Search results

Do you think we will literally see dead bodies all over at some other time? If so, when? Isaiah clearly indicates that he's talking about the new heavens and new earth in Isaiah 66:22-24, yet here you are once again denying that a passage is talking about the new heavens and new earth even when...

LOL. This is 100% gibberish. If you only knew how incoherent you come across. It's impossible to make any sense out of what you're saying. I had to stop reading here because your words were turning my brain into mush. You just talk completely incomprehensible nonsense.

You are a stubborn one. This is utter foolishness. In no way, shape or form can a nation that includes many people who reject Christ be considered holy. You're not even thinking here. To include Christ rejecters in His "holy nation" is utterly ridiculous and shows a complete lack of discernment.

Did you somehow miss the other part of Colossians 1:13? Not only have we already been delivered from the power of darkness, but we also have already been translated into the kingdom of Christ. That supports Amil doctrine, not Premil.

That is not true at all. They would not have been considered children at 100 years old even back then. Come on. They became adults at the same age back then as they do now. They just lived a lot longer as adults back then.

When someone's primary source to back up their claim is Thomas Ice then you know their claim is on shaky ground! LOL!

Your whole post, including your own comments and the comments you quoted from others, was ridiculous. You said "However, in the earliest part of Church history, Premil was dominant". That is not true. And the quote from the early church father Justin Martyr proves that.

No, I don't follow you at all. Do you understand that Jeremiah 31:31-34 is quoted in Hebrews 8:8-13 and it relates to the new covenant that was established by the blood of Christ long ago? If you don't understand that, what can you understand? I think maybe nothing. No, he indicates that it...

Oh, the kingdom has "only" been established in Spirit? That's all. I guess that isn't very significant to you. LOL. Ridiculous.

Well said. To think that some Premils accuse us Amils of spiritualizing everything. Yet, our doctrine is founded primarily on taking passages like Matthew 25:35-44 and 2 Peter 3:3-13 literally. So, their accusations are clearly false since Amils are often take scripture more literally than Premils.

Having degrees does absolutely nothing to improve your spiritual discernment. Nothing at all. I'll pray for her and for you. I know what it's like to care for a wife with serious health issues.

This is flat out ridiculous and completely biased. I think even the early church father and premil Justin Martyr would laugh at this nonsense. He said this in the early or maybe mid 100s: "I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion (temporal 1000 year reign), and...

It's so clear that only doctrinal bias can keep someone from seeing it. First Paul said that in times past (before Christ's death and resurrection) Gentiles were not citizens of Israel and then a little later he said now we (Gentile believers) are fellow citizens. Let's see...fellow citizens of...

If you acknowledged that Isaiah 65 verse 20 relates directly to verse 19 then it would prove something, so it's no wonder that you don't want to acknowledge that verse 20 relates directly to verse 19. Even though it clearly does, as you've been shown.

Do you believe that Isaiah 65:18-19 is about the new heavens and new earth?

Your inability to recognize that Isaiah was speaking figuratively when talking about a 100 year old child is amazing to me. A 100 year old child? Really? That's nonsense when taken literally. It's clearly figurative text. He was describing eternity in a figurative way that people back then...

She thinks Isaiah 65:17-19 is about the new heavens and new earth, but then the subject is changed and it starts talking about the supposed earthly millennium after that. Yet, it's very clear that verse 20 refers directly to what was just talked about in the previous verses (17-19). Isaiah...

So, you see it as talking about the new heavens and new earth in Isaiah 65:17-19 and then you think the subject changes in verse 20, right? But, you were shown how verse 20 refers back to verse 19, which means it's directly related to verse 19. Does that not matter to you?

That's a lie. I don't ignore any important verses and I also don't twist verses like Romans 9:6-8 and 1 Peter 2:9 to fit my doctrine.

That's quite a convenient way for you to interpret that passage. It's quite clear that all people will be gathered before Christ on His throne just after He comes with His angels and then all people will be judged. There is absolutely no indication whatsoever that there will be any kind of...