Search results

Amill does not argue against Genesis. That is an absolute lie. You have NOTHING to support Premill, so you have to resort to lying about Amill instead.

The thousand years begins when Christ begins to reign and when Satan is bound, right? Scripture teaches that Christ began to reign after His resurrection. Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Ephesians 1:19 and his...

Who is saying that Satan's little season begins when the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night? No one. Yet another straw man argument from you. You make no other kind of argument. When will you address what Amills actually believe? What are you talking about here? Just because one Amil...

You do nothing but make straw man arguments. Amills do not say that his binding relates to his general ability to deceive as you understand it. So, we do NOT claim that there is no difference between him being bound and being loosed. Why do you have to resort to misrepresenting Amill? Is it...

Who are you thinking should answer this question? Your straw man? This question is clearly based on the assumption that Satan's binding means he is locked up and completely incapacitated, so it's not a valid question to ask Amills since that is not how we understand his binding.

LOL. Your arguments are WEAK. Trying to relate Adam's age to an imaginary future thousand year earthly kingdom is the WEAKEST argument I've ever seen. You can't be expected to be taken seriously after such a WEAK and DESPERATE argument like that.

So, you apparently believe that the mortals who you believe will somehow survive the return of Christ will all stay alive throughout the supposed future thousand years? You would have to believe that in order to be consistent with your literal interpretation of the passage. And, you apparently...

They do have definitions for the word. Do you understand that the New Testament was written in Greek? The word "generation" in Matthew 24:34 was translated from the Greek word "genea". Here are the definitions for that word... Do you see any definition for the word here that means "the...

Wrong. In the past local event, Jesus was not using hyperbole. Literally no flesh would have been saved in Jerusalem in 70 AD if not for God's intervention. In the future global event of Christ's second coming no unbelievers will survive just as none survived the flood in Noah's day. That is not...

You didn't provide any evidence to back up your claims in the original post. Why should we take you seriously at all when you didn't bother to do that? What was the purpose of your original post? Are you pre-trib? I'm wondering if you're trying to make people think that no one really taught...

I don't think he is doing that. If you have Old Testament scripture that you think the New Testament scriptures you posted are based on, then you certainly can show that. But, you have to do something to show that the NT authors were intending to reference those OT scriptures.

David, stop being so ignorant. I'm talking from my Amil perspective and you know it. What I said is true from my Amil perspective. I don't care if it contradicts your Premil perspective. That is irrelevant. In my understanding of what that means, which is different than yours, he is not doing...

We have seen someone make a claim about what the early church fathers taught before which was proven wrong and he later apologized and admitted that he didn't research the topic first. Now, we are seeing that again. I don't understand why people do that.

Are you admitting that you just made a claim without being an authority on the topic and without doing much research to confirm it?

Don't just post scripture without telling us where you are seeing two harvests (grain harvest and fruit harvest) there. Exegete the text and show us how exactly you are concluding that those texts teach two harvests. Anyone can just post scripture and make claims about it. That is not enough...

You blatantly contradict what Paul taught. He very clearly indicated that the mass falling away from the faith and revealing of the man of sin must happen first before our gathering to Christ at His second coming. 2 Thessalonians 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus...

Yet another straw man argument from a Premill who does not understand what we believe. Notice how they focus on 1 Peter 5:8 and completely ignore 1 Peter 5:9. They focus on the power that Satan has and ignore the power that was taken away from him by Jesus and ignore that we have authority over him.

What are you intending to say here? Do you think Amils disagree with this verse? We don't. Do you even understand what we believe? If you did, you wouldn't try to use this verse to refute it. And, why do you focus on 1 Peter 5:8 and not verse 9? He seeks "whom he may devour", but he can't...

How about you explain why you think Satan is more powerful and influential than Jesus in all His glory? You think that in a short time Satan will be able to completely ruin everything that Jesus does for a thousand years while on the earth in all of His glory. Why would billions rebel against...

Their theories get more and more ridiculous because of their desperation to find something that can support their weak doctrine. They clearly can't address any of our points or answer any of our questions. Any time they try to address something, they just make straw man arguments that address a...