Search results

If it isn't fulfilled until the second coming of Christ, then it wasn't done at the cross. The words "done" and "fulfilled" are synonyms. We're just going to have to agree to disagree on this because I'm not seeing what you're seeing in his commentary about Satan's binding at all. It would be...

Why don't you address the scripture he referenced? Scripture teaches that we are living souls made up of body, soul and spirit. The word "soul" has more than one definition. Are the following verses in your Bible? 1 Thessalonians 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray...

He doesn't even attempt to address our arguments. He knows he can't. So, what does he do? He invents the idea that all this Gnostic spiritualizing nonsense is related to Amillennialism, which is 100% false. We both have shown him how Amil is based on clear, straightforward scriptures and he just...

Where does Irenaeus say anything about the binding of Satan in relation to Christ's second coming there? Show us. He references Luke 10:19 there to support what he was saying. Do you think Luke 10:19 has a second coming context? It clearly does not.

That is what I was responding to in post #431! So, why are you telling me to go back and read it? I obviously did read it and that's why I was responding to what you said about it. How about you actually respond to what I said in post #431 about your claim that he said something about Satan's...

You completely misunderstood what I was saying. I was NOT saying you didn't acknowledge that Irenaeus tied the binding of Satan to both the 1st and 2nd coming of Christ. What I was alluding to was how Irenaeus referenced Luke 10:19 in support of what he said in his quote that you tried to apply...

What does that mean? Do you think there are clouds in heaven like the clouds we see in the earth's atmosphere? Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him...

In another thread where you referenced your post #582 in this thread, you said this: Where do you see any mention of Christ's second coming here? Notice that he references Luke 10:19 in support of what he said there. Do you try to claim that Luke 10:19 applies to the second coming of Christ? It...

Right. He, like them, did not bother to look at the context of the verses that Irenaeus referenced in support of his belief in relation to the binding of Satan, which are clearly in relation to the first coming of Christ and not the second.

Wrong. Do you somehow not understand that words can have more than one meaning? Human beings are living souls made up of "spirit and soul and body". 1 Thessalonians 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto...

He blatantly misrepresented that last quote from Irenaeus as relating to the second coming of Christ. Irenaeus referenced Luke 10:19 in support of what he said there and it's very clear that Luke 10:19 relates to the first coming of Christ, not the second. Over and over again we see Premills not...

Where do you see any mention of Christ's second coming here? Notice that he references Luke 10:19 in support of what he said there. Do you try to claim that Luke 10:19 applies to the second coming of Christ? It clearly does not. The context of Luke 10:19 is in relation to the first coming of...

I communicate clear enough for everyone here except, apparently, you. I'm not going to change my communication style just for you.

LOL. You are hilarious, Douggg. What do you find difficult about the way I presented my points and asked Davidpt questions in post #506? Why are you unable to understand normal adult discussion without charts and without things having to be spelled out to you in lists and so on? Davidpt did not...

Premils have nothing from scripture to refute Amillennialism, so they have to resort to falsely misrepresenting Amillennialism instead. As you show here and as I showed in post #8, Amil is based on literal, straightforward scriptures. Premils act as if everything should be interpreted literally...

Here you go again with your replacement theology nonsense. Amils do NOT have the church replacing ANYONE. Stop misrepresenting Amil. The church consists of Gentile believers joined together with Jewish believers as one body by the blood of Christ (read Ephesians 2:11-22). Paul illustrated this...

You tell lies about what others believe because you can't support your own beliefs with scripture. Amillennialism is absolutely NOT a doctrine of pagan Gnosticism and does not SPIRITUALIZE any Bible prophecies that are meant to be taken in a literal, physical sense. Amillennialism is founded...

Why do you try to minimize the significance of His kingdom that you acknowledge that "He established at His 1st coming"? Scripture teaches that He will deliver the kingdom that He reigns over now to the Father when He comes again. 1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ...

Your ignorant ramblings mean nothing. Your interpretation of John 18:36 is a complete joke. When Jesus said His kingdom is not of this world He was not saying it was not of this present time. You are twisting the meaning of that verse to fit your false Premil doctrine. You obviously don't know...

For one thing, I do NOT see everything in Daniel 7 or everything in Revelation in chronological order. So, that's a strawman argument. I frequently point out that not everything written in Daniel and Revelation are in chronological order. But, with that said, there is no basis at all for seeing...