Search results

So, let me see if I get this straight. You're saying from the get-go that anyone that doesn't agree with your interpretation of Revelation is not possessing of "true spiritual enlightenment" and "won't be able to grasp it"...in other words, if we don't agree with you, we're dumb, wrong, and...

Well, I'm not sure what else I can say on the animal sacrifice issue. I really don't think it's scriptual, and I really don't think it will be Christ honoring. But I've made my case, and I suppose that's all I can do! Ok...Isaiah 65:20...it might be best here to quote someone who has done some...

Okay, first off, it is extremely dodgy hermenuetics to dismiss a doctrine based on a single word not being there. Especially when other words that mean the same thing are present. There are so many verses and passages that speak of his return, that it takes an obstinate person, one who has...

Annnd...once again, I don't understand what you're saying. You say "who is 'we'?" Well...my reply is that obviously I meant "we" to be those that are In Christ. Christians, those saved by Christ's sacrifice. Redeemed by his blood. Set free by his sacrifice. I could go on, but you get my drift...

They need a "feeling sheepish" emoji! It was hard to compact it any further because a lot of it sort of has to be explain from a "we come from this direction" sort of thing... Anyway...I won't suffer from hurt feelings if you can't slog your way through it!!

I do understand...sort of, what you are saying. I'm just struggling to see if it makes sense to me. Let me try and use an analogy to explain how I see this: In the lead up to Christmas, kids are always keen for their presents. In their eagerness, they often stare at their presents, wondering...

Now, I should probably touch on Revelation 20, since that’s the actual “thousand years” passage! The Thousand Years Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil...

So…there is a basic layout of our logic. We read these passages as saying “when Jesus returns all these things will happen.” We don’t see that there is any inserted time gaps, or indeed any way to really assert two different comings of Christ. Could they be there…I suppose, sure, with God...

We also know from scripture that at Christ’s return he will judge the nations: “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd...

@Hidden In Him ...as per your suggestion, I've put together what *I hope* is a fairly easy to understand summary (althought it sort of turned out longer than I thought...sorry!) of why Amillennialists believe what they do. Was aiming for not preachy, just straight info... I've started a thread...

Hi! I hope you don't think that me always disagreeing with you is me getting contentious or something, but, as I am, you are just enjoying the back and forh of ideas here. To be honest, while I don't see all this, I'm hardly going to be disappointed to be proven wrong, am I? Where Christ is...

Hi! Now I'm confused...because I thought that's where I sort of landed! Did I explain it really poorly?! That in Christ (spiritually) there is neither Jew nor Greek (as per Galatians 3), but we can clearly see that there are differences (in flesh), such a male, female, master, slave (not so much...

Hi HIH :). Well...I have two thoughts on this. First, I would ponder at Paul's arguments that in Christ, Jews and Gentiles have become one. So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of...

What does Phil 2:6 has to say about Christ's post-resurrection body? That whole passage is talking about the incarnation...his coming and the purpose of it. It does not talk about his post-resurrection body. So...not sure how that verse is backing up your 'disagreeing'. You disagree about...

You think it immature, but for those who clearly see scripture saying that Christ became fully man, your insistance that he 'only looked like it', like some sort of cheap ruse so he could blend in with the locals, is the cheap shot, taking so much out of the incarnation and what it meant...

Um....pardon me....but...isn't that what we do every time we read scripture? Aren't you saying, in effect, that it is "a fail" to try and understand scripture when we read it? How then, do you propose we understand God if not by the very word he has given us for this purpose?

I think you totally missed my point. Let me take a step backwards and explain a little more carefully: Yes, Jesus, in his first body, was pure, as was his spirit. However, after his death, he had a NEW body. Christians, after accepting Christ, are giving a new spirit. It's still not perfect and...

Semantics. I'm sorry, but it really seems like you're reaching here. The bible says that God became man. Better men than you and I have struggled to understand how that could be, exactly, but the bible cleary says it. I'm sorry if that upsets your world view...but there it is. He didn't just...

Yes, God is spirit. Yes, God's spirit is powerful, as is God. Yes, Christ is part of all that...in the Trinity. But all that is still not The Holy Spirit, which is clearly painted as separate from God The Father, and The Son. The Spirit is spoken of as a 'he', he's spoken of as a personality...

Jesus removed that buffer, that veil. In him we have access to God, regardless to what stage we are at. We can all come before the throne with confidence (heb 4:16).