Search results

I do recall seeing those two posts. Let's be reasonable here. If you insist the last 7 vials of wrath begin with trumpet 1, produce the Scripture in Revelation that informs us that the wrath of God begins with trumpet 1. That's how Pretribbers reason some of these things except you are not a...

Some of this you brought up is Shepherd's Chapel teachings. Therefore, irrelevant, since some of us reject Shepherd's Chapel teachings. I recognize Shepherd's Chapel teachings when I see them. I have been aware of Shepherd's Chapel since the mid 90s. IOW, to use Shepherd's Chapel teachings as an...

Some of us are not so much disputing that some men are killed by fire. We're disputing the manner in which some insist that it happens, that it means the entire planet is engulfed in flames at the time. Which, BTW, if true, it contradicts the passage you submitted which you feel supports your...

Take the following, for example. If Lot and his wife were side by side when fleeing the area, and that when Lot's wife looked back after already having been warned not to do so, how is it that Lot's wife was reduced to ashes but Lot wasn't? Have you ever wondered why? Let's say Sodom and...

One reason why it is nonsense is because, if true, this would mean the entire animal kingdom is wiped out, as in no more. There would be no way to preserve them this time around. Why did God want to preserve the animal kingdom during the flood but no longer wants to preserve them when He...

Try and do some comparing of things here and treat each account in the same manner. Have you ever thought of that? IOW, don't take it figuratively in one passage and literally in another passage when the same idea is expressed in both passages. To show what I'm meaning, consider what I have...

Who do you believe it to be? There is a chance I might even agree with you here, depending on who or what you propose is the bride of Christ. Edited to add. Ok, now I see where you said in an earlier post that you said it involves Isaiah 62:4. Had you said it involved the new Jerusalem, that...

No doubt there are numerous interpreters that agree with your interpretation of verse 12. I do not dispute that. The question is, does the context support that? It for sure doesn't support it if verses 9-11 the context is the GWTJ. Nor does it support it if verses 9-11 the context is the...

Per these verses that you submitted, if verses 13-14 can be taken parenthetically, there is no issue here, that it can mean the ascension rather than the return and not contradict anything in the previous verses you submitted here as well. OTOH, if verses 13-14 can't be taken parenthetically...

For one thing, assuming the context pertaining to verses 9-11 is the GWTJ, it is then preposterous, that per a context such as that, that what allegedly happened to the rest of the beasts earlier in history thousand of years earlier, that that would even be relevant at this point. Who would even...

While I do agree with you here, I certainly don't agree with your interpretation of Matthew 24:30 as well.

IMO, Verses 13-14 are parenthetical. They explain the one sitting upon the throne in verses 9:11 and how He initially obtained that position. Verses 9-11 are involving His return to earth, and so is verse 22 since verse 22 is the interpretation of verses 9-11. Daniel 7:9 ¶I beheld till the...

For the longest, I too used to take Daniel 7:13-14 to be meaning a return to the earth rather than a return to heaven. But then I noticed a cpl of things I wsn't factoring in at the time. First let's start with this. Acts 1:9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was...

And that's what happens sometimes when someone assumes nonsense to begin with. They add yet more nonsense to it in order to get the initial nonsense to supposedly work. I guess all the animals will get moved underground as well? Why not? If they can fit on an an ark they should be able to fit...

You have it backwards. It is not me that is misunderstanding that, it is you that is. Not according to me, but according to the texts involved. Try reading what the texts actually say. You have verse 24 contradicting verse 15 not agreeing with it. Genesis 4:15 And the LORD said unto him...

I don't mind if I am wrong in this case. I hope I am. That means per Amil verse 13 would be meaning after Christ has returned, except some Amils have the entire planet literally engulfed in flames the same way it was engulfed in water. As if verse 13 makes sense per a scenario like that, that if...

IMO, you are conflating events involving the 2nd woe with that of events involving the 3rd woe. But even so, I'm going to be honest here. I hope I am wrong about verses 11-13 where I think they are meaning during the 2nd woe, but are really meaning during the 3rd woe. That way I get to enjoy...

This remnant that are affrighted, how does that make sense if they are meaning the ones in 1 Thessalonian 4:17, which means they wouldn't even still be be on the earth to begin with, they would be up in the sky instead if verse 13 is meaning during the 2nd coming and that the remnant in verse 13...

During a trumpet, though. There is no trumpet sounding towards the end of the 2nd woe when the 2Ws rise. The 2Ws rise toward the end of the 2nd woe not at the beginning of the 3rd woe. The beginning of the 3rd woe is the 7th trumpet. Revelation 11:11 And after three days and an half the Spirit...

Come on, be real here. How does it make sense that after the 2Ws rise followed by an earthquake that same hour, and then John telling us the 2nd woe is past, that this rising of the 2ws nor the earthquake that same hour, that it isn't meaning during the 2nd woe, it is meaning during the 3rd woe...