Search results

In your opinion. Okay, fair enough. No, after it is finished. God's millennium is the time period in which this "first resurrection" takes place. It is a one-time event for individuals, certainly, but takes place progressively over the course of the God's millennium. You're conflating about...

No, John calls himself "the disciple whom Jesus loved." John is speaking of himself in John 13:23, 19:26, 20:2, 21:7, and 21:20. Grace and peace to you.

It's neither, I think. 3R is just fully bought in to an errant understanding of these Scriptures we're talking about. He obviously knows Scripture at least fairly well, and he's not "deliberately disseminating misinformation," which would be lying. He's just mistaken. I don't mean to...

Sure. And that's unfortunate for several reasons. Sure it does; the bringing of God's Israel to completion and Jesus's subsequent return. Not a specific (or even implied) date, but a time of completion, for sure. As Jesus said, "concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the...

Ohhhhh... boy. <smile> No, God's millennium, this present age, will come to a close when His Israel is complete. Then Jesus will return, and in short order will win the final victory, execute the final Judgment, and finally usher in the Kingdom in its fullness... and earth and heaven will be...

No, not in the slightest. And you think these are...? I mean, I do agree that there are multiple datable events described throughout Revelation... and multiple iterations of those events... <smile> And at the end of the age, when God's Israel is complete, Jesus will return and bring them all...

Just the fact that John prophesied Christ's return ~ seven times over, by the way ~ in Revelation, in his relating to us the very visions Christ Himself gave him in about 95 A.D. should be enough. John was imprisoned on Patmos as an old man (probably in his 80s or perhaps early 90s) when he...

Yes, but not every one of them were used in the same context. Which I affirmed, as opposed to denying. However, assuming you are a follower of Christ as I am, then He was speaking of us also. What he was saying there did not just have an immediate context. Certainly, it had that, but much...

Disagree. "This generation" can be understood there in Matthew 24 in two different senses, in the present generation (which is strictly the sense you are seeing that in) and in a future generation. I submit to you that it is to be understood in both senses, but applied differently... it is...

Well, he said, "this is the last hour," right? Well, also "it is the last hour," in other English translations, but there is no difference. The "this" and the "it is" there... <smile> ...clearly indicates that he was speaking of the present time in that day... and is also prescient to us today...

Yeeeeeeah, right back atcha. And we'll leave it at that. You do. What I don't like is watching people flail away in futility trying to make something stick ~ which itself is terribly disingenuous. Right, because I don't. Your opinion, however erroneous, is... noted. <smile> Grace and...

Right, so it's inadvertent. Which I knew also. Or... possibly you're just in denial, still. It's probably at least a little of both. I'm well aware of that, too. <smile> This much is true, and if you don't, then... <smile> ...the issue you are taking is not really with me. And your...

What you say Calvinists believe. And some who call themselves Calvinists may, but that would make them, at least on these points, not Calvinists. So there is no "so" (again)... I know, but I don't care. <smile> The initial choice, yes. It's just amazing to me how anyone can refute what...

No. The way you are stating that question... no, that's not what I believe. I've answered this question in all its forms many, many times, in this thread and many others. So there is no "so." The premise itself is invalid, so there can be no "so." If you ask that question in the sense that...

Yes, and we've been here a thousand times. He did die for the sins of the world, and everyone in the sense of sufficiency... and even to make it possible for everyone. But... <smile> ...God gave Jesus who He gave Him; not all are His sheep, and of His sheep, given to Him by the Father, He will...

I have never argued against this. In your opinion. I get it. Yet again... "could not" in what sense, SI? Again, "could not" in the sense that they will not do so, and will thus purposely do the opposite... rather than "could not" in the sense that they are incapable of "being willing to do...

No. They are not willing to do so. They are only willing to do the devil's will. This is true of all people unless and until they are born again of the Spirit. It was true even of you and me at one time; we were children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God... I am not; that's just...

And finally, back to 1 Corinthians 12... ...believe Paul was actually right in 1 Corinthians 12:9... <smile> ...and I do... "All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, Who apportions to each one individually as He wills." What you say here is not true for at least two reasons: 1...

SIGH... As Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.... Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." Sure, we are sealed with the promised Holy Spirit...

Nobody I know ~ especially not me ~ ever said "faith is God's." Who ever said that? Yeah, not me... Faith is God's assurance to us of our salvation in Christ. Yes, we have it, and it is our assurance from God of these things. And, some have a greater measure of it than others, but this does...