversy concerning what many call “Holy Communion”.  I believe it is one of the most misunderstood doctrines in christendom.   The Catholic doctrine on this is called transubstantiation.  This is the belief that the host and the wine, once blessed by the priest, becomes the actual body and blood of Christ.  Protestants do not accept that doctrine but I do not believe they have come up with an acceptable alternative that I can embrace.   I have been trying to come up with a way to articulate my belief on this subject but, as usual, it requires patience until the Holy Spirit himself enlightens you on any given subject.  I will share with you where I am at this point in my journey and trust that God will not lead us astray.  

Many followers of Jesus did go astray over this very subject.  In John chapter six Jesus was explaining to the crowd that he was the true manna but they could not grasp it.  They were so focused on the flesh that they became blinded to the spiritual realm.  Finally Jesus said;

53 ... “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.54 Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For My flesh is food indeed,[a] and My blood is drink indeed.

Many took Jesus as some sort of cannibal and turned away that very hour.  So, what did Jesus really mean when he said to eat his flesh and drink his blood?  I can assure you one thing for certain and that is that he did not mean that the bread and wine were going to magically turn into his body and blood.  In fact this is just another “task” that Catholics use in order to feel like they are doing God’s will.  They perform many tasks as if they have a checklist to accomplish to appease God.  Many perform these menial tasks but never experience a conversion or any real life changes.  This is a sure sign that God is not in it.  When God is in it, lives change and one becomes a new creation.  The law cannot change a man but the spirit can.  

As I explained in an earlier article (End of the Law), Jesus became the fulfilment of the law.  This means that he also fulfilled the miracle of the manna.  In John chapter six the crowd followed Jesus to the other side of the lake.  Jesus began at that point to explain his sayings about him being the true manna. He attempted to convince them that the true meaning had spiritual implications, not physical.  

26 Jesus answered them and said, “Most assuredly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw the signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. 27 Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set His seal on Him.”

Jesus wanted them to be filled with the spirit of God, not with wheat.  At first they wanted this new breed but right away began asking for a sign but Jesus knew that many were not really seeking God but just trying to solve their physical ailments.  Then Jesus began dropping bombshells to clear out the unbelievers.  

49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and are dead. 50 This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world.”

Then he insults them again:

53 Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.

After many in the crowd left he had to explain it to his disciples who were also confused.  

63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.

He assures them that his words were spiritual not physical.  He is not talking about turning bread into flesh.  He is talking about him becoming the true spiritual passover meal.  

John the baptist clearly identified Jesus as the new passover offering that God would offer.

29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!

David B. Curtis of the Berean Bible Church in Virginia (Lesson 653) gave a powerful lesson on the seven feasts of the Lord.  In that lesson he showed that Jesus never did eat that last passover meal; what he really ate was the preparation meal the night before the passover.  Since it was this passover that Jesus would become the fulfilment of the passover lamb, he could not be there to eat it because he "was" it.  This puts the whole flesh eating controversy to rest.  A passover lamb was meant to be eaten.  So, as the Jewish world ate a physical lamb during the passover, the true believers ate the spiritual body and drank the spiritual blood of Christ.    

The point that Jesus was attempting to convey is that he was about to become the fulfillment of the Passover celebration.  He will lead his people out of slavery to sin and the law.  Instead of eating a lamb, believers now eat Jesus spiritually.  He is our Passover lamb.  Whenever we break bread with other believers we are to celebrate the true Passover meaning and glorify God above in Jesus Christ.  Simply eating the bread as if it is some sort of commandment is not sufficient or biblical.  

Scoffers Dilemma

Scoffers Dilemma

By Richard P. Joseph

According to the common futurist doctrine that nearly all preachers adhere to, the return of Christ is still in the future; but that’s as far as they know.  Of course the scammers keep predicting that it is right around the corner and all you need to do is buy their CDs and books and you will be able to know for sure.  But in reality it could still be 10,000 years away which leads me to one basic question;  When should the unbelievers start scoffing?  As you all know, Peter predicted that there would be scoffers in the last days.

 2 Peter 3:3-4 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming?

If the scoffers are to come just before the parousia then all we need to do is wait for them to scoff.  Right?  It’s been 2,000 years already, don’t you think that is long enough for people to start scoffing?  I do.  I mean, how much time do you give someone who says that they will return within one generation?  If Jesus did not give us time markers then that would mean he was probably a scam artist and didn’t really have a legitimate plan.  He would be in the same boat as the evolutionists are who use millions of years to sway the uneducated into believing that they are legitimate even though you can’t see it.  But the fact remains that Jesus did give us a timetable to work with and that was clearly within the generation of the Apostles and no later.  That is why Paul was already getting scoffed at in his lifetime.  Paul finally warned them by quoting Habakkuk 1:5

‘BEHOLD, YOU SCOFFERS, AND MARVEL, AND PERISH;

        FOR I AM ACCOMPLISHING A WORK IN YOUR DAYS,

        A WORK WHICH YOU WILL NEVER BELIEVE, THOUGH SOMEONE SHOULD DESCRIBE IT TO YOU.’”

Habakkuk warned his people in his day about the impending destruction coming upon them by the Babylonians.  Paul used the same verse to warn Israel about the impending doom that they would suffer by the Romans.  

Peter clearly identified that he was certainly living in the last days of “the present age” and knew the “age to come” was at the very door.  

