The Book of Mormon Site

First Resurrection, Second Resurrection, Third (General) Resurrection

Also, Mystical Resurrection v. Literal Resurrection; The Millenium; Lions and Tigers and Bears, Oh My!

Revelations 20:6–7:

20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison

Speculation and argumentation on this passage raged (and all of the Book of Revelations, really) for probably more than a millenium, and in the English print world, for nearly two cenuries (17th, 18th, early 19th century) before the Book of Mormon was produced. The following will suffice to illustrate this point.

1679, A New England Firebrand Quenched, The Second Part: Or, an Answer to Roger Williams’ Appendix by English Dissenter George Fox, founder of the Quakers or Friends, refered to by Roger Williams as Foxians, p. 99–101, bold emphasis added:

R. W. Bringeth M. Bines (fol. 86.) saying [ Notwithstanding thy passing through the First and Second Resurrection (as he saith there remains a Torment for thee at the last Day, and Woe. ] And G. F. Answers: [ “They are blessed, that have Part in the First Resurrection, the Second Death hath no Power over them; but are made free from Wrath that is to come, and are passed from Death to Life: and are translated into the Kingdom of the Son of God; and are in Union with the Son of God and the Father both.” ] R.W. replieth and saith: G. F. arrogates to himself and his Foxians, a passing through the First and Second Resurrection; he triumphs in their Blessedness pronounced to their First Resurrection, viz. of Communion with God, and Freedom from Wrath to come.

Answ. The Reader may see, how R. W. falsely applieth the Priest’s Words to G. F, which speaketh of the First and Second Resurrection: but doth G. F. mention the Word of passing through the Second Resurrection? For doth not John say in the Revelations (and is it Arrogancy in him?) Blessed and Holy is he that hath part in the First Resurrection, on such the Second Death hath no Power; for they are Priests of God &c, (Revel, 20)? And doth not the Apostle say (Rom. 5, 9,) We shall be Saved from Wrath through him (to wit, Christ &c)? and, Thanks be to Jesus, which hath delivered us from Wrath to come (1 Thess. 1, 10)? and (Chap. 5, 9) God hath not appointed us to Wrath?. And the Saints had Fellowhip with the Father and the Son (1 John 1)?

And R. W. saith: That G. F. is in his Burrough of Words of diverse Significations &c, Nay Roger, G. F.’s Words are plain; and thou art in thy Burrough, that seest them not. And then thou sayest: G. F. wrests and winds, what is for his wicked Ends. This is false, and thy own Condition; and wherein doth he wrest, when he speaketh plain Scripture?

[Saying my interlocutor is “in his Burrough of Words“ is 17th Century Speak for: I know you are, but what am I? But Fox has a point, he simply quoted Revelations and R.W. thought he was making things up?]

R.W. And thou sayest: You shall never take him in distinguishing and defining, what is the First and Second Resurrection.

Answ. What need he, when John hath plainly defined and distinguished it in his Revelations?

R. W. And thou sayest: The Truth is, as soon as they hearken to this Familiar Spirit, they are so elevated, that they be in Heavenly Glory: the Resurrection is past, and (with K. Agag’s Dream) the Bitterness of Death and Wrath is past for ever with them.

Answ. This thou mightst have applied at home, with thy Familiar Spirit, thou speakest of. And dost thou not here again abuse G. F’s. Words? doth he say here, That the Resurrection is past? and are they not the Priest’s M. B’s. Words of Passing Through the First and Second Resurrection? But where doth the Scripture say, They that have part in the First Resurrection, there remaineth a Torment for such at the last day and Wo, as the Priest saith? thou shouldst have made this good by Scripture. And as for the Thorns and Thistles, thou mayest keep them at home, which grow in thy own Nature.

1822 / mid-1600s reprint of The Whole Works of John Lightfoot, edited by Rev. John Rogers Pitman, from a sermon of John Lightfoot (1602–1675) firmly a 17th-century sermon, bold emphasis added, p.195–196:

Shall we dispute, whether the first or second resurrection be the greater work, the greater business?

…

A second parallel of the first and second resurrection, is in regard of the instrumental cause of both. The second resurrection will be effectuated by the all-powerful voice of Christ, calling all out of their graves.

1816 reprint of mid-18th century text, The General History of the Christian Church, Sixth Ed., Charles Walmesley aka Signor Pastorini (1722–1797), bold emphasis added, p. 67–68:

And this admission of their souls into glory without their bodies, is called the first resurrection. But the souls of the others, who were guilty of any of the above-named crimes, lived not the life of the before mentioned happy souls, but were condemned to hell-flames, which is the first death. Nor will they revive or recover life till the thousand years be finished at the general resurrection, when they will indeed be drawn for a moment out of the infernal pit and be reunited to their bodies, but to be replunged together into eternal damnation, which is the second death. In like manner, when at the last day the bodies of the just are made partners with their souls in bliss, that may be termed the second resurrection. — We see here inculcated that known maxim of the Christian religion; that the souls of the just who die in the Lord enter into heavenly glory, though their bodies do not participate of it till after the general resurrection; and the same holds with regard to the punishment of the souls of the wicked.

