Search results

I believe what is taught in scripture and I'm backing up my view with scripture. You are not. You are trying to back up your claims with logic that you are not applying consistently throughout the Bible. Somehow, you think that what Paul wrote in Ephesians only applies to that time period, but...

If you can't back up your claims with scripture, then why are you here? This forum is a place where people discuss end times Bible doctrine (and sometimes other Bible doctrines) and debate is expected. It's also expected that you should be able to back up your claims with scripture instead of...

The church is simply a term that refers to those who belong to Christ. That includes you and me and all who belong to Christ. This comes back to what I was saying before. You know that the book of John was primarily addressed to believers who were alive at that time, right? Yet, you have no...

All of us here believe that we are getting understanding from the Holy Spirit, so saying that alone is not enough to explain how you are coming to your conclusions. If the Spirit is giving you your understanding, then you should be able to clearly explain the truth as the Spirit has shared it...

I disagree with a lot of his preterist views as well, and I don't hide my disdain for preterism itself, but he's a good example for us of how to have a respectful discussion. I appreciate that about him. Let's you and I try to do better as well. Deal? That's what I would prefer rather than the...

You seem to have implied it. It comes across that way to me when you say that Ephesians 5:22-32 only applies to the ones that Paul wrote to. How do you decide that to be the case, but then decide that other things he said apply more than to just them and still apply to all believers today? How...

I think this discussion needs to end soon because we just are not able to understand each other. Which has pretty much always been the case, so this is nothing new. The problem I see with your view is that your framework should not prioritize Matthew 24:4-34 over Matthew 24:35-25:56. But, it...

That's an odd way of thinking of the WHOLE earth. Even if the earth there referred to the known world of the Roman empire, you are arguing that the verse is referring to just parts of the earth rather than the WHOLE earth. It's not a strong argument. No, I was particularly wanting to know what...

The problem with this view is that Jesus was not considered to be sitting on the right hand of the Father until He ascended to heaven, so it seems to be something associated with Him being in heaven, not on the earth. This doesn't mean He's sitting on a literal throne in heaven, but it does mean...

So, you're saying you think the references to Jerusalem in verses 16-19 refer to the new Jerusalem. In that case, why do you think the references to Jerusalem in verses 1, 2 and 4 refer to earthly Jerusalem? Zechariah 14:16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem...

Yes, and here is what Paul revealed about that prophecy. 1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God...

If you're going to insist that Zechariah 14 is describing the same day of the Lord as 2 Peter 3:10-12, then you need to be able to explain how to reconcile the two passages, but you make no attempt to do so. You do know enough that the new heavens and new earth are ushered in upon the arrival of...

I haven't paid close enough attention to his view to know how he interprets verse 4, but I did see that he referenced John 7:37-39 in relation to Zechariah 14:8, which I think is a viable possibility of what the verse is talking about. Can you just stop referencing me in any post where you are...

Does the rest of scripture mean anything to you when you interpret Zechariah 14? Paul said we will meet Jesus in the air when He returns, not in Jerusalem. Nowhere does scripture ever teach that Jesus is returning to Jerusalem. It says He is coming down from heaven in like manner as He ascended...

Where do 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 indicate that the day of the Lord is an event that centers around earthly Jerusalem rather than being a global event that affects the entire world?

You don't even know how I interpret it. You foolishly try to accuse me of interpreting it the way preterists do. I don't. I'm not a preterist. So, your comments about me are trash and misrepresent my view. I think there is exactly one Amil that I've seen who interprets it in a literal, futurist...

The day of the Lord is a global event involving global destruction (1 Thessalonians 5:2-3, 2 Peter 3:10-12). It will affect the entire earth. Zechariah 14 describes things only related to the area in and around Jerusalem. What is described in Zechariah 14 does not match what is described in 1...

I disagree that there's any direct connection between the parable that Jesus told in Matthew 22:1-13 and Revelation 19:11-21. The armies referenced in Matthew 22:7 refer to the actual armies who destroyed Jerusalem, which were the Roman armies. Revelation 19 does not refer to the Roman armies...

Looking at it this way, that would mean nothing in the Bible is for us today. The book of John was address to certain people of that time, so does that mean John 3:16 no longer applies today? Think about what you're saying here. What Paul taught in his letters was not intended for his audience...

That is meaningless. They do not desire to worship and praise the one true God. If they did they would believe in Jesus. You are just not getting it. John 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me. 47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe...