Search results

Let's not confuse topics. We were talking about Satan's role and disposition at the end. Here we saw that Satan is not bound, but he can attack and accuse the saints. Not only this, we saw that Satan had been removed from heaven, signifying that he was no longer eternal. The verse you quoted...

I disagree. Please compare the following two passages. Revelation 12:6-8 Then the woman fled into the wilderness where she has a place prepared by God, so that there she would be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days. And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging...

I take issue with your assessment that my views are ridiculous. If you disagree, that's fair, but dismissing my views without evidence doesn't contribute to a productive discussion. The passage describes a battle against the nations, which ends in subjugating them and ruling them with a rod of...

The danger of Confirmation Bias requires that we examine the text independently first.

If they die by the sword, then they aren't put into the sieve, are they?

Who told you that insults are helpful? You don't seem to understand exegetical principles. We are examining a passage of scripture, attempting to derive the intended meaning from the immediate context. Revelation 19 should be considered when looking at Revelation 20 because the topic has not...

While that is true, this idea is not taught in Amos 9:9 where God is giving hope to Israel, who will go into exile.

My statement is grounded in an objective analysis, as I explored the common thematic elements present in chapters 19 and 20. I consider the seamless flow of the narrative and the absence of certain key indicators typically employed to signal a shift in subject, particularly from deliverance to...

Maybe, but it is not unreasonable to conclude that the two chapters are chronological. The onus is on those who must prove that they aren't chronological. The rest of scripture does not necessarily rule out the Premillennial position. I would say that the balance of the evidence favors it.

Can you be specific? I don't see a reference to the righteous in that context.

You are making the same exegetical mistake as WPM, not taking into account that Revelation 19 describes Jesus doing battle with nations on earth and Revelation 20 gives no evidence that the venue has moved up into heaven. Revelation 20:1 implies that the angel is coming down to earth from...

Your objection, as stated above, seems rather ungrounded, as it highlights either a lack of objectivity or a reluctance to engage in a balanced discussion regarding this important issue. Those who strive to maintain objectivity in their interpretation will readily concede that Revelation chapter...

You inserted ideas into Amos 9:9 that aren't there.

Marks is right. The most straightforward literal interpretation is that Jesus is ruling on earth for a thousand years. The onus is on you to show that John intended to say otherwise.

I get that you don't want to talk to me. What happened to posting so that others might benefit? Were you joking?

Is that the best you can do?

I meant what I said.

I asked for something easy to provide.

Defend your ideas from the scripture. Show me where Amos makes the distinction you want to make.

I would like a response to what I said. How does it matter whether or not I am a heretic? The truth stands independently, and you can defend your position. However, perhaps you are unable to provide a rational defense of your stance because reason was not the basis for your conclusion.