1816, Thomas Southwood Smith, p. 194:

If it be just to give a literal interpretation to this phrase, it seems to warrant the conclusion that the wicked will die a second time; yet it is not uffirmed that they will never rise again. Of a first resurrection we are certain, and we have no assurance that there will not be a second. There is no passage of scripture hostile to the conclusion. Should it be inferred, that a second resurrection will not take place, because there is no express promise to authorize the expectation, it may with equal justice be concluded, that there will, because it is not positively affirmed that there will not. Of these opposite inferences, the latter is at least as well founded as the former: nay, it is much more so: for the first is incompatible with some passages of scripture; the second is contradicted by none, and is directly supported by several, particularly by those which speak of a first resurrection; for a first resurrection implies a second.

1822, John Fry, The Second Advent of the Glorious Epiphany of Our Lord Jesus Christ, vol. II, ch. 3, “The Revelation”, sec. 32, “The Installation of the risen Saints with Christ, in his Kingdom upon Earth,” and sec. 33. “The Continuance of the History of Christ’s Kingdom till after the general Judgement” p.473–481, esp. p.480, bold emphasis added:

We are here, then, reading of the common hope and expectation of all the faithful people of God. They all live and reign with Christ a thousand years. It follows:

“But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.”

That a proper and not a figurative resurrection is intended in this place, if the analogy of prophecy had not made it plain, might be demonstrated from this verse. It must be admitted, unless the resurrection be denied altogether, that the living of the rest of the dead here mentioned-supposing them the same as those mentioned in ver. 12, of which no reasonable doubt can be raised-is a true and literal resurrection. Of course, then, the living of the dead before spoken of—those that are counted “blessed and holy as having part in the first resurrection,” in distinction from that, the second resurrection,—must be real and literal also. If the one is figurative, the other must be figurative too; and if the one be literally true, so is the other, by every example of the language of prophecy which is at all applicable to the case. We learn, then, from this passage, that a period of a thousand years intervenes between the first and the general resurrection; and that during the same period the saints reign with Christ upon earth. During the same period, too, we have seen Satan is to be bound. This period is what is known by the term Millennium. Whether this number is to be taken as the other numbers in this vision, a day for a year, so as to denote a period of three hundred and sixty thousand years, or whether it is to be taken strictly, as it is generally understood, we seem to have no means of ascertaining. But whatever be the space of time intended, it evidently marks off a particular period of the reign of Christ and his saints.

1819, Archibald Halliday, An Investigation of the Paraphrase, p.59, bold emphasis added:

As the resurrection, at the last day, is termed the second resurrection, by reason that the conversion of the saints is termed the first resurrection; so the sentence against the damned, and casting them into the lake of first and brimstone, is termed the second death; from man’s lapse in Adam being the first death, the reprobate then will be finally destroyed at the last day, or day of judgment. But if it were possible that a deliverance from that final misery could be attained, such a deliverance would be a third resurrection; which to hope for, would be the highest presumption, as there is not a promise in scripture for that opinion, but many are against it. To dream of a third resurrection, or rather, in their language, a restoration therefore, is a vain and presumptuous delusion; for as death is a destruction on the vessels of wrath, not a discipline; so the second death is final and endless destruction.

1825, Archibald Mason, A Scriptural View, referencing John Fry’s work on The Second Advent, p.205–214, esp. 209–210, bold emphasis added:

