Search results

Says the guy who is AFRAID to address my arguments. I bring up Isaiah 45:22-24 that Paul referenced and you are too AFRAID to address what that passage indicates. Why are you so AFRAID to dig deeper to see what scripture teaches? Are you just that intent on believing what you want to believe?

You can manipulate ChatGPT to say almost anything you want with how you word your questions. This is meaningless. Don't waste your time with this stuff on me.

No, I haven't, but I will also say that it's alright that you have misunderstood the verse and twisted things since you're right that it's a difficult book to interpret. Though I don't really think that Daniel 9:24-27 is all that difficult to interpret, overall. So, paraphrase the verse for me...

Since you decided not to address anything I said specifically, can you at least do one thing and tell me how you interpret this parable, which I believe relates to Matthew 25:31-46... Matthew 13:47 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a dragnet that was cast into the sea and gathered some of...

You might want to not try to twist the verse and make it about a prince who was not actually the prince of the people who destroyed the city and the sanctuary in 70 AD. Good luck. The prince was to come in the future as of the time the verse was written, not after the people destroyed the city...

When did I do that? I don't recall ever doing that and I certainly didn't do it in the post you replied to. Where did I say that 2 Peter 3 mentions the lake of fire? Nowhere. I did not agree with you about that. Are you just talking to someone else here and not me. You are the one using your...

Okay, I will have my lawyer call you if I'm not satisfied with how you address my post. Okay... Oh, I love when you demand that I interpret a passage the way you say I should. How nice... No, I don't. What is your point? Look in the mirror. As usual, you are trying to relate unrelated...

Yes, I will. And don't need your permission to do so. Yep. That is obvious. End of story. Moving on to other things now instead of repeating the same things over and over....

LOL! You're a comedian. And you bore me. It's not like I was not already getting bored with you before that one post. But, go ahead and think otherwise if you want.

That doesn't line up. You are talking about someone who was not the prince of the people who destroyed the city and the sanctuary in 70 AD, which is who Daniel 9:26 refers to.

And who do you think that is/was? It has to be someone who was the prince of the people who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD.

Good grief, dude. You can't be for real. You are constantly trying to put words in my mouth.. What is wrong with you? That's a 100% serious question. Tell me why you are the way you are. I'd love to know. Never have I said that we don't have eternal life secured at any point until we are bodily...

Matthew 25:31-46 clearly refers to the GWTJ because it has people being cast into "everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matt 25:41), which should easily be recognized as being the same thing as what is described in Revelation 20:15. And that passage clearly shows those who...

You make simple things complicated sometimes. I feel sorry for you when you do that. Nothing you're saying changes the fact that the context of what spawned the Olivet Discourse is Jesus saying that the physical temple buildings standing at that time would be destroyed. He didn't just say that...

What "prince who is to come" are you referring to exactly? You are referring to some other scripture than Daniel 9:26? Where is here? I can't follow you. Please clarify who you believe "the prince who is to come" is in Daniel 9:26.

That's great....(yawn).

I don't deny that. I've said many times that He will return at the last trumpet and we will then put on bodily immortality. Of course. Believers appearing before the judgment seat of Christ when He returns, as depicted in Matthew 25:31-46, has nothing to do with being fearful of the second...

Are you claiming that the prince to come mentioned in Daniel 9:26 was not actually the prince/ruler of the people who destroyed the city and the sanctuary in 70 AD, but was some future prince to that time?

Right, that is what Acts 24:15 shows. Davidpt was using that verse to refute Earburner's false claim that "every person who does not have the Gift of the Holy Spirit, the Vehicle of Eternal Life, they will not be resurrected, and neither indeed can be!!". Verses like Daniel 12:2, John 5:28-29...