Search results

I have never said otherwise. According to Revelation 17:8, the beast "was" in the past, was in the bottomless pit at the time John wrote the book, and will ascend from the bottomless pit/abyss in the future. You are apparently unable to answer the question of what it means when it says the beast...

How does this answer my question of what it means when it says the beast "was, and is not"? Why are you avoiding answering that question? It must be because you have no answer for it. Can you just acknowledge that instead of insisting that the beast is a man? If the beast is a man then he would...

If it's so simple then why can't you support your belief in a simple and very easy to understand way? You can't. That is obvious. Instead, you come across like a child who has no idea how to form a coherent argument and who can do nothing but repeat the same words over and over again. Your...

Then why do you judge everyone else all the time? Where is it taught in scripture then? Surely, such a concept would be very clearly taught in scripture if it's absurd for anyone to miss it. So, where is it taught? You rarely use scripture to support your claims. That makes it very difficult to...

Observing the feast of tabernacles involves performing animal sacrifices. Do you think animal sacrifices will be performed on the eternal new earth?

I find it to be incredibly sad that any Amil would not recognize that Daniel 9:27 is talking about Jesus confirming the new covenant and putting an end to the need for animal sacrifices and offerings and not about some imaginary bad guy. I know dispensationalists interpret it that way, but you...

How do you know I'm pulling that verse out of context? If that's the case then you should be able to tell me what the verse means. So, can you please do that instead of repeating your same rhetoric over and over again? I agree. The date he wrote the book has nothing to do with my understanding...

This says it all. You say no interpretation is needed and yet you can't tell me what it means when it says the beast "was, is not and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit". Did you mean to say you don't know how to interpret that, but that doesn't matter to you because you're going to just...

Why didn't you address what I said? And now you are expecting me to address what you're saying here? Is this a one way discussion? Is that how discussions work? I could say the same to you as what you said to me here regarding many other passages like 2nd Peter 3. How does 2 Peter 3:3-13 fit...

It talks about judging the dead separately from destroying those who destroy the earth. That is the context. You are trying to make those things the same. If physically destroying those who destroy the earth is a case of judging people then it's judging those who are alive, not dead. Judging...

He repeatedly fails to address the arguments being made against his view and he just repeats the same things over and over. If his view was true then he should be able to defend it when challenged, but he doesn't do that. The next argument he addresses specifically will be the first one.

In verse 26 it talks about the destruction of "the city and the sanctuary". Do you believe the consummation relates to that in the sense of the city and the sanctuary being brought to an "ultimate end"? Daniel 9:26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will...

Is that your understanding of this passage which talks about destruction accompanying the day of the Lord as well? 1 Thess 5:1 Now, brothers and sisters, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, 2 for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night...

This is absolutely true. As you like to say, he is just winging it. Making it up as he goes. Not willing to learn anything, but only willing to do anything he can, including adjusting his view on the fly, to fit Premil.

LOL. I'm convinced that I could tell you that 2 + 2 = 4 and you'll find a way to make 2 + 2 = 5. It does not say the slaves are great and small, it says "all people" include free and slave, great and small. You clearly do not read scripture carefully. Why did you not address anything I said...

Seems more like common nonsense. That's the result when someone relies completely on their own flawed mind and "common sense" instead of relying on scripture.

Where are you getting the idea that "Paul's readers were expecting a message or a letter from one of the Apostles to the effect that the Day of the Lord has come"? I'm not seeing that at all. Instead, I see a warning from Paul that they should not believe any message or letter that is supposedly...

You're thinking about this in completely the wrong way. It's not the type of inheritance that you're thinking of. What it's saying is that He will inherit the right to do as He pleases with those who have rejected Him. And it shows what He will do is destroy them. And why wouldn't He? They will...

LOL. You think Paul was talking about "sudden destruction" from which "they shall not escape", but no one dies? He was talking about "the day of the Lord". Same thing as Peter in 2 Peter 3:10-12. You don't think anyone dies during what is described in 2 Peter 3:10-12? Read it again. It refers to...

What did John mean when he said the beast "was" in Revelation 17:8? What did he mean when he said the beast "is not"? What did he mean when he said the beast "shall ascend out of the bottomless pit"? Revelation 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the...