Search results

Nor do I, but for different reasons. Something that has crossed my mind in the past is this, in regard to how you interpret Revelation 19 over all. Revelation 14:1 ¶And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name...

Translation then---Is what I submitted maybe hard to refute? I think so and so do you, apparently. I'm supposed to take your interpretations seriously but God forbid you take any of my interpretations seriously. Everything I submit, no matter what the subject, when you disagree with me you try...

Right, I don't believe the Holy Spirit can help anyone understand scripture--not. You missed the point entirely. per the scenario I submitted, 10 different ppl are coming to 10 different conclusions about the same text. All 10 insist the Holy Spirit led them to their conclusions. Assuming...

Whatever. Just lie about why some of us are doing what we are doing at times. That's the Christian way, right? To bear false witness about someone. That doesn't mean you might not be right about some who are doing that. Just don't paint it with a broad brush is all. That's being unfair and...

We should be looking in Ezekiel 47 and Revelation 22 for answers in regard to Zechariah 14:8, not in John 7 instead. Per John 7:37-38 there are better places to look than Zechariah 14:8. Such as Isaiah 55 maybe. In Zechariah 14:8 where does it even hint about anyone believing on someone in that...

IOW, the following block of text MUST be understood like such. BTW, though, Ezekiel was a prophet not a history teacher. Of course though you apparently don't grasp that prophets don't prophesy about past events, they prophesy about events in the future. But let's just ignore that plus ignore...

I didn't rely on anyone. I simply used an an AI after the fact to validate or debunk my reasoning. And you would have known that had you read the rest of my post unless you have reading comprehension or something. So, LOL then, you make zero sense a lot of the time. Scenario--there are 10...

I'll have to think some more in regard to your other points. I can't really address those at this point. Yet I will try and address this point, though. "Revelation 19 can't be revelation 20 because revelation 20 has people consumed by fire and revelation 19 has the bodies being eaten by birds"...

I don't think we need to look for another falling away in the future. I think it begins exactly like you said. Except as Christianity becomes global, thus more are saved, the falling away intensifies. Now instead of it only being possible to fall away per a local scale, it's now possible to fall...

Take the following, for instance. Which, BTW, is the result of the coming meant in verse 5. Zechariah 14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their...

why does any of that have to be connected with Zechariah 14:8 when verse 8 is meaning during verse 11 and that verse 11 contradicts verse 2 not agrees with it? Therefore, verse 2 is fulfilled first, verse 11 is fulfilled later. Even 70 AD contradicted verse 11 if verse 11 was already fulfilled...

So explain why I don't in spite of what I have been arguing throughout? In my view verse 8 matches Revelation 22:1, for one. Revelation 22:1 is NHNE context post the 2nd coming, not first advent context.

In my view in verse 2 Jerusalem is meaning the NT church during great tribulation. And in verse 11it is meaning the new Jerusalem that comes down from God out of heaven(Revelation 21-22). But even so, verses 3-5 involve the DOTL and the 2nd coming. Which agrees with the NT. Great tribulation...

Is this supposed to mean that the first resurrection 2000 years ago explains--and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saint with thee? If yes I obviously disagree. How do you then make that work in verse 4? When Christ rose, since when did that lead to His feet standing upon the mount of...

What you felt you needed to say to me, you got it off your chest. Fine. I'm going to ignore all that and not bother responding to it, though. I'm just going to get down to business, and that is, sticking to the text. And whether or not you are contradicting anything in Zechariah 14. Below is a...

Accomplished, after turning Scripting on. The only option I don't like is that unignore option. Maybe in his case I should ignore that option from now on. It's not like things are ever going to get better with that dude.

I see what the issue is then. Per this browser I'm using, I don't have Scripting turned on. That's why I'm not seeing these options. I can solve that by turning Scripting on. Thanks. As to @Davy it doesn't have to do with disagreements about Scripture so much. It has more to do with the manner...

What is the procedure for putting someone on ignore? I have never put anyone on ignore before and want to put @Davy on ignore. And I couldn't care less that he is also a Premil. So what. The dude aggravates me and I don't want to say things to him that I shouldn't.

Amils often interpret Revelation 20:8 as referring to all the unsaved nations being deceived after the millennium, and they appeal to 2 Thessalonians 2 to support this. But 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is explicitly about apostates---those who fall away from something they were previously part of. You...

I edited it but I bet you still have issues with something. And so what if I bring my doctrine into it? You don't bring your doctrine into it when you are discussing these same verses? Yeah, right. Unlike you, what I'm arguing in that post proves the millennium is post the 2nd coming. But you...