Search results

I would not NEED to go “on and on” if you would simply stop skirting the issue….which is the glaringly obvious reality that the passages you are attempting to use to support your ideas do not say what you say they do. I have repeatedly asked for you to show me from scripture where you get your...

I’d have to…perhaps somewhat reluctantly (:p) agree that there biblical validity for a Millennial period from some of these OT passages, just in how they speak of it. Where I struggle with it is how we then come to the NT and find nothing similar; we have this age, and the age to come; this age...

If you cannot take that question seriously, we’ve reached the very heart of the issue. And, well, you’ve answered it anyway. John 10:30-33 I and the Father are one.” The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which...

Are you claiming divinity?

Yes…the argument always seems to go something like this: “my authority to disregard/change/add to/interpret as I choose/special revelation…comes FROM the scriptures themselves” Your problem is this: you believe the bible is telling you to “listen to your spirit-led interpretation!” But when...

Well….you could attempt to provide biblical proof that Christ’s body (the church) is one with God, rather than ‘in’ him. All verses/passages you’ve provides thus far only supports my view; that Christ and the Father are one. That the body is one. That through the Spirit we are ‘in’ Christ and he...

Forgive me, but I thought you were referencing the parable Jesus told in Matt 13…the one about the wheat and the tares. And the fact that it discusses this age and the next, but not an intermediary one (the Millennium). So…no…I was not referring to a ‘parable Paul told’ in 1 Thess 4. I agree...

And let me guess. You have the correct interpretation…one that has been revealed to you and now you are here to reveal it to those unenlightened. Like I said: Gnosticism But it is sufficient. And trustworthy. Which many ‘spirits’ and claims are not. You are making some fairly bold claims. And...

If you will recall, I point out that the bible, when it speaks of ‘Oneness’ is directly referring to the relationship either between Christ and the Father (like kind) or between Christians (like kind). When it speaks of being “in”…which is different than being ‘One’…then we see Christians being...

Well….I tend to view the 1000 years as a symbolic representation of the church age. After all, Christ did say that the Kingdom would come in a way that could not be observed, AND that it was already in their midst. And we also know that Christ is ruling and reigning in this age, as well as the...

There is a world of difference between what the bible means by God being ‘in us, and us in him’…and being “one with God”. A difference of likeness and essence, and what the bible tells us of how God dwells with us and in us. John 14:16-20 [16] And I will ask the Father, and he will give you...

I…disagree. Linguistically, it is easy to determine the difference between resurrection and ascension. One was a rising from death, the other was him leaving earth to return to his father. And…I cannot help but feel you are, in your effort to explain our relationship with God and his with us...

Maybe the parable doesn’t ‘go into the future 1000 years’ because there’s not one…? Or…at least, not one in the sense most people would argue.

It’s entirely possible I’m letting my biases and presuppositions sway my understanding of the texts. We all do, even if we’re not aware of it. And yes…one of the reasons I refuse to be dogmatic on my view is because of the…uncertainty around it given the mention of the beheading and the direct...

Forgive me…but the assumption that I have not already “carefully studied” 1 Corinthians, and that also any “careful study” that I might do would automatically produce views similar to yours, is both presumptuous and slightly preposterous. Let’s look at your claim per as 1 Cor 15: “What most...

Well….if we are (and I suppose I mean me here!) supposing that the 1st resurrection is talking of those who are made spiritually alive with Christ….Christians…., then we must suppose that the ‘rest of the dead’ are everyone not found in Christ. Both those alive and dead at his return, unsaved...

I disagree. As, I think, would Paul. 1 Corinthians 15:12-23 Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been...

As I said…it’s a massive assumption that just because God is outside of time (which we must allow since he created it), that he intends for us to ‘land there’ as well. Even being gifted ‘eternity’, can we truly say that we have the capacity to dwell outside time like God? What if that is one of...

With all due respect, you yourself have just allowed that my post has legitimacy. I said that ‘a biblical case can be made’. And you agreed that new birth is, ‘in one sense a resurrection’. I am not being dogmatic on this point…it is not a hill I wish to die upon. But, as I laid out above, I...

There are several different takes on this passage in Revelation. Some, yes, do see it as meaning there must be two resurrections…by which they mean 2 separate physical resurrections. However, there are those, and I am more persuaded by this argument, who believe that the ‘first resurrection’...