Search results

So, you don't think that Luke 21:20-24 is a parallel passage to Matthew 24:15-22? I believe it clearly is and that passage is referring to "great distress in the land and wrath upon this people". Which would indicate that the great tribulation/great distress that Jesus talked about was related...

Right. How is it that Premils don't see His point in the following passage about the scope of destruction that will occur at His second coming being equal to the scope of destruction that happened in Noah's day with the flood? Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by...

That's what he's not getting. He thought I was saying he was using ChatGPT to tell him what to believe. No, I didn't say that. But, it's almost as bad to try to use ChatGPT to confirm something you believe, as if ChatGPT is a reliable source to confirm whether something we believe is true or...

You stopped that? When did that happen? How did you stop that when you jumped into this thread with a bunch of stuff to support Premil when you knew that the point of this thread was to refute dispensationalism? You know you were trying to stir things up and debate Amil vs. Premil when you came...

That is besides the point as far as I'm concerned. Regardless of why it took that long, all believers are part of one body now. Maybe you can start a new thread about why it took as long as it did for the Father to send His Son to join Jew and Gentile believers together as one body. How long...

Do you think Paul would ever contradict himself? Based on your understanding of Romans 11:26, it seems so. How does what he said in the following verse agree with your understanding of Romans 11:26? Romans 9:27 Isaiah also cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the children of...

Yes, that's what I said. Some of the things you're saying are based on what ChatGPT says. That's how you come across. Including your understanding of Romans 11:28. You think ChatGPT telling you that a verse should be understood based on English grammar rules is a valid point and that influences...

What do you think, that it will take a thousand years to judge the twelve tribes of Israel? Is that your understanding of Matthew 25:31-46, that the judging described there takes a thousand years to complete? This argument you're making here is very weak, at best. It's talking about judging...

He loves all people (John 3:16), but the word "love" used there (agapaō) is a different word than the word "beloved" used in Romans 11:28 (agapētos). The word used in Romans 11:28 only describes those who God has a close personal, loving relationship with. It's not a word that would be used to...

You did. But, don't expect him to have any understanding of that. He's just here to needlessly stir things up, as always.

What does that mean? What you posted doesn't reflect what you believe? How do you interpret Romans 11:28?

That is a lie. To call your comments foolish is not equivalent to calling you a fool. I wasn't talking about you as a person, I'm talking about your foolish response in that one particular case. You are blatantly misrepresenting me and it's most likely on purpose. Pathetic.

Look in the mirror, hypocrite.

This can't be a serious response. Are you seriously suggesting that consulting AI is the solution to people disagreeing about scripture? Why are people trying to replace the Holy Spirit with AI? It's just unbelievable to me. Why didn't you address the points I made in my post? My points are...

He's clearly not lying. Do you not know the difference between lying (something someone does on purpose) and mistakenly (not on purpose) misinterpreting your words? You just don't know how unclear you are sometimes.

You are saying all unbelieving Jews are beloved for the father's sakes, including those who never believe. How can that make sense? That's like saying the scribes and Pharisees that Jesus ranted against in Matthew 23, including asking them how they could avoid hell, were beloved for the father's...

He's not using scripture to interpret scripture here. Romans 11:28 should be understood according to what Paul wrote just previous to that in Romans 11, but he's not doing that. It's utter foolishness and insanity to suggest that unbelieving Jews could be considered beloved by God. Not a...

What difference does it make why God didn't just do that from the start? That doesn't change the fact that scripture teaches that all believers are part of one body now. You seem to be diverting attention away from what scripture teaches with your questions.

Name one Israelite or any person at any time in history who God prevented from ever receiving Christ at any time in their lives. I know Paul talks about Israelites who were blinded by God in Romans 11, but that was only temporary. Paul said he hoped to lead some of those who were blinded to...

Let's leave AI out of this. It only serves to cause confusion if it's used for any other reason but to help format and clarify your points. It does not have "the mind of Christ" and the Holy Spirit to guide it like we do (1 Corinthians 2:9-16), so it is untrustworthy for providing biblical...