At the 5th verse, it receives the name of the first resurrection, “This is the first resurrection.” This is said of the resurrection of the souls of the martyrs. This name imports that there will be a second resurrection. This second resurrection is mentioned in the beginning of that verse. “But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.” At the expiration of the thousand years, and at the commencement of the little season, the souls of the rest of the dead shall live. As the souls of the martyrs shall live and reign with Christ on the earth throughout the thousand years; so the souls of the rest of the dead, who were opposed to the beheaded saints, shall live and endeavour to reign on the earth with Satan during the little season. Their leader, their character, their number, their actions, and their end, are distinctly stated in the 7th, 8th, 9th, and 1Oth verses of this chapter. In this vision, two resurrections are foretold; the former at the beginning of the Millennium, and the latter at the commencement of the little season. Neither of them has any connection with the general resurrection of the bodies of the just and the unjust, at the day of judgment, at the end of time; Of this resurrection and judgment we have a description in the five verses at the end of the chapter. “Then Christ shall come in the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. Then shall be sit on a great white throne. Then the dead, small and great, shall stand before him. At that time all that are in the graves shall hear his voice and come forth, some to the of life, and some to the resurrection of condemnation. At that time, the sea shall give up the dead that are in it, and death and the grave shall deliver up the dead that are in them; and they shall be judged every man according to his works.” And, at that time, the books shall be opened, and another book shall be opened, which is the book of life, and the dead shall be judged out of those things which were written in the books. The result of this judgment is also declared. For whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire; and all who are written in the Lamb’s book of life shall enter into, and enjoy the heavenly city. From this literal resurrection of the bodies of all the dead, the first resurrection of the souls of the beheaded saints, and the second resurrection of the rest of the dead are entirely different. They differ in their season. Betwixt the first and second resurrections a thousand years must be fulfilled, and the little season must expire between the second resurrection, and the general resurrection of all men at the last day. They differ as to their design. The first resurrection will be accomplished, that the world may be filled with saints; the second resurrection will take place, and the world shall be filled with wicked men; but in the [general] resurrection, all mankind shall be judged, time shall come to an end, and all men shall be fixed in their unchangeable state, the wicked suffering everlasting punishment, and the righteous enjoying life eternal. They differ also in the inspired descriptions that are given of them. The objects of the first resurrection, are souls, and the souls of beheaded saints only; they are said to live; this life is called a resurrection; they attain to great holiness, for they are Priests; they are exalted to high dignity, because they are kings; they are with Christ, they live and reign with him, according to his appointment, on the ground of his purchase, and in the enjoyment of his special presence, fellowship and care, and this shall be enjoyed on the earth, only for a thousand years. The objects of the second resurrection, are the rest of the dead; or, in conformity to the other resurrection, the souls of the rest of the dead; they are said to live; they fight against the Church of Christ; and the cause of their life and actions is the deception of the wicked one. But the account of the general resurrection, is essentially different from these.

Note that he mentions three: first resurrection, second resurrection, and the general resurrection. Hence Alma in Alma 40 in discussing the first resurrection and how many resurrections there may be “it mattereth not,” meaning if John wrote “first resurrection,” we know there is more than one, but “it mattereth not” if there be two, or three, or more.

1827 W.C. Davis, A Treatist on the Millenium, p.28, bold emphasis added:

But it is thought that because this is called the first resurrection, it is therefore a literal resurrection of the bodies of the witnesses from the dead; they take it for granted, without a single syllable of proof, that the second resurrection, is a resurrection of the bodies of the wicked. They argue thus; if the second resurrection be a literal one, the first resurrection must of course be literal also. This argument takes it for granted that the second resurrection is a literal resurrection from the dead. But let us dispute this point; then the basis of the argument falls, and the argument is good for nothing. I am truly surprised that such a learned and sensible man as Bishop Newton should argue and attempt to demonstrate his point on such flimsy ground. (See Newton on the prophecies, Vol. 2. p. 346 and 347.)

That a first resurrection argues a second, I grant; but I would beg leave to deny that either of them will be a literal resurrection; because the text does not say so, neither explicitly, nor by fair construction. And I humbly affirm the contrary; and say that they will both be mystical resurrections, to wit, the resurrection of souls and not of bodies. This is what the text means, and further it saith not; and I refer to the arguments already stated above. After the first and second resurrection, we have an accurate account from the eleventh verse of this chapter to the end, of a third resurrection, which is called, the general resurrection of all, both good and bad, and also of the final day of Judgment. And this account contradicts their whole theory. This is a literal resurrection of the bodies both of saints and sinners. “And saw a great white throne, and him who sat on it— And I saw the dead small and great stand before God And the sea gave up the dead, which were in it, and death and hell, [death and the grave] delivered up the dead which were in them; and they were Judged every man according to their works.” This is evidently a plain literal account of the final resurrection from the dead, at the last day.

…

The first resurrection is a spiritual one, metaphorically called a resurrection; it will be effected by the spirit of Christ accompanying the gospel on the hearts of sinners, causing them universally, (or at least generally) to possess the true spirit of piety and religion, like the martyrs of old, who stood and bled and died for the cause of Christ. The second will be a metaphorical resurrection, and it might be called with propriety, a diabolical resurrection, because it will be effected by the influences of Satan loosed from his prison, inclining the hearts of the children of men to evil, stirring them up to persecute the church, with the same disposition as used to reign in the old heathens, Mahometans, and Papists. The third and last resurrection will be a literal one, effected by the almighty power of Christ, who will sound his trumpet and summon all the dead, to come to Judgment, when all, both quick and dead, shall be judged according to their works.

Very un-Christian, consigning all Catholics (Papists) to the diabolical resurrection of the children of men to evil. Let no one think that Christians were ever united except in their hatred of Islam and atheism and their willingness to argue endlessly with their arbitrary interpretations of tricky passages of the Bible.

< Back to Index