Search results

Revelation 19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. Now you...

If they ever get around to providing the Scripture that shows when and how these in Revelation 20:4---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands--and then show how it supports Amil, in the meantime it's hard to see...

No one is forcing you to do anything. I don't have a gun to your head. It's all about being transparent, if nothing else. Don't you want to be transparent? If Amil is correct then you should be able to prove with Scripture what Scripture shows how and when these recorded in Revelation 20:4 were...

No one denies, including Premils, that saints have been being martyred since the time of Christ's ascension back into heaven. That's not disputable. What is disputable, is that same past 2000 years meaning the millennium recorded in Revelation 20? If Amils have both the beast and satan in the...

I realize they do. What's in question, where does the millennium fit? Do things recorded in Revelation 20:4, for instance--- which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands--provide any clues as to where it fits...

No, I do not agree that when the 2Ws are prophesying that this parallels the 42 month reign of the beast. Per my view of things the beast is still in the pit during the time of the 2Ws testimonies. Otherwise, it would obviously be making war with them during their testimonies if it had already...

My issue here is mainly with @rwb in this case since I can't grasp what point he is making about disembodied souls living with Christ upon death. As if only the saved live on in a disembodied state upon death but the unsaved don't.

I definitely agree with that since it would be plain silly not to. But even so, what about professed Christians that are still on this side of life, that haven't physically died yet? How can that be applied to every single one of them when not every single one of them will manage to remain saved...

Heaven, obviously. Yet that is beside the point since no soul dies upon physical death including souls of the wicked. Therefore, all souls are alive after physical death, even the souls of the wicked.

Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their...

Unless you believe in soul sleep or something, or unless you believe in the death of the soul for some, that upon physical death their soul also dies, even the souls that go to hell upon death, even they are souls with life that are not dead. Therefore, your point is moot and proves absolutely zero.

When did I ever say Christ is not currently reigning? I agree He is currently reigning, but not like how He will be when He returns to the earth, that being when He sits in the throne of His glory for all upon the earth to behold and to literally see with their own eyes. Likely one of the real...

Yet there is a crystal clear clue that tells us the timing. Revelation 21:9 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife. Unless the timing of the...

Not certain what your point is here, all I know is, I didn't say nor imply Amils did not believe that. What's in question here, do the texts involved agree with what Amils believe here? Are you basically saying this? These saints are martyred after they began living and reigning with Christ a...

I'm not certain what you are asking me to do here? I'll try to do what you ask once it is clear to me what you are asking me to do. For some reason it's going over my head at the moment.

In a different thread earlier today which inspired me to make this thread, I made that very same point you raise here. Apparently, I forgot to factor that in, in the OP. But anyway, the following is what I said earlier.

I didn't forget that. How is that relevant per the OP, though? The OP involves whether or not saints are being martyred during the thousand years. And that we can not ignore what Revelation 20:4 records concerning the following martyrs--which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image...

I already typed the following up a little bit ago, may as well post it now, then. The following is an example of Scripture interpreting Scripture. and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands(Revelation 20:4)...

If we are living in it now, how does one explain this part---for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea? (Revelation 21:1) I'm not certain what 'sea' means in this context, all I know is, the text indicates there was no more sea. Which then means one...

These terms are not unreasonable, thus are fair. If Amils are to prove what they allege, that Amil is true, well they can't do that until they first show/prove that saints are being martyred during the thousand years, according to the text of Revelation 20. After all, it doesn't take a rocket...