Search results

LOL. Oh, really? And why is that? That's how he appeared to mean it. Do you speak for him? Yeah, you and I may recognize that, but does Davy? How do you know that is what he meant? What is even the point of saying something like that? We all think we interpret it as written. It serves no...

Neither Jesus nor Paul ever taught that theory. Not even close. Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30 And then...

This post here really illustrates just how clueless you really are. No Amil says that Revelation 20:4 only describes "the OT redeemed". Just please stop replying to me if this is the kind of nonsense that you're going to respond with.

What is your question here exactly? I can't make sense of it. It destroyed everything on the earth except for those who were saved and that is what will happen at the second coming, only this time by fire. That is my argument based on what Peter said in 2 Peter 3:5-7 and what Jesus said in...

So, do you think Jesus was mistaken by saying that a time (singular - not two times) is coming when all of the dead will be raised?

Neither of you have come anywhere near explaining how 2 Peter 3:3-13 can possibly fit with Premillennialism, so please do not act as if you've provided airtight arguments in favor of Premillennialism when you have provided no convincing arguments at all for how 2 Peter 3 can possibly be...

Right. And it shows them being resurrected unto two different eternal destinies. That lines up with the passages like Matthew 13:36-43, Matthew 13:47-50 and Matthew 25:31-46 which show everyone being gathered to be judged at the same time.

@Timtofly I have the same response to all of your posts. I have no idea of what you're talking about. That's all I can say in response. Your posts come across as incoherent, rambling nonsense to me. Just being honest. So, I don't have any interest in continuing the discussion with you...

You should be an agnosmillennialist like you were before until you get 2 Peter 3 figured out, in my opinion. I don't see any possible way that 2 Peter 3 can be reconciled with Premillennialism. Without exception the Greek words translated as "first resurrection" are only used to describe...

Jesus said one time is coming when all of the dead will be raised, not two. You are choosing to twist John 5:28-29 to fit your view of Revelation 20 instead of allowing the very straightforward text of John 5:28-29 to aid your understanding of Revelation 20.

You missed the point. Do you even make any effort at all to understand what others are saying? What I'm saying is that word is not used to refer to the act of being resurrected itself. But the word anazao is. So, why wasn't the word anazao used in Revelation 20:4 like it was in verse 5 to...

Was it too much trouble for you to just quote the one before it, so that we don't have to search for it? None of your supposed contradictions are valid. This thread is a joke.

LOL. Not even close. But, go on with your delusions if you want.

Why can't He have been speaking partly of the destruction of the temple buildings in the Olivet Discourse and partly of His future coming at the end of the age? He was asked about both of those things, so it makes sense that He would have talked about both of those things. There's no reason to...

Right. He was asked two different questions. One related to the destruction of the temple buildings and one related to His coming and the end of the age which has not yet occurred. It just doesn't work when people think that either the entire Olivet Discourse was fulfilled by 70 AD or that...

The judgment written about in Revelation 20:11-15 clearly happens after the thousand years and Satan's little season. Do you agree or not? If not, then there's nothing left to discuss because your view is just too far off base to even have a reasonable discussion about. But, if you agree that...

LOL!!! Why does He need to point it out in order for that to be the case? Does the book of Revelation come across to you as a book where everything is spelled out to us? Please point out where John states "everything I'm writing about in this book will occur in chronological order". Good...

What depends on that exactly? I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you denying that the Greek word stoicheion can refer to the physical elements of the universe? This is what I see on blueletterbible.org for that word: So, one of the definitions of the word is fits my interpretation...

Right. And I was not expecting you to completely agree with everything I said, so that is not a surprise. I agree. There are those who acknowledge that Luke 21:20-24 refers to that event, but then they deny that Matthew 24:15-22 and Mark 13:14-20 are parallel passages to that one, which I...

You think the entire book is chronological and don't recognize the parallel sections in it, which is laughable. As long as you continue to believe that what is written in the book all happens chronologically from beginning to end your interpretation of the book will continue to be completely...