Search results

The old covenant never ended.Sinners are under the old covenant. Both Preterists and dispensationalists are wrong regarding this fact.

To be precise, the grace that we have is only a pre-millennial partial experience to be fully realized at the return of Christ and the beginning/duration of the thousand year millennium.

You know what it means. There are different terminologies with the word depending on the context. When Jesus said it shall come on the whole world he meant the whole world, not just a section of the world. You have to read it carefully in context. You got to put away the concordance.

Preterism is simply reverse prophecy. Everything that is future becomes present. It has no prophecy value whatsoever in the Bible for the NT church. It leaves the church without any type of word of encouragement which is null and void. It’s a dead end street for anybody’s belief system

Preterism reads the Bible in a strange way. It is like an endless stream of misunderstandings being introduced. Watching preterism explained is like watching the Beverly Hillbillies.

Love not the world?

Did he say in the whole world or just the world? Are you trying to misread what Jesus said?

Also, everybody must realize that when Jesus said the gospel will go into all the world and then shall the end come , he would be referring to Revelation 14 as it was revealed to John. That is when the three angels preach the gospel to the entire world right before the end.

Just remember that when Jesus says the whole world, he means the whole world. Jesus does not fabricate things.

Some naive Bible readers think the quotes of the unsaved in the Bible are gospel truth.

The problem with the preterist is they think Jesus is the "Great Exaggerator".

Big difference. "The people" said...the whole world. Vs, Jesus said the whole world. "The people" exaggerated, not Jesus.

The main problem with those that reject Peter’s very first command is simple… They think that remission of sins is prior to baptism. This renders the sacrifice of Jesus as moot. For without the shedding of blood is no remission of sins. Peter said Acts 2:38 was specifically for the remission of...

Those that obey Acts 2:38 are all that? If Peter were alive, he would think it the other way.

So you are saying that the pope, or Mormon, or a Jehovah witness that receive the gift of the Holy Ghost can remain how they are and they will be saved, correct?

OK, enough of the unscriptural threats. Stick to business. If the pope gets the Holy Ghost and remains the pope, is he saved?

Just answer a simple question Robert… Did Peter command the Gentiles per Acts 10 to get baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins? If so, why, if it was not essential to immediately be baptized? Also, this may come as a shock to you, but Romans-Revelation were written to...

Would I be imposing to ask you if you were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ?

It is called the spirit of truth. It comes inside of us to lead us to the truth. The truth is to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ like Cornelius and his kin folks were. They would not have been baptized if the spirit of truth had not entered them. They were not yet buried with Christ when...

Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins is an essential part of the born-again process. The Holy Ghost does not remit sins. It leads us to water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. We have to keep that in mind. Water baptism in the name of Jesus...