1 Peter 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand; therefore be serious and watchful in your prayers.

So, we are now in a dilemma.  If Peter said the end of all things was at hand, then why are we waiting for the end now?  Who is right, Peter or the preacher?  In fact all preachers since I was young have been preaching that the end was near.  Somebody has to be wrong and I don’t think it was Peter.  In fact I think that if anyone scoffs today they actually have a legitimate gripe.  However, if Jesus did return in the first century as history confirms then the true scoffers were those that harassed the apostles in the first century.  They were all left to pay the horrible price when Jerusalem was besieged and leveled to the ground.  Once you familiarize yourself with the writings of Josephus and other first century historians, the second coming of Christ will finally make sense.   You would finally conclude that Jesus Christ is who he said he was and that he made no mistakes when he predicted that some standing and listening to him would not taste death until he came in his glory.  You can see that this solves the problem of the scoffers dilemma.    

The Resurrection

The Resurrection

By Richard P. Joseph

You would think that a discussion on the resurrection would be an open and close case but it is not quite that easy.  Depending on who you ask, you might be surprised at the answers you receive.  Hopefully I can simplify it and make sense out of the confusion.  The first thing we need to do is separate the two main types of resurrection.

One resurrection belongs solely to Jesus Christ.  His resurrection out of the grave is unique to all mankind.  Since Jesus was a sinless being and he was God incarnate, he had the power to lay his life down and to pick it up again, ostensibly proving that he is who he said he was.  He rose from the grave, showed himself to the apostles and then went back to the father whence he came.  There is not much argument about that resurrection but there is about the resurrection of all other humans.

The bible also indicates a second resurrection event.   This is where the confusion comes in for some people.  There are probably many views but I will only mention three at this time.  One is called the Individual Body View, one is called the Collective Body View and one is the Futurist view.  

I will eliminate any futurist view immediately because there is no mention of

prophetic fulfillment after the year AD70.  Jesus and Daniel said that all prophecy and vision will be finished once the power of the Holy People is shattered.  All of the law was fulfilled in Jesus and finished by AD70.  If you are not familiar with that then please refer to my older posts on preterism.     

The next view I will eliminate is the Collective Body View.  I would explain it to you but I can’t figure it out even after doing some research on it.  It seems to morph as it goes by.  The best I can do to explain it is by saying that someone is getting the New Covenant mixed up with a resurrection event and coming up with a concocted mess.  Jesus instituted the New Covenant sealed with his blood.  This new covenant was the fulfillment of the Old Covenant which God made with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  This new covenant seals the Christian people as the new covenant people.  

Matthew 26:27 Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 For this is My blood of the new[c] covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 29 But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.”

Rev:21 Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea. 2 Then I, John,[a] saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God.

The new covenant is a new order of being between God and Man.  It was the fulfillment of the Mosaic law.  God’s covenant is no longer with the Nation of Israel but now with Spiritual Israel.  The proponents of the corporate body view, what I can gather, believe that this was the resurrection.  In other words they believe that the body (believers) were resurrected out of the old law and came to life in the new covenant.   This has a way of eliminating the personal element from the equation.  Nobody doubts that there is a new covenant but it should not be mixed up with the resurrection itself.  The Corporate Body View has led many astray into various cultish type beliefs that I will not mention here.  Suffice it to say that I do not support this doctrine.  I have read several of Don Preston’s works and he labors and labors over scripture but never seems to express any exact or precise conclusion.  He has many good things to say but I still can’t figure out what his view on the resurrection really is.  I think it is what I described above but I cannot confirm it.  This leaves us with the first choice I mentioned above.

The Individual Body View makes the most sense from a scriptural and historical point of view.  This view has been promoted heavily by Ed Stevens (http://www.preterist.org).  I strongly advise you to visit his website for a complete explanation of his views.  The individual body view follows the flow of scripture without having to tweak any of it to make it fit.  It also considers that God is in the people business and not necessarily in the nation business.  

At the last supper, Jesus made it very clear that he was in this to save souls of men, not to start another cultus type of nation.  In John 14 Jesus lets the disciples know that they will all personally be with him in his eternal kingdom soon.  

14 “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 In My Father’s house are many mansions;[a] if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.[b] 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself;

When Peter, Paul and the other New Testament authors commented on the resurrection doctrine they always had an individual person aspect attached to it.  Even Revelation 20:5 talks of a first resurrection and then later describes what appears to be a second resurrection then Hades and death were cast into the Lake of Fire.  As confusing as that sounds there is one common thread that laces through it and that is the idea of personal souls being raised up into God’s everlasting heavenly realm.  The sequence is always; millennium(40 year transition period) including first resurrection, tribulation of the saints, rapture of the living saints and resurrection of the souls in hades, then Hades and death cast into the lake of fire, then the wrath is poured out on those that rejected Christ in Israel.   Resurrection is not mixed up with a covenant change even though they may occur at the same time.  Since Hades was emptied of its contents, there is no future resurrection.  We now are ushered directly to heaven or hell at our death.  Hades only existed as a holding place until the Messiah finished his redemptive work.  There is no need of this intermediate place after Christ finished his priestly duty.  We are not part of some corporate blob, we are individuals who must personally account for our lives on this earth.  We will personally meet and bow down before Jesus Christ.   We will enjoy a real heaven and behold the glory of God in our new immortal bodies.  If we do not have a personal relationship with God then why are we wasting our time?