Search results

What do you mean tell the truth? How am I failing to do that? Take for instance, any of the initial 12 disciples besides Judas. Obviously, OSAS applies to these disciples, NOSAS doesn't. Obviously, NOSAS applies to Judas, OSAS doesn't. Therefore, both positions are Biblical, and not this...

Hebrews 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, 5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, 6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance...

LOL. What a lame analogy. But you didn't come up with it though, therefore, you shouldn't take it personally. IOW, this is not the first time I have heard an Amil use that same exact analogy. Must be one long chain satan is bound with if he can devour someone in the USA and also devour someone...

Though, I think I get your point, but if one factors in Zechariah 14, everyone would already know who these mortals remaining are. They are the ones left of the nations which came against Jerusalem, but instead of the plague getting them too, they are spared to live another day. I tend to take...

I'm not entirely understanding what you are meaning here. Can you provide some Scriptures that illustrate what you are meaning here? I need to get on the same page with you before I can decide whether you are right or wrong.

You must have reading comprehension or something. Nowhere did I say I reject OSAS. I'm not the one rejecting anything, you are. You are rejecting that NOSAS is also Biblical.

Being shown something is not always necessarily the same thing as proving something.

You misunderstood the OP if you take the OP to be meaning that. How can mortals that end up rebelling after the millennium be among the just and righteous during the millennium? They can't. They dwell among the just and righteous during the millennium, and that the just and righteous are keeping...

Here's the problem as I see it. I do not deny that OSAS is Biblical. You apparently deny that NOSAS is also Biblical. Plus, you are somewhat of a Calvinist, right? If yes, we are never going to see eye to eye about some of these things, since a Calvinist is something that I'm not nor want any...

Over the past 2000 years there have been places and people that the gospel never reached but reaches eventually. What's in question is, the time periods involving the gospel not having reached any of these places and people yet. How would they even know to repent if the gospel hadn't even...

Maybe these 3 and 1/2 days are symbolic for something rather than literal. Because look what it leads to if taken literally. It leads to a contradiction involving the following. Matthew 24:36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. What you...

In the event Amil is the correct position, regardless, only one thing makes sense to me in that case. That being the following. Except I have never noted any Amils making this connection. Revelation 20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog...

We might not be on the same page about some of this, but we are on the same page in regards to what you submitted here, though. I fully agree with this, yet fully disagree that the beast reigns for 42 months after the 7th trumpet sounds. The beast reigns 42 months prior to the the 7th trumpet...

One could argue, and I have argued this before, so what, in light of the following? Initially satan also saw God face to face, saw Him in all of His glory, knew without a doubt He existed and knew without a doubt He created him, but did that prevent satan from rebelling? Of course not unless the...

That does not make sense in light of the following, for one. ---------------- Revelation 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever...

BTW, I'm not a Dispy but you appear to be one, though. You are the one, just like the Dispys, that are taking these things in the literal sense. Yet you claim to be Amil. My opinion is that you were likely a Dispy before you became Amil and are somehow trying to make Dispy and Amil compatible...

Since you apparently take the 2ws to be meaning false prophets, unless I'm misunderstanding you somewhere along the way, you and I are miles apart here to begin with. Therefore, based on that alone, nothing you can say is going to convince me you are right and I am wrong, since it makes no...

Speaking for myself I don't disagree with that. Except for maybe the part about them being literally in Jerusalem. What I disagree with is, that the 1260 days per Revelation 11 and the 42 months per Revelation 13, that these time periods are running in parallel, thus not 7 years being involved...

It makes no sense, to me anyway, that if the beast is reigning for 42 months and that it is allegedly paralleling the 1260 days the 2ws are prophesying, why it then is not making war upon the 2ws until their 1260 days are finished? If these time periods are running in parallel this would mean...

The OP has to do with which proposed Millennium seems to be the better one, regardless which proposed Millennium is actually the correct one? For example. Is a Millennium where righteousness is not dwelling throughout the earth, thus crooked courts, crooked judges, crooked lawyers, is better...