Search results

The lengths that some go to to deny clear scripture is truly unbelievable. Clearly, the temple buildings were destroyed long ago (in 70 AD) just as Jesus said they would be. Why deny something so obvious? The reason is that many people don't understand that Jesus did not just talk about...

You are hilarious. You will go to any length to deny the obvious, which is that one of the questions the disciples asked Jesus (the other being about His future coming at the end of the age) on the mount of Olives is when the temple buildings would be destroyed. They clearly were referring to...

I don't know what in the world you're saying here, but it's quite obvious that the books aren't opened until after the thousand years and Satan's little season are over first. So, you can say they're already opened all you want, but that contradicts Revelation 20.

It's referring to them having part in the first resurrection, yes. But, scripture says that Christ's resurrection was the first resurrection (Acts 26:23, 1 Cor 15:20;22, Col 1:18, Rev 1:5). That's not something that should be ignored. So, I'm not side-stepping anything. You need to stop...

I will answer your question in this post. I hope you will then answer mine as well. It's used in only 5 other verses and it refers to worldly principles or rules in those verses. However, that is NOT the only definition of that word. So, just because it's used a certain way in a grand total...

Where are you getting that from? I just looked at about twenty different English Bible translations and the verse is there in all of them. Why would all of those Bible translators include it if most of them (supposedly) thought it shouldn't be there? I think you're making that up just because...

Not in terms of determining their eternal destiny, as I said. That is what Jesus will do. Do you disagree or do you think the eternal destiny of people will be up to you to decide? What is there to discern? Whether someone was dead and has been resurrected or if they are still alive when...

What does that even mean, to "stay with God's Word as written"? Such a meaningless thing to say. That usually means someone is interpreting everything in a wooden, literal fashion without using any spiritual discernment and without any regard for context or the style of writing (literal...

So, you think the timing of both Daniel 7:9-10 and Revelation 20:11-15 goes back to Adam and Eve then? If not, then what you're saying here makes no sense at all because what you're saying would imply that Revelation 20:11-15, which refers to the books being opened and people then being judged...

It does in Revelation 20:4. It doesn't matter if it does anywhere else. It was a colossal waste of time for you to list all the verses where it isn't used that way. You'll never get that wasted time back. The only way you could prove that it can't be used to refer to those who are...

What does this even mean? What are you attempting to say here? How exactly does this question relate to a supposed error or contradiction in Amil? You're clearly just making up a bunch of nonsensical points, including #23 here, and then claiming they are supposed contradictions in Amil. You...

If you want to look at it as two resurrections (one of believers and one of unbelievers), I don't care. That's really besides the point that Amils make about John 5:28-29. If it's meant to be seen as two resurrections then it's two resurrections that occur at around the same time. Jesus said...

LOL at you, of all people, accusing someone else of eisegesis. That's a good one. It's only your assumption that it's talking about those who die during a brief period before the end of the age. Your hyper-literalist approach to a very symbolic book leads you to that conclusion. But, what...

What is the earth that is referenced in 2 Peter 3:10 that Peter said will be burned up? Is it something besides the planet earth?

Well, good for you. LOL at you saying that someone else is not being nice. Hilarious.

You have attempted to debunk Amillennialism and have failed miserably every time. You are the one who tries to use Matthew 25:31-46 to support your false Premil belief even though that passage very clearly shows both the saved and unsaved being gathered for judgment at the same time, which is...

How many hours that are coming? The Premil view says two. But, the text only says one.

Which Amills are those? Just give me a couple names. Otherwise, I have to assume that you're making this up just to try to make Amills look bad. I don't know of any Amills, past or present, who interpret it that way.

Do you not understand that what symbols represent in reality doesn't have to resemble the symbols? For example, Satan is described as a dragon with seven heads and ten horns. Does that describe his literal appearance at all? Of course not. So, a symbolic sword does not have to be understood...

LOL. Such nonsense.