Search results

I completely disagree if you are suggesting that the new covenant was not yet in effect at that time, which I think is what you are suggesting. No, the transition came immediately when the veil of the temple was torn. Your view takes the significance of the veil being torn away. Preterism really...

The reason Paul did that can be explained by this passage... 1 Thessalonians 9:19 Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the...

Yeah, I can't seem to find it, either, but maybe his vision is better than ours or we're not looking at the right translation or something? Let's see what he comes up with.

Jesus didn't say that anyone had to die beforehand, He just said some who were standing there would see the kingdom come in power in some way before they died. Regardless of the fact that you disagree with my interpretation, would you agree that what Peter, James and John saw at Jesus's...

Please. You guys are the game players here, as everyone can see. In one post I took the time to explain my view on several things and you only responded with saying that I finally admitted something without actually addressing anything I said. That's what people do when they're just playing...

You've never read any of your own posts?

Are you unable to answer my question? Questions don't answer questions. Can you just answer my question? Of course. Everyone does. Any other dumb questions you want to ask? Was my question too hard to answer?

Nonsense. I have nothing to hide, so it's not anything "to admit", as if there's anything wrong with it. It's incredible that after everything I said, this is your only response. Lame.

Where is your evidence to support this claim? Why does it have to be long? The truth isn't that complicated. So, you just like to share vague opinions without doing anything to back them up, which seems rather meaningless and serves no purpose whatsoever.

Not necessarily, but in this case doesn't Revelation 20:15 indicate that all whose names are not written in the book of life are cast into the fire at the same time? I believe so. So, with that in mind, how can Matthew 25:41 be talking about people whose names are not written in the book of life...

You completely miss the point. I'm not saying the word literal can't mean that in that context, but if you just use the term without also explaining that, then what people will think of is non-allegorical, non-metaphorical and non-symbolic things. So, all I'm saying is that if you choose to use...

What is the reason that you apparently don't take the verses which follow Matthew 16:28 into account when interpreting the verse? Are you allowing the inappropriate placement of a chapter break to influence your interpretation? In Mark 9, there is no chapter break between Jesus talking about...

And, what supposed conflicting details are those exactly? Why do you always make claims about something and not offer any explanation for how you came to your conclusions? I agree. I'm glad I'm not doing that. You certainly are not proving otherwise.

No, the sheep are the chosen. What is the difference between the chosen and the sheep in your mind? Please be as specific as possible. Also, do you agree that everything described in Matthew 25:31-46 happens right after Christ's second coming with His angels? If so, please tell me the...

LOL. I post SCRIPTURE PROOF all the time to support what I believe. Are you kidding me? You posted one scripture, which was Revelation 3:9 and I gave my understanding of that verse. What other scriptures are you referring to? Give me a post number and I will give my understanding of whatever...

Is that what people think of when they see the term "literal"? No, it is not and that's my point. People think of things that are real and straightforward and not symbolic when they see the term "literal". So, with that in mind it's better to use a term where people will know what you're talking...

LOL. Your responses continue to get weaker and weaker. Maybe you should stop and step back and actually think about why you twist scriptures like Acts 2:29-36 to fit your doctrine and why believing what you want to believe is more important to you than just believing what scripture teaches...

It implies no such thing. You are saying that based on your doctrinal bias. Jesus was not commenting one way or another on whether some of them standing there would die before seeing Him coming in His kingdom. He was simply saying some of them would not die before seeing Him coming in His...

Maybe "doctrinal bias" wasn't the right term, bu it's not the right term to describe my view of these things, either. I don't need Matthew 24:15-21 to be literal in order to support my beliefs in Amil and post-trib and that Jesus prophesied about what would happen in 70 AD in the Olivet...

Right. I'm not finding his argument to be very convincing when, in this day and age, it should not be difficult to locate said throne if it still exists and provide some pictures. It seems that the evidence of the current existence of that throne is as legitimate as the evidence proving that...