Search results

You are the one who made the claim that the last being first and the first being last has something to do with the rapture. So, the onus is on you to prove that. So, why don't you quote the scriptures which talk about the last being first and first being last and show exactly how they have...

Apparently, he does. But, why would anyone think that He would do that? That makes no sense. The destruction of Jerusalem and the temple buildings was a very significant event and is not something that Jesus would have refrained from prophesying about at all. Was that the main focus of His...

Exactly. There is no indication whatsoever that what is described in verses 34-36 happens at the same time as what is described in verses 21-24. In between the two great tribulation events is what Jesus called "the times of the Gentiles" which people like Truth7t7 are completely ignoring.

Was Jerusalem not surrounded by armies in 70 AD? I believe it was. Did no one in Judea heed Jesus's warning to flee into the mountains back then? I believe they did. Was there "great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people" with "the land" being Jerusalem and "this people" being the...

Are you saying you don't believe anything of any significance involving great tribulation of any kind happened in 70 AD? Are you saying that you believe Jerusalem and its temple buildings were not destroyed in 70 AD? Because that is one of the great tribulation events that I'm talking about...

Yes, I have already established that several times at this point. I'm glad you are remembering that so that I don't have to remind you. Wrong. I'm just denying your nonsense. You can't expect to be taken seriously when you deny that the following is describing the temple buildings standing...

You were talking about the rapture, so that is what he was addressing. Are you somehow not aware that the resurrection of the dead in Christ will occur at the time of the rapture, as indicated by Paul in 1 Thess 4:14-17? Paul said they (the dead in Christ) will first be resurrected and then the...

That isn't true, either (the first thing you said). Yes, it is partly about that, but, overall, it's about all the time between His first and second coming with a bit about what comes after that (new heavens and new earth). Why would chapters 2 and 3 refer to first century churches, but then the...

What holy place are you talking about? When Jesus comes back it will be too late to repent and believe. The idea of anyone being able to repent and believe after Jesus has descended from heaven at His second coming is not taught in scripture anywhere. 2 Thessalonians 1:6 Seeing it is a...

Where does that scripture say He would be anointed at His return? I showed you scripture which shows He was anointed already long ago and you just ignore them all. Who should I believe? The authors of scripture or you? I'm glad you asked. Clearly, neither of our views can be correct if we take...

I completely disagree. Revelation is not a book about the last 7 years of history before Christ's return. You have such a narrow view of the book. The book was addressed to seven first century churches. You think nothing in the book applies to them? Revelation covers the entire New Testament...

Never. Instead we see Jesus saying things like this: John 17:15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. If Jesus prayed for His followers to not be taken out of the world in order to avoid evil and tribulation, then why would...

Do you ever interpret any scripture in context? That has absolutely nothing to do with the rapture at all, let alone anything to do with when the rapture will occur in relation to the tribulation.

Yes, you do. You don't have all who are in Christ together as one body. That is false. They are saved by the blood of Christ just as NT saints are. There is salvation by no other name and no other way (Acts 4:12, John 14:6). Was Abraham not an OT saint? Of course he was. Scripture teaches this...

Thanks for the response. You obviously interpret that in a literal sense, but how can you conclude that everlasting righteousness is brought in at that point, when you believe the following occurs 1,000 years later: Revelation 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set...

Revelation 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. 16 And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell...

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Do...

Your hyper-literalist and futurist views originated with the pre-trib dispensationalist teachings of John Nelson Darby in the 1800s.

Because that is what Jesus indicated. This occurred around 70 AD and was great tribulation in and around Jerusalem: Luke 21:20 “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in...

I'm saying the second half of the 70th week consisted of the preaching of the gospel first to Israel. You are aware that the gospel was first preached in Israel before going out to the Gentile nations, aren't you?