Search results

Great to hear, brother. So, no reason for you to take offense at what I say regarding other pre-tribs that I've either heard or read comments from. Is it any different than the testimony you've already posted a few times? If so, there's no need. I read that. If you mean something else, go for...

Yes, it is. You can't be an unbeliever and be saved. Period. Once it's blotted out they are an unbeliever and not saved, right? That's what I'm saying. While someone is an unbeliever they are not saved. Agree? What are you talking about? Do you understand that everyone, include you and me...

Yes, but only while someone is still alive. On judgment day it will be too late.

At the end? Are you saying that you think that all of those who were blinded in Paul's day never repented? That none of them ever repented and were saved, in other words? If so, what do you make of what Paul said here: Romans 11:11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery...

LOL. That's all I was ever asking about was those who are cast into the lake of fire and I've been saying they are unbelievers (unsaved, lost) and you seemed to be disagreeing with me about that. Don't blame me for your lack of reading comprehension skills.

That's not what I'm saying. Right. Do you think anyone but unbelievers (the lost, unsaved) will be cast into the lake of fire? Yes or no? I do believe that both the saved and lost will be judged at the same time, as is portrayed in Matthew 25:31-46. But, I am speaking specifically about those...

My goodness, you are just completely lacking in discernment. What does it say about them after that in verse 15? That they will be cast into the lake of fire, right? Do you actually think that saved believers will be cast into the lake of fire? That is the most absurd thing I've ever heard or...

What I meant was that he said nothing about it being a salvific issue. Okay? Once again we have misunderstood each other. And no one said it was. Agree? For you. Do you speak for all pre-tribs? I don't think so. Maybe you haven't heard or seen the comments that I have of pretribs who talk...

Okay, I gave you a chance to answer my questions and you have been exposed as a fraud that no one can trust. You clearly believe that Paul's letters, and apparently the gospel of Mark (or at least his account of the Olivet Discourse), are not scripture that can be trusted to base our doctrine...

Again, the avoidance of answering my question. This is what liars do. It's a very simple question. Does this mean you do not believe Mark's account of the same thing in Mark 13:24-27 where he gives one added detail that Matthew didn't (which is not a big deal...it just means we should read all 3...

What difference does this make? Both Paul's letters and the book of Revelation are scripture that are inspired by God. Do you disagree?

It says it very specifically. What other promise does Peter refer to in 2 Peter 3:13 except for the promise of Christ's second coming that he had mentioned previously in verse 4?

You have such trouble answering questions. You seem to purposely avoid them. It makes you come across as dishonest. Again, do you believe what Mark wrote here is true or not? Mark 13:27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the...

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth here, so to speak. Let me ask you another way then. Do you think Paul wrote anything in his letters that isn't accurate and that we can't trust as being the truth that we can base our doctrines on?

So, you're saying you think Mark is wrong in what he wrote here and we should go by what Matthew wrote instead? Mark 13:27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.

You never answered my question of whether or not you believe Paul was inspired by God when he wrote his letters that we have as part of the New Testament. Yes or no, please. This is your last chance. I won't ask it again and am only asking it one more time because you somehow think you already...

No, I'm saying Matthew, Mark and Luke did not give all the same details in their accounts. Isn't that obviously the case? How is that me calling Matthew a liar? Should I ask you if you are saying Mark is a liar? Do you believe Mark 13:27 is accurate which would just mean Matthew didn't include...

So, there it is. I'm not going to ask again. Your refusal to answer a very simple question says it all. You clearly do not believe that Paul was inspired by God when he wrote his letters. You are indeed one of those frauds who thinks that Paul's letters are not true scripture and can't be...

You seem to have trouble taking Mark 13:27 into account. Why is that? Do you have a low opinion of Mark like you do Paul? Do you believe that Mark 13:27 is a parallel verse to Matthew 24:31?

LOL! You are avoiding the question. He was led to write about prophecy by God, was he not? Do you believe that Paul was inspired by God when he wrote his letters? Yes or no. Your hesitancy to answer this question is quite telling. I'll give you one more chance. Please answer my simple question.