Search results

Hypothetically, if there were a Pretrib rapture Paul already makes it crystal clear who it will involve. It will involve those that are alive and remain. For the sake of argument, a rapture happens today, thus it is Pretrib. Who today is still alive and remains? Only Pretribbers? No Post...

If you fully agree Luke 21:27 = the bodily coming of Christ in the end of this age, why would you then divorce Luke 21:31-32 from the coming meant in verse 27 then apply verses 31-32 to the here and now spiritually? You are all over the place if you are doing that. The context pertaining to the...

May have slipped my mind. I may not have even read it yet. There could be numerous reasons why. Plus I do have my mind occupied with other things, I admit that. For one, a woman that I have been knowing and very close to since she was 22, I just found out recently, thus way after the fact...

What question did you ask me? I was responding to a post between you and @rwb, not a post between you and me. I was basically giving my 2 cents, so to speak. Ppl do that all the time since this is a public forum. None of these conversations are private unless one takes those discussions to a DM...

If you are meaning verse 30, that coming involves both , bringing the kingdom to the earth, and coming in judgment. Both will be true at the time. The Luke 21 account echoes the bringing of the kingdom to the earth Luke 21:31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that...

Actually, it depends on how Ezekiel 38-39 play out. Once God enacts His judgment on Gog and his multitude, God quits hiding His face from those currently in that region. Thus they become friends of God again, not remain His enemies. Granted, Ezekiel 38-39 are difficult chapters to interpret, yet...

When it comes to Amil in general, I don't think there is any such thing as an actual chronology of events to them. They are basically Idealists. That's one reason I can't get on the same page with some of them. I refuse to accept that the same moment those in 1 Cor 15 are changed in the...

He answered their question per Luke 21:20.. But Luke 21:20 is not the context of verse 36. Luke 21:20 is not the context of verse 27 either. Apparently, initially you already knew these things, thus agreed at the time, before you changed your position to what it is now. You didn't always read...

But that great day is not meaning Revelation 20:11-15, in the event that is what you are implying. That great day is involving a battle of sorts. Revelation 20:11-15 is not involving a battle of sorts. IOW, regardless when Rev 20:11-15 is meaning, that 'great day' that you mentioned, it...

shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. He didn't go into heaven without being on the earth first, then departing the earth's surface. Therefore, any interpretation that insists He never touches down on the earth when He initially comes, is 100% false. That contradicts...

Clearly, He returns to the mount of Olives first, exactly where He departed from, and that even Zechariah 14:4 echoes this. But that doesn't mean He won't be globally seen as He is descending. Satellites and things of that nature would be capturing the event live and broadcasting worldwide.

Not even remotely the same context. By the time Jesus gets to verse 36, verse 20 is already 2000 years in the past. But that doesn't mean I interpret verse 36 in the same manner as Pretrib, that I apply it to what they do. But at least, unlike you, they place verse 36 in the correct era of time...

I have decided I may have over reacted a bit. Have other things on my mind lately. Just recently I found out that a woman I have known since she was 22 years old, a woman that worked with me in the past and that we still conversed with each via Facebook, except I haven't had Facebook for two or...

Finally I understand, but even so, when comparing it with the texts involved I don't see it making much sense. Because it has to fit the texts involved somehow and the texts involve prophesying, being persecuted then killed, then rising from the dead, then ascending into heaven, and then during...

So now I'm a clown. Wow. From now on I don't care to converse with you any longer. If that is the way you view me, don't respond to me anymore. After all, clowns are not anyone that anyone can take serious. That's one point you are trying to make. If you don't agree NOSAS is Biblical, that...

You don't even agree that both Revelation 18:10 and Revelation 19:2-3 echoes this? But if you agree they echo it, explain how Revelation 18:10 and Revelation 19:2-3 make sense if placed during Revelation 20:11-15? But if you disagree it is echoed in those chapters, it then makes me question why...

Does this mean you are meaning literal ppl that live then die, then are raised from the dead and live again? If you are meaning in that sense, in that case I can see your view making sense. The way you phrase it is misleading if you are ultimately meaning something else by that, other than what...

This is not the first time I have heard you say that. And it never makes any sense to me what you are meaning to begin with, no matter how many times you repeat it. And the reason why, note the following texts. We can't divorce any of it from any of it. Revelation 11:12 And they heard a great...

I do not disagree that Pretrib is not biblical. Therefore, I'm not arguing for Pretrib or anything. But even so, How do we explain the 2Ws, for example? How do we align them to the last trump? They don't come back to life and rise at the sounding of a trumpet, period. They rise before the 7th...

But let's don't address any Premil rebuttal, though. If I 'm reading Daniel 7 wrong then someone needs to prove it to me per the very same texts I'm using to determine what I'm concluding to begin with. If I can take the time to type out how I reason through those verses, the fact I'm a slow...