John sees our souls in the same way I have seen the soul of my beloved wife. And yes we do reign with Christ in our 'glorified' bodies received for the Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:7-8) which occurs before the Return of Christ as King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Rev 19:11-21 and the events of Rev 20. At the Marriage Supper of the Lamb is the Bride of Christ who are the Old and New Testament saints the Lord has brought home to Him and those martyred for Him during the Great Tribulation.
Don't you think we will have our 'glorified' bodies at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb?
According to the text, John explicitly says he sees souls who "were beheaded". These are dead people. These are people who have passed on. They are no longer living. I don't think that is how you 'see the soul of [your] beloved wife' (at least I hope not). Interesting, how the literal interpretation doesn't allow for your view. These are dead people! John makes a point of specifically mentioning that!
"And yes we do reign with Christ in our 'glorified' bodies received for the Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:7-8)"
I looked in 19:7-8. I didn't see any mention of 'glorified' bodies. Furthermore, don't we reign with Christ now? Ephesians 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) 6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
Paul is speaking of the 'here and now'. He declares that we "sit together in heavenly places". John declares that he "saw thrones, and they sat upon them". Strikingly similar language.
Look again at what Paul says in vs. 5,6: "Even when we were dead in sins, [God] hath quickened us together with Christ. And hath raised us up together..."
Again, with strikingly similar language John mentions (vs 4,5): "and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years...This is the first resurrection."
"which occurs before the Return of Christ as King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Rev 19:11-21 and the events of Rev 20."
It does? Where do you get that idea from? Oh, your ~assuming~ Revelation is written in 'strictly chronological' order. Goodness, even the Gospel narratives aren't written so. Sorry, the events described in 19:17-21 and 20:7-10 are descriptions of the same event -albeit from a different perspective. Both passages even draw images from the same O.T. passage -Ezekiel 38-39.
Now, if your going to tell me that Rev ~is~ strictly chronological, I expect this 'chronology' to hold up through the ~entire~ book (we both know that isn't true) -or- I expect to see some indication of this fact from Revelation itself (we both know that it doesn't). Why should I ~assume~ or even 'take your word' that Rev is strictly chronological when not even the Gospel narratives are.
If Rev isn't ~strictly~ chronological, I expect you should be able to give me some indication why ch. 19-20 are indeed chronological. You will have to give me some indication that the only ~legitimate~ reading of ch. 19-20 is a 'chronological' reading.
I will warn you, that if you ~insist~ that ch. 19-20 are indeed chronological and only chronological, you will do great damage to your interpretion. I say this because if you ~insist~ that ch. 19-20 are indeed chronological, I will ~hold~ you to this for the entirety of those chapters. (Of course, I'm not going to tip my hat ~yet~. I'm more interested that you think about this and look at what the words of ch. 20 carefully and take them for what they say, not what I contend is read into them.)
"At the Marriage Supper of the Lamb is the Bride of Christ who are the Old and New Testament saints the Lord has brought home to Him and those martyred for Him during the Great Tribulation."
Again, if we don't ~assume~ ch. 19 and 20 are ~necessarily~ chronological, there is good scriptural warrant for concluding that the Marriage Supper of the Lamb doesn't ~necessarily~ happen before the 1000 years. In fact, there is excellent scriptural warrent for concluding that the Marriage Supper of the Lamb could not possibly happen before the 1000 years.
"Don't you think we will have our 'glorified' bodies at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb?"
Why, of course I do.
Now, I have answered your questions as best I could. I have yet to see some answers to many (any?) of my questions.
Why does Jesus speak specifically of a ~singular~ Day of Resurrection (John 6:39,40,44,54)?
Why does Jesus speak specifically of an hour in which ALL in their graves are raised up from the dead and Judged: some to the resurrection of life and some to the resurrection of death (John 5:28,29) According to Pre-Millenial theory, the resurrection to life happens before the millenium and the resurrection to death happens 1000 years later. Why does Jesus specifically and seemingly literally speak of a singular 'hour'?
Why does Peter, in his vivid description of 2 Peter 3, fail to mention the temporary '1000' year reign of Christ on earth which is supposedly to happen after the 2nd Coming (2 Peter 3:4,9) and before he destroys the old Heaven and Earth (2 Peter 3:7,10-13)? Why has he not mentioned this alleged event?
(A new one for you): Why, as is recorded in Acts 3:21, does Peter specifically declare of Christ: "Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began." He specifically says that the heavens must recieve Christ ~until~ the 'restitution of all things'. This is quite consistent with his statements in 2 Peter 3 that when Christ comes (the Day of the Lord) the Heavens and the Earth will be destroyed (the Day of the Lord) and the New Heavens and the New Earth are ushered in (2 Peter 3:13). Now, it can hardly be said of the alleged 1000 year millenial reign is the 'restitution of all things'. According to pre-millenial theory, we see evil rear its ugly head once again at the end of the '1000' years. Death, war and destruction are all still in the cards when the 1000 years is introduced. This can hardly be called the 'restitution of all things'. Now, why would Peter declare that Christ would remain in heaven ("Whom heaven must receive until"...) if the New Heavens and the New Earth ("restitution of all things") don't happen for another 1000 years?
Jean