Search results

Where are you getting from that scripture that "the Lord Jesus has all power, but is not yet ruling over all on earth yet?". I don't see that concept being taught there at all. Is there anything existing right now that is not under Him? No. It very clearly says in past tense: "thou hast put all...

That is a lie. I am objective and that is exactly the conclusion I come to. You are equating being objective with assuming everything is meant to be taken literally, but that is not a case of being objective at all. This is nonsense. Do you deny that there is symbolism in the book of...

Yes, it is. A typical false accusation made by a Premil. The fact is that we all see some of the text as being spiritual and some as symbolic and some as literal. We just don't always agree on which is which. And by "objective" you mean "literal". That's not objective. Objective is to discern...

They all portray the final wrath of God/Christ, so how can that be? What evidence do you have to back that up?

Forgot to respond to this separately. I didn't say it was the complete fulfillment, I've said all along that it has an ongoing fulfillment that started on the day of Pentecost. It continues to be fulfilled as people continue to call on the name and become saved. And it will continue up until the...

What plan? Where is this plan taught in scripture that there would be 6,000 years of history, then Christ returns, then 1,000 years (plus Satan's little season) more? So, the ten kings reign with the beast for literally 60 minutes? That's all they get? I don't believe any of the time periods...

Because that isn't taught in scripture. I am zealous for opposing false teaching and promoting truth from scripture. It can, but not necessarily. If you don't recognize that Jesus is reigning now and that we reign with Him and have complete authority over our spiritual enemy because of that...

Do you think that the events written about in the book of Revelation are all in chronological order from beginning to end? It seems so. But, that is not the case. The final wrath of Christ that will come down when He returns is referenced several times in the book of Revelation, including...

Why is the book not addressed to churches in Israel then? Instead, it was addressed to churches in the ancient Roman province of Asia.

Amen. It's very disturbing when I see people on here who can't even grasp the fundamentals of Christianity. It makes me wonder what do they understand about Christianity? Nothing?

You just don't get it. Is God a God of the dead or of the living? He is a God of the living, right? And He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. If Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are completely dead (body, soul and spirit) then God would not be their God. Moses and Elijah appeared at Jesus's...

Yes, I understand that there is symbolism there, but you're taking it too far. What the symbolism implies is that those who are physically/bodily dead are conscious in heaven. Luke 16:19-31 very strongly indicates that those who are physically dead and in hell are conscious as well. Do you...

I have already answered this multiple times! Why do you act as if I haven't? I'm not going to spoon feed scripture to you as if you are a toddler. I showed the scripture which indicates that the new covenant was fully established by the blood of Christ and how Paul talked how he and the other...

All of it. It's just that easy. There's no such thing as a partial fulfillment of the new covenant. It was fully established by the shed blood of Christ, as scripture teaches. It's just that easy.

LOL. I just can't take you seriously. No, the phrase "this is that" is not ambiguous. You are a false teacher who twists scripture to make it say whatever you want it to say. That's the bottom line.

What isn't okay? I didn't say anything about something being okay. LOL. Do you actually think I'm going to take statements like this seriously when you won't even state what you believe the promise is? LOL. Hilarious. Paul applied the promises God made to Abraham and his seed to Gentiles (Gal...

Why are you saying that I apparently don't understand Romans 9:6? What is that based on? I have explained my understanding of that verse many times and you have never done anything at all to refute it.

That hasn't stopped you from sharing your opinions before, so what's different about this?

You agree? I guess I'll need to reconsider my view on this. I'm kidding (mostly). I was referring to Romans 11:11-14 in particular. What are you talking about? How do I not figure? Have you actually read Romans 11:11-14? What in the world are you even talking about here? He was talking...

This is different. Peter said "this is that". As in "this" (what was happening on the day of Pentecost) is "that" (what was prophesied by Joel in Joel 2:28-32). There's no wiggle room there. That's as straightforward as it gets. You do understand that absolutely no one agrees with you on this...