Search results

Can you tell me your understanding of the parable up to and including verse 7? Matthew 22:1 And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said: 2 “The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son, 3 and sent out his servants to call those who were...

Look at how you don't bother to address what I said. Is Acts 10:34-35 not in your Bible? Where will Jesus return? In the air (1 Thessalonians 4:14-17), after which the judgment will occur (Matthew 25:31-46) when the heavens and earth, as we know them pass away (Revelation 20:11) . But, you'd...

No one but Jesus has an immortal spiritual body. Paul made it very clear that we will all be changed (all believers) at the same time when the last trumpet sounds. Only then will we have immortal spiritual bodies and the last trumpet hasn't sounded yet. You are in serious error with your full...

It is you who is not understanding what we're saying. You tried to say before that if it was talking about physical destruction of the city and the sanctuary that would mean that it would have to be talking about a literal flood of water. We showed you that's not the case and you still aren't...

You misunderstood the question. For one thing, that does not say that the Lord regenerated her heart. As you so often do, you are reading things into the scripture that aren't there. But, what I was meaning for you to address is whether or not her heart had been regenerated before anyone came to...

In your view, regeneration involves God regenerating someone's hardened heart to make it so that they will repent and believe? Is that not correct? If so, do you claim that Lydia's heart was regenerated already even before hearing the gospel? Romans 1:18-21 makes it clear that no one has any...

Do you claim that Lydia was born again before she heard the gospel (Acts 16:14)? Do you claim that her father was the devil before hearing the gospel despite the fact that she was already a worshiper of God before the gospel was preached to her?

So, what is your answer to my question? It's very difficult to get you to actually answer a question for some reason. It seems that you do not believe that the Bible prophesies the destruction of Jerusalem and the second temple anywhere. Is that correct? Yes or no, please. No, it clearly is...

It's not my opinion. When someone keeps claiming that I'm a preterist even after being told many times that I'm not, then that person is lying about me. You have been told many times that a preterist is someone who believes that all or most of the Olivet Discourse, the book of Revelation as well...

I've already told you I don't know how many times that I agree with your understanding of the passage in terms of who all of those references are talking about and you're still asking me this? I interpreting the references to Messiah the prince in verse 25 as well as the references to the...

It's referring to the physical destruction of Jerusalem and the temple and figuratively describing it as being with a flood because of how the Roman armies would go into the entire city and overwhelm it and destroy it. It was figuratively like a wave of soldiers coming in and flooding the city...

That is the point I've been making as well, but the argument is being made that the "he" in verse 27 must refer to "the prince that shall come" in verse 26 and that is simply not the case. The Hebrew grammar allows that it can be pointing back to the last individual focused on in the previous...

Yes, that's one prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple and it's also mentioned in Luke 19:41-44, Luke 21:6-7, Luke 21:20-24, Matthew 22:7, Matthew 24:1-2, Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 3:1-2 and Mark 13:14-20. Some of those are parallel passages, obviously. I'm trying to see if he...

His people, the Jews, were responsible for the destruction of the city and the sanctuary because of having rejected Christ. So, that's a viable way of looking at it. First, the prophecy mentions Messiah the prince in verse 25, and then it mentions the Messiah (not Messiah the prince this time...

You don't have to be a preterist to see it that way. That's where you are flat out wrong. You acknowledge that what happened in 70 AD was God's wrath and punishment against the unbelieving Jews, right? So, what is wrong with believing that the Bible prophesied that event? That's not preterist...

Yes, I know that. Where did you get this from what I said? Of course I know that and never said otherwise. Go back and read the whole discussion so that you can know what it's about. This discussion was about whether Enoch and Elijah had ascended to heaven (the third heaven/paradise). I'm...

I never said that a date was given. Why can't you ever just respond to what I'm actually asking instead of resorting to strawman arguments? Let me try again. Do you believe that what ended up happening in 70 AD, which you acknowledge was God's wrath and judgment against unbelieving Jews, was...

When people lie, what do you call them? No matter how many times I tell you I'm not a preterist, you keep falsely accusing me of being one. That is a lie. So, if you don't like being called a liar, then stop lying about me. I don't! I just read one of your posts where you acknowledge that what...

So, which verses in the Bible do you think prophesy about that event of God's wrath and judgment against unbelieving Jews that occurred in 70 AD, if any?

Why would the consummation not refer to the previously mentioned physical destruction of the city and the sanctuary which came about because of the Jews having cut off the Messiah and continuing to mostly reject Him right up until the city and the sanctuary were destroyed?