Search results

I added to that post. Did you read rest of it as well? It's as if I'm trying to talk myself into that you might be correct here. I'm trying to be objective, regardless.

I understand now. I will say this, to be fair, your view has some logic to it, thus not unreasonable. I just don't know if you are correct or not. I guess when you really think about it, the fact he hasn't went anywhere at that point, that when He comes again it could indeed mean when He rises...

Aren't you arguing that He comes again after the resurrection, which then logically implies He is preparing a place in heaven while He is dead? I'm trying to debunk your view. None of this is my view. Of course though, I can't debunk your view if I'm misunderstanding it to begin with. It is when...

I don't rely on Commentaries. I can read and reason things for myself. And that I can see who Jesus is addressing at the time and what is required in order for them to be where he is. That he has to come again first. We cannot remove that from the text nor ignore that Jesus said that. It is...

Someone needs to educate you on what a strawman is. A strawman fallacy is when you misrepresent your opponent's position so it is easier to attack. I did the exact opposite---I used their own stated timeline against them. Rev 19---Premils universally place this at the Second Coming, right...

What you are not factoring in, is this. When Jesus died He never ascended into heaven and began preparing a place. He descended into hell, but not the portion pertaining to torment. But you want us to believe that while He was dead those cpl of days that He was in heaven preparing a place...

And your reply here is not juvenile? You didn't even bother to debunk anything if you disagreed with it. Opinions like yours are a dime a dozen, and by themselves prove absolutely zero.

John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. The ones Jesus was addressing at the...

Except it is not until the NJ descends out of heaven from God does the bride then begin living with the groom. John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come...

Matthew 24:4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. 5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. 6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the...

for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. Obviously, before she makes herself ready she is not already ready. And that there is no marriage of the Lamb until the wife has made herself ready first. When are you saying the wife initally made herself ready?

But let's be realistic here pertaining to which U-turn makes more sense. The Post trib U-turn means they rise up from the earth, put on bodily immortality, thus form the armies seen with Jesus in Rev 19, and they together with Jesus, the dead in Christ that rise first, plus those who were...

If you believe that the dead in Christ are presently in heaven with Jesus in a disembodied state, assuming soul sleep is not your position. You then see it making sense for Jesus to bring with Him the dead in Christ who are already in heaven with Him to begin with, to then do a U-turn moments...

The question you asked was, when was Jesus born. I don't know the context of why you asked that to begin with since I haven't read all posts in this thread yet. Therefore, I was only addressing that question. Maybe I took your question out of context, I don't know. Still have some catching up to...

What AI and wrong about what?

Apparently, you missed the point of the analogy. I'm not saying the OT explicitly mentions Revelation 20--1,000 years. The point is that chronological priority doesn't prove two passages are referring to different things. Revelation being written later doesn't prevent earlier Scripture from...

And while you persist in insisting the rapture is Pretrib, in the meantime the GT will have begun and ended, and Christ will have returned after GT while you are still insisting the rapture is Pretrib the entire time.

Using that logic would be like arguing that nothing in the OT is involving the thousand years since the book of Revelation was written after the OT was.

For simplicity, to then start from zero with the remainder. 483 years - 33 get us at the beginning of Jesus's birth per that example. That leaves us 450 years remaining, which then falls at around 450 BC. But I accounted for the year zero by this---give or take a year or so. At least in the...

if 30 AD, 483 years - 30 years = roughly 453 years. If 33 AD 483 -33 years = roughly 450 years. If Jesus died in the middle of the 70th week, the math would not be 483 -, it would be 486.5 -. Such as 486.5 - 30, if 30 AD = roughly 456.5 years earlier when countdown begins. = roughly around...