Search results

And guess what those translations support? Reigning with Christ a thousand years. Too bad Amils can't apply any of that to when their proposed millennium is meaning. You would think Revelation 3:21, for one, should be coming to mind. What I'm arguing is that they don't sit on 12 thrones judging...

They are 2 different Jerusalems for sure. Except neither one of them is meaning the literal city in the first century.

1) Zechariah 14:2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. 2) Zechariah 14:11 And...

Apparently, you don't grasp the argument, or that you do except you are ignoring the argument. The argument is this. When the martyrs live and reign with Christ a thousand years, thus have part in the first resurrection, it is meaning after the beast has already ascended out of the pit first...

Since I assume you obviously take the sheep and goats judgment and the great white throne judgment to be one and the same, can you then point out in any of those texts where you see anyone judging anyone other than Christ Himself alone being the one judging everyone? Unless you can prove that...

What should we make of this part? And how long should we assume this involves once it begins? Keeping in mind, it is obviously connected with the following, for one. Matthew 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son...

In my view, and not in the view of most Premils, is because that is where the new Jerusalem will be. No doubt in my mind, some of Zechariah 14 is pertaining to the new Jerusalem, meaning after it comes down from God out of heaven. I basically see the NHNE as a process that begins with the 2nd...

When do you take the thousand years to be meaning? Before the 2nd coming or after the 2nd coming? If the former that makes you either Amil or Postmil. If the latter that makes you Premil. But this doesn't mean you have to agree with everything one of these groups you fit into does.

If your point perhaps has to do with homosexuality, the fact you put 'men' in bold letters, I don't see that making sense of the text based on what this part says---the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. One of those is something good that you would hope to happen to you, the other...

BTW, what I said in regards to Acts 6:13 below, that does not apply to you nor your view. I'm attempting to kill 2 birds with one stone, so to speak. That being, the holy place isn't meaning the city of Jerusalem in Matthew 24:15 nor is it meaning the 2nd temple. Matthew 24:15 When ye...

The fact you are a Premil your view makes zero sense. What do you do with Revelation 20:5 per your view? After all, that's involving a resurrection which means at the beginning of the millennium they remain dead and are not raised from the dead until after the millennium. Except you have them...

You're thinking like I am. The same logic would be true for the 2nd temple, obviously. To use some of your same words 'You cannot have an abomination that makes desolate sitting or standing in that 'holy place' as it is not holy 40 years after Christ died and rose'. What was your position...

I don't disagree with you about those 2 chapters 4 and 5. I'm not a Pretribber. My view of Ezekiel 38-39 is that Christ returns during those events and that it is during the DOTL that He executes His judgment on Gog and his multitude. IOW, I see Ezekiel 39:17-20 involving the same events...

Sounds like we could be somewhat on the same page here, the fact, even in our day and time there are still them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie.

That's not how I'm looking at this. I'm looking at there being them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie, still existing in our day and time, but instead of Revelation 19:21 happening to them as well, they are spared and are meaning some of the ones meant...

AS to that post, only the first paragraph was applicable to that article you submitted. The remainder of that post I was focusing on other things. I tend to do that sometimes, just the way my mind works. I have pretty much been like that my entire life. I can't explain why I'm like that, all I...

What we need to take note of is where Jesus placed in Matthew 24 what He said in Luke 17. Pertaining to Luke 17:31-33, He placed that during great tribulation. Pertaining to what He said in Luke 17 involving 'and the flood came, and destroyed them all', Jesus placed that involving His 2nd...

Dude, I have missed you. Where have you been at? I was just thinking about you, throughout this thread, and here you are again.

The post I made before this one might explain how I'm trying to see some of this. I'm almost afraid to ask, lol. What are your thoughts on that post? It would be something if you actually surprised me for once and admitted that maybe I'm on to something here. Except you are not good at...

I'm at least glad you never used verse 8 to explain verse 7. In the past I have seen others actually do so. Actually then, I agree that what Jesus meant by times and seasons likely involves the DOTL. But in what way would the DOTL involve restoring again the kingdom to Israel? Well, except you...