Search results

Your rhetoric doesn't phase me at all. I will not take back anything I said. Everyone here can see that you deny the future bodily coming of Jesus Christ and the future mass bodily resurrection of the dead in Christ. I don't care what label that YOU want to put on that. I call it Preterist.

LOL. You are incapable of just answering yes or no? That is too much to ask of you? So, this is clearly talking about bodily resurrections from the dead, so I guess that means your answer to my question about John 5:28-29 is that it is indeed talking about the bodily resurrection of the dead...

What in the world are you talking about? What evidence do you have to back this up? According to what Jesus taught about things like adultery and murder, which gave insight into how God looks at things, I would say yes. Why would you ask an Amil this question when you know I don't even believe...

What do you know about Scripture? It seems that you know nothing. Your comments indicate that.

Nowhere, of course. Jesus very specifically said there will be no marriage in the age to come (Luke 20:34-36). Where does this guy get his beliefs from? I think it's possible that he doesn't interpret even one single verse in all of scripture correctly. I just don't get it.

Yes, I have. Many times. Why do you ask? Is there some reason why you are avoiding answering a simple question?

Absolutely right. The Premil theory is clearly based primarily on speculation and wild theories rather than on solid arguments that can be backed up with scripture. They take a passage from one of the most highly symbolic books in the Bible (if not the most) and interpret it literally and...

LOL. That's rich coming from you. Hilarious.

Wrong. God wants people to place their faith in His Son and to love Him. Can love be forced? No, it cannot. So, your understanding of God is very flawed. You believe He is a Puppet Master, but He is not. That is a lie. When He said "It is finished" that means He finished all of the things the...

You are a clown. I can't take you seriously. You are as clueless as they come. You do NOTHING to support your views with scripture. And you lie about what others believe. You should be ashamed of yourself, but instead you are proud of yourself for being an arrogant fool.

"Both kingdoms"? LOL. Scripture never teaches that Christ would rule over 2 kingdoms at once. You guys just make stuff up. It can't be taken seriously. It's utterly ridiculous.

Believing that Jesus would rule over some temporary kingdom is complete nonsense that can't be taken seriously. He would never reign over a meaningless temporary kingdom. His kingdom, which does not come with observation (Luke 17:20) and is not of this world (John 18:36) will go on forever.

You would actually learn something if you read his posts, but you clearly aren't interested in learning anything. You are clearly comfortable with believing the falsehood that you currently believe in.

Says you, but, again, the only other place in scripture where the Greek words protos (first) and anastasis (resurrection) are found together are in Acts 26:23 which refers to Christ's resurrection as being the first resurrection. And we know His was the first resurrection in the sense that it...

No, what's weird (insane, really) is the idea of Christ ever being King over a temporary kingdom. It doesn't get any more weird (insane) than that.

Says the guy who only shares his own words without ever backing them up with scripture.

No, you have not. Maybe to yourself, but not to anyone else. You apparently don't. You deny the future bodily coming of Jesus Christ at which time all of the dead in Christ will be resurrected and all of His people will be gathered to Him, do you not? It seems clear that you do, so that makes...

LOL! You continue to make this silly argument. So, I will continue to point out that the beast is referenced over 30 times in the book of Revelation. Does that mean it's a literal beast since it is referenced so many times? Of course not. So, your argument here is ridiculous and can't be taken...

That's a meaningless thing to say since we all believe that it means what it says. But, the fact of the matter is that it's not always literal. You're talking as if it is, which is nonsense. You are a premillennialist whether you realize it or not, so that's why I was talking about it from that...

You should try thinking first before you post. The Greek words translated as "first resurrection" in Revleation 20 are protos (first) anastasis (resurrection). The only other verse in scripture where those two words can be found together is here: Acts 26:23 that the Messiah would suffer and, as...