Search results

Gee-whiz! You are still avoiding my question. You guys are wasting an incredible amount of time fighting over 520 years versus 2,550+ years, while you have not first established from God's Word who the Two Witnesses actually are. That is backwards exegesis. Before arguing about when the Two...

Seriously, this response only shows that you are missing the point of biblical exegesis! Yes, John 5:39 teaches that the Scriptures testify of Christ. No one here is denying that. But that does NOT mean you can take every Old Testament passage and simply declare, “This particular verse must...

Truth7t7 did not prove anything biblically. Simply pointing out that Zechariah was written around 520 BC does not establish that Zechariah 4:14 refers to John the Baptist and Jesus, nor does it disprove its connection with the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11. What exactly does “520 BC” or the...

You guys are a riot. You STILL can’t even agree among yourselves on who the Two Witnesses really are, the meaning of 1,260 days, 3-1/2 days, fire coming out of mouth, lying dead in the street of the city, etc. yet you’re so certain everyone else has it wrong? Wow. At this point, you’re just...

Read my posts again and again until you realized that you did not pay closely attention to what I said. Your position remains refuted.

Chuckle... Patting on your back and say to you, "see ya when you have two fire-breathing men." :-P

And one more thing...bud... And since you insist that Revelation 11 must be read literally, I'll leave you with one final thought. Revelation 11:5 says: So when you actually see two literal men breathing literal fire out of their literal mouths and literally devouring their enemies with it...

Chuckle! Bud, you are doing exactly what I have been pointing out. You put your interpretation in bold: “Two future prophets.” “Literal physical bodies.” “Literal plagues.” “Future, Literal, Unfulfilled.” Then you quote Revelation 11 as though the passage itself said those words. But it...

Ah yes—“simple, clear, easy to understand.” Apparently the rule is: if Zechariah says “two anointed ones,” we shut the Bible, stop comparing Scripture with Scripture, and announce, “Well, obviously that means two literal future men!” Except Zechariah never says that. You keep repeating “These...

Huh?! You say I am “avoiding” Zechariah 4?! No, not at all, I am doing exactly the opposite. I am comparing Zechariah 4 with the rest of Scripture instead of stopping at one phrase and assuming that “two anointed ones” must mean two literal individual men. You quote: I agree completely...

You say I am waving a “symbolic wand” over Revelation 11 and magically turning the Two Witnesses into the Church. That accusation is rather ironic, because I am not the one who introduced symbolism into the passage. God did. Before calling my interpretation “laughable” or “malarkey,” perhaps...

Thank you. To God be the glory! I agree that Satan’s “little season” is important to understanding Revelation 11. However, I understand the timing a little differently. I believe Satan’s little season begins when the testimony of the