Search results

And "pass away" can be ~ and should be, regarding what is being discussed here ~ understood in a very different way than "cease to be/exist" or in the sense of annihilation or obliteration or literally burned up. I've echoed it many times from Scripture: God is not "making all new things," but...

Is a misunderstanding. Wow. Ah, Ezekiel 18:30-32... So often misconstrued... Here, repentance is not being urged on Jerusalem, for the preceding chapters affirm that its destruction is assured. Rather, the exiles are pressed to repent and take responsibility for their moral lives. Thus...

I did. :) ...in your opinion. I understand. And you think I don't, I guess; I'm perfectly fine with that. :) Ah, free will... No one denies we have free will, Ghada. No one. But it's not about the will... not initially, anyway. So to your "ungrounded philosophic theology" comment, that...

One of my favorites... Man, Bono looks so young, there...

Hmm, well, I would disagree regarding Satan's perspective, but good. Well, I say after the millennium does come to an end, because it has not... yet. :) But we may be very, very close to it coming to an end. We'll agree to disagree on that... :) Grace and peace to you.

LOL!!!

It doesn't, but that's because the focus of Revelation 19... particularly verses 11-21... is different than Revelation 20 (and the first eight verses of Revelation 21). But here is the problem for so many in reading Revelation: not all the events of Revelation 20 are chronologically subsequent...

Only the righteous will be co-heirs with Christ in eternity, in the new heaven and new earth. The unrighteous... yes. Right, your understandings and opinions, some of which I disagree with. Well I have... This is how it (God's millennium) progresses... is progressing. Agree. This is what...

The first resurrection of Acts 26:26 is a different resurrection entirely from the first resurrection of Revelation 20:6. The physical resurrection of Christ Jesus is obviously in view in Acts 26:23, but the first resurrection of Revelation 20:4-6 is the resurrection from death in sin of each...

... continued: LOL! I don't even know what this means... :) Is this all you have to say in response to the passages I cited? Perhaps you could explain why you think they... don't clearly say what they clearly say... :) Ah! Well, good question, but I would answer it with a question. Two...

LOL! I can see where this is going already... Yes... No, that will be when Jesus comes back, after the conclusion of the millennium, and after the final Judgment. The millennium is completed when all of God's Israel has been saved, when temple He has been building ~ us, all those in...

You know, not to hijack this thread and make it into something other than what it originally was, but... :) Not sure who you are referring to as "anti-millennialists," but in reading passages like the following... "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus...

Right... This is really a general misunderstanding of how John's Revelation is structured. What we are to see here in Revelation 12:12 is the defeat of Satan in the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ (see also Colossians 2:15 and John 12:31). The end of the millennium and then Satan's...

Right, I agree. But we don't know the expiration date, as it hasn't come yet... but may be very close. The millennium is the fullness of God's time in bringing His elect into His Israel. This is the time in which (as Jeremiah said was then still to come, but surely coming) God is now putting...

It is what it is. The problem with not being able to link the two is not understanding God's millennium as a fullness or completeness of time ~ the full span of our time God has appointed to bring His Israel to completion ~ rather than a literal 1,000 year period. Well, that Satan would be...

Well, I wouldn't say it's gibberish or that it doesn't make sense, but that it is based on flawed premises. Among other things: If we say of this "PAST-millennialism" that the millennium expired and was finished at the First Resurrection of Christ and that it began with Solomon's temple in...

Well, I would submit that it's about both, Retrobyter. And ours with Him, as all the saints, over the course of the millennium, are coming to life and reigning with Christ (Revelation 20:4). We know that Christ was King at His first coming, at His birth (we sing it every Christmas), and He...

Oh, yeah... I mean, I can't speak for anybody else, really, but I think we all get that loud and clear. :) I surely do... :) I agree with what you say here, but the understanding that that is concurrent with the millennium is the issue. See directly above. Yes. Yes. Question here, David...

LOL! There's some things here that we would at least be close to agreeing on, and some not so much. But just to this very last thing, here Randy, as I was clear in saying before. both your A and B here are correct; the only clarification I would make is the A is in part, the B is... will be...

Well, so you're questioning the authenticity of their Christianity, the genuineness of their conversion to Christ. And that's fine; if they are truly converted, it will at some point manifest itself in deed... the fruit of the spirit and good works. Hmm, well, in a sense, I don't disagree, but...