Search results

He's very childish. I recommend not wasting your time on him.

Otherwise, we could assume either that Jesus was smiling when He said it or that Matthew was smiling when he wrote that parenthetical statement. ;)

I have specifically told you that probably at least 10 times and have mentioned that in other posts probably at least another 50 times, so, no, you are not wrong about that. I've made it very clear on how I interpret Matthew 24, so you shouldn't be any uncertainty about how I interpret it by...

Like me, you've been posting on forums like this for a long time. You know you can rarely be certain about what someone is saying here. I was going by what you had said, which did not make it obvious that you thought He was talking about the end of the age there. But, His coming and the end of...

Maybe you should. It clearly is a word used to describe an indefinite amount of time that something would occur after another thing. But, that is not how you are understanding the things that would happen "hereafter". You are creating a new definition for that word that doesn't exist as well...

I don't see Jesus alluding to anything you said there in those verses. I believe what He was saying there lines up with what He was saying in verses 4-14. He's talking about the time that leads up to the return of Christ. A time during which there would be an increase in deception because of...

Agree. Disagree. Jesus was talking in a global sense there, not in a local (to Jerusalem) sense. In Matthew 24:4-14 He talked about things that would happen before "the end". He specifically referenced "the end" in Matthew verses 13 and 14. The end of what? The end of the age that Jesus was...

Yep. But, that was conditional, which you keep denying. If they did repent and watch, then He would not have come to them as a thief and there's nothing to indicate that He would have come to them at all. You add the idea that He would come to them either way, but that idea is not found in the...

Sigh. You interpret everything with extreme doctrinal bias. For one thing, you interpret Revelation 1:3 to be saying EVERYTHING written about in the book was "at hand". You are saying correctly that Revelation 1:19 says that he was told to write about things in the past. Were the things he wrote...

You have misrepresented what I believe many times and I've had to correct you about what I believe many times as well. So, since we both apparently can't understand each other, then there is no point in us continuing to talk to each other about this topic. Hopefully, others who have read the...

Let me make something very clear to you. I don't have any private interpretations. I'm sure you are well aware that they are plenty of lone wolves on this forum who do have private interpretations. I'm not one of them. Okay? Please don't forget that. Also, keep in mind that you share your...

That, in itself, proves nothing. If the word was only ever used in that sense, then you would have a point, but that is not the case. But, again, as I said, if the hour of trial had something to do with the return of Christ, which has not yet occurred, then it would have to be the case that...

Not in today's day and age, especially in a place where it doesn't even snow much at all. It's not even reasonable to think that Jesus had in mind that it would be difficult for them to flee because of snow since it rarely snows there. In today's day and age, apart from a blizzard, it is not...

So, you don't want to deal with the fact that you have no answer at all for how what Jesus said in Matthew 24:15-21 could all be taken non-literally? You'd rather not even comment on that and talk about something else? You are expecting me to address what you're saying here after you didn't...

I don't know if you realize it, but your way of communicating can be hard to follow. Which would explain why you sometimes don't get much response. It's simply because people don't even know what you're intending to say rather than being a case of people not being willing to consider your view...

It can't be and it's not when you're talking about the coming of Christ referenced in passages like Matthew 24:29-31, 1 Thess 4:13-5:9, 2 Thess 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-13 and others. Exactly. And, yet, what do we see in Revelation 3:3? A coming of Christ that is conditional upon the repentance of...

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you were trying to say here. Can you try to clarify? How does this prove that the hour of trial relates directly to Jesus's second coming? That's an exaggeration. I can't dismiss what you said since I don't even understand what you said. It can't...

You would know about making false allegations. You have done that towards my view many times. You need to look in the mirror. You think you are so high and mighty while you do the very things that you accuse others of doing. I'm going by what you have said you believe. I don't really care what...

Let me make something clear. I am not saying that nothing was fulfilled back then. Clearly, when Jesus was talking to those first century churches He was talking about things that had been going on in those churches in the past, things going on there in the present and what He would do if they...

I don't understand what you're saying here, David. Are our prayers in vain? Does God not answer prayer and always just does whatever He planned without ever doing anything in response to people's prayers? Is that what you're trying to say? That's how it comes across. If not, then please clarify...