Search results

Do you expect to be taken seriously at all? I hope not. These kinds of responses are utterly ridiculous and do nothing to support your case. You are obviously incapable of defending your doctrine, so I'm not going to waste any more time on you.

It's described figuratively in Revelation 6:12-14 and literally in 2 Peter 3:10-12. There is no reference to heaven or the elements dissolving or the earth being burned up in Rev 6:12-14. That is because 2 Peter 3:10-12 is a literal passage and Rev 6:12-14 is not. Yes, there is, so we agree on...

David, do you think it's helpful to talk to me like this? Do I come across as someone who doesn't try to think of all possibilities when interpreting scripture? I make no assumptions about any given verse or passage as far as whether it's literal, symbolic or some other type of text. So, of...

You can resolve this by showing where in 2 Peter 3:10-12 it gives any indication that any mortal could possibly survive what is described there. Can you do that? In verse 13, Peter suggests that the result of what is described in verse 10-12 will be "the new heavens and new earth wherein...

When will you stop taking that verse (1 Thess 4:16) out of context? Where do you see Paul comparing the resurrection of the dead in Christ to the resurrection of the dead unsaved in this passage: 1 Thessalonians 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which...

What's this nonsense you're saying? I'm telling YOU the truth.

Spoken like a true amil! Except, someow, you're not an amil. Anyway, I agree with everything you said here.

Somehow, none of the NT authors knew about this since they wrote absolutely nothing about that. How do you explain that? As for this supposed "glorious kingdom age", what good is it when it ends up resulting in what is described in Revelation 20:7-9? How glorious can that supposed future...

You don't find it to be frustrating when people have different definitions for the terms we use? It only causes confusion. Anyone can be frustrated by that because it makes communication almost impossible when we don't define the terms we're using the same way. You mean you once again tried to...

It boggles my mind that you can recognize the truth that all of the dead will be raised on the day of Christ's future coming, but still insist on being premil. The rest of the dead are dead in the same sense as the dead referenced in verse 4 are dead, right? I think that's quite clear...

There are not two different first resurrections in scripture. Concluding that is what people do to try to keep their false doctrine afloat. Scripture is very clear that Christ's resurrection is the first resurrection, so don't try to change that. Instead, adjust your doctrine and your...

Hoe many hours does He mention? One or two? You are the one changing the text to fit your view. Where does that indicate there is a long time in between? Nowhere. That just shows that all of the dead will be resurrected with each person experiencing one of two different possible eternal...

That is correct. Being born spiritually is not the same thing as being physically/bodily resurrected, obviously. Christ's resurrection was the first physical resurrection, according to scripture. Acts 26:23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the...

We are currently saved from the second death, right? Why do premils not pay closer attention to what this verse says: Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and...

No, the day of judgment will occur in the future when Jesus comes with His angels. Please read Matthew 25:31-46. The souls and spirits of Christ followers immediately go to heaven upon their physical death. That's why John talks about seeing the souls of the dead in Christ in Revelation 6:9-11...

I'm done with you if you have no interest in actually backing up your claims with scripture. And that does appear to be the case.

Are you even making any effort whatsoever to understand what I'm saying? It doesn't seem like it. You understand that Jesus ascended to heaven long ago after His resurrection, right? Yes or no? And Acts 1:9-11 says in the future He will descend from heaven in the same manner as He ascended...

I could say the same thing regarding your interpretation of verses 13 and 14 using your same logic. Why is it that you never realize that when you use the same logic you use to interpret one verse or passage to interpret another verse or passage it ends up contradicting your doctrine? Why do...

What in the world are you talking about? Are you somehow not aware that Jesus ascended to heaven long ago 40 days after His resurrection? You're acting like you're not even aware of that. Do you think it's not possible that there would be any prophecy about that?

You understand that Jesus is God, don't you? You're not differentiating between God the Father and God the Son here. Why not? Where does it ever say that God the Father is coming to the earth? Nowhere. Jesus is coming from heaven one day, but He ascended to heaven to God the Father's presence...