Search results

Easy big fella. Sit down, have a beer and relax. Stranger

Read my post #101. Stranger

Whether it is called Gog and Magog, or the Soviet Union or Russia, it speaks to a people of a certain region. And that region is the northern areas of what we call Russia today, and used to be called the Soviet Union. The interpretation is certainly not 'subjective' as you claim. Morris gave...

Yes, I can read. That is what you said. If you disagree with what you wrote, maybe you should write a little better. Instead of writing in a fog, write with some clarity. Stranger

To identify Russia as Gog and Magog is not prejudicial. It is simply interpreting the Scripture. Same could be said for identifying Western Europe as the realm of the anti-christ. For it will be that same area of the Old Roman Empire. Same could be said for identifying Israel as accepting...

Please. You're the one who said it was the night before. See post #6. But (John 13:1-31) agrees with (1 Cor. 11:23). So, what is the problem? And, you're the one casting doubt on the testimony of John. Not me. Stranger

So, your point is the Gospel of John is not Scripture. Why do you say (John 13:1-31) is the night before Jesus was betrayed. Concerning Judas, Christ said that night, "He then having received the sop went immediately out: and it was night." To which (1 Cor. 11:23) agrees. "...That the Lord...

Start with the Table of Nations in (Gen. 10) Of this table Henry Morris says of... "Dr. William F. Albright, universally acknowledged as the world's leading authority on the archaeology of the Near East, though himself not a believer in the infallibility of Scripture, said concerning this Table...

I didn't say there was no return for one who is backsliding. I said there is no return taught for one who loses his salvation. The Prodigal Son, didn't cease from being a son. His sonship was not restored. (Luke 19:10) speaks to our initial salvation. Not to a restoration due to...

Mayflower Just remember post #206. Your post #215 is correct. And Jesus was forsaken on the Cross, for a time. He was the Son also, and He should know. Stranger

Russia is Gog and Magog. See (Ez. 38-39). Stranger

I'm not anti-catholic. I'm not even anti-roman. Your linguistic argument of 'epignosis' is dead. No science can resurrect it. Stranger

He is really a muslim. He just doesn't like to say it. He is too ashamed. Stranger

Have you not been able to understand my view of this? Yet, you are an interpreter of dreams? It is you claiming something that God did not. Whether by error or purpose I do not know. You ask, 'what is it'? It isn't anything as it doesn't exist. This means your interpretations are...

My opinion sir, is that you play the middle of the road too much. Stranger

No, I said what I said. And I have proved from the Scripture that your 'epignosis' argument is DOA. Get over it. Move on. The believers are still saved. Rejoice. Stranger

No. I never said they didn't have 'epignosis'. And I believe you mean at least from post #57. They did have it. But, they are not saved. 'Epignosis' is not synonymous with being saved or born-again. (Rom. 1:28,32) is clear. They had the knowledge, 'epignosis', but they were not...

They did have it. (Rom. 1:28,32) is clear. But they are not saved. (Rom. 1:18-3:20) is clear. Your 'epignosis' argument is DOA. In other words, you want 'epignosis' to determine if one is saved or born-again. But it does not. Scripture proves you wrong but you simply ignore it and say...

Then you should not raise an opposing voice toward any doctrine you encounter on a forum. Because God's sheep know His voice. Stranger

Except the people in (Rom. 1:28,32) did have it. Scripture is clear here. They didn't have salvation. Of course not. Which destroys your 'epignosis' argument. Stranger