Search results

An interesting question to explore might be this. Do tares know they are tares? For example. If a tare equals a wolf in sheep's clothing, do they know they are a wolf in sheep's clothing?

Why can't you grasp that I am only arguing against that only OSAS is Biblical, NOSAS isn't? Are you seriously going to argue that OSAS is not Biblical? That there is not one single person once saved always saved, that every single saved person goes to hell? That's what it would mean if OSAS is...

Meaning the 1st and 2nd temple, obviously.

Can you point out in any of those passages where it ever says the end has come? We can't ignore that part in Matthew 24:14-----and then shall the end come.

The following, no person who believes that only OSAS is Biblical but NOSAS isn't, is going to be able to dispute the following below. Because if that one does or attempts to, it will clearly, undeniably, expose that person as purposely being deceitful and intellectually dishonest. One cannot...

I guess that's debatable about Judas then, in regards to whether he was initially saved or not. I mentioned him since I assumed everyone agrees that he wasn't in a saved state when he died.

What I basically mean is this. In order to be saved in the end one has to persevere unto the end. Meaning to the end of their life, or unto the 2nd coming. Whichever one might apply in their case. But if one falls away before they die and that they are in a fallen away state when they die, that...

Sometimes in order to arrive at the truth of something requires that there is an opposite to take into consideration. For example, the following. Revelation 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will...

What I believe is this. Both OSAS and NOSAS are Biblical rather than only one is the other isn't. That might sound contradictory, yet it isn't. Take Paul, for example. Obviously, OSAS is applicable to him since he remained in a saved state all the way up unto death. While OTOH, someone like...

That passage isn't teaching it is impossible for them to be saved. It is teaching that if they fall away after having been saved it is then impossible for them to regain their initial saved status at that point. IOW, that passage is yet another passage that proves NOSAS is Biblical.

In the Discourse, is Jesus all over the place? Where one minute He is talking about first century events, then the next minute He is talking about events involving His 2nd coming, then the next minute He is once again talking about 1st century events? So on and so on. An example. Matthew 24:14...

Yet someone else that understands some of these things in the same manner I do. Great post! Very well reasoned.

Logically, that's what the Amil view should have happening if Amil was actually true. But since Amil isn't true that's why the Amil view doesn't agree with the text. Instead of what the text plainly says--that he should deceive the nations no more while he is bound---Amil can't have it meaning...

Revelation 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests : and we shall reign on the earth. How about here, for one? Compare with the following. Both have what I underlined in common. Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second...

The problem in my case might not be your view, but might be that I'm not fully grasping what you are meaning. It's going over my head for some reason. I'm not entirely certain what you are trying to say over all. In the meantime, I'm still thinking along these lines below. Personally, I think...

A 'place' whether spiritual or literal, would have to be 'location', would it not? If you had said this instead---and I’m guessing it’s a spiritual condition--in this case a location of some kind wouldn't be applicable, since it doesn't imply a location while 'a place' does. If meaning a...

Apparently, I do though, the fact I think the thousand years are the first thousand years of the NHNE, and that I take the ones meant in Zechariah 16, for example, to be mortals. Is history going to go down like this? To this day not one single mortal has ever lived an entire thousand years. A...

What you are not factoring is that he does not stay bound all the way up unto being cast into the LOF. he is loosed a little season first. The point being, if everything you brought up applies to his binding, what does all of that mean when he is no longer bound? It has to mean the opposite of...

Now you need to show how all that doesn't contradict Revelation 3:21, the fact that verse teaches, in light of Matthew 25:31, for instance, that overcomers don't sit with Christ in Christ's throne until He returns first.

You are now Amil and no longer Premil? The OP is arguing Amil.