Search results

Amen. There was no backup plan because there was no chance of Plan A not succeeding.

Don't those who believe in a pre-trib rapture normally say that it can happen at any time and there aren't any signs that immediately precede it? But, you guys seem to believe that certain signs have to occur first before the rapture happens. That seems to contradict the normal pre-trib rapture...

Here's the bottom line. Scripture teaches that Christ's resurrection itself was the first resurrection (Acts 26:23, Col 1:18, 1 Cor 15:20-23, Rev 1:5). That should be the starting point when determining what having part in the first resurrection is about, but for some reason people use...

Stop being so vague and tell me exactly how I am doing what you are claiming. I need less of your words and more scripture to back them up or else you are going to put me to sleep. So, please break Romans 9:6-8 down for me and show me how exactly you think I'm doing what you're claiming that I'm...

Exactly. A holy priesthood? That reminds me of this passage which is very clearly referring to the Church: Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins...

I think this is just a case of semantics here rather than us disagreeing about this. Yes, in a sense, it failed, but it was meant to fail. So, in that sense, it succeeded in doing what God intended for it to do. How's that? Can we at least agree on that? I cringe at you calling Christ's...

My view does not have that label since I don't have national Israel being replaced by spiritual Israel. How many times do I need to tell you this? Let me tell you what I believe instead of you trying to tell me what I believe. You mean what your straw man believes and what others believe? That...

And who is doing that exactly?

What good is it for you to just make claims without backing them up with scripture and showing how you are coming to your conclusions? Here is why Gentiles are included in Spiritual Israel. Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are...

And what Paul wrote about in passages like these as well: Colossians 2:11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the fleshwas put off when you were circumcised by Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you...

It's not my definitions of Israel, it's Paul's definitions as given in passages like Romans 9:6-8. And spiritual Israel is referenced in passages like Ephesians 2:11-13 and Galatians 6:15-16 by Paul as well. I'm not even claiming that, I'm claiming that spiritual Israel consists of all...

Yes, he most certainly was. Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other...

You're acting as if there are people who claim there is only one Israel and it's the "International Church", but people like me believe there are two Israels. How can that not matter when the term you're using is called "REPLACEMENT theology"? How can something be called "REPLACEMENT theology"...

I don't reject that when it's used, but it wasn't used in this case. There is no indication that he was using hyperbole there. You are just making things up as you go along. Jesus was clearly indicating that the title "Father" is sacred and belongs only to God the Father. LOL. No one is saying...

Asking them to back up their beliefs with scripture is asking too much of them since it can't be done.

Rightly so because that is clearly what Jesus indicated. You are the one not using exegesis to interpret the text. The text does not indicate what you are saying at all. You are twisting it to say what you want it to say. This is what Jesus was saying to "the crowds and to His disciples"...

How can I answer that question when you don't explain what you're talking about? What are these two future gatherings of Hebrews that you're referring to here?

He partly spoke about that, yes, but He was asked two questions. One related to the destruction of the temple buildings and one related to His second coming at the end of the age. He answered both of them. The part regarding the gathering of the elect relates to the second question and His...

I've already explained this to you several times. In my view no one is replaced. The description of the cultivated olive tree by Paul in Romans 11 is a description of my view. What Paul described there represents unbelieving Israelites like the first century Pharisees and scribes being cut off...

This doesn't matter. He knew that the elect, at His coming at the end of the age, would include Gentiles. That is what matters. I see no basis whatsoever for thinking that Matthew 24:29-31 is speaking of a different event than 1 Thess 4:14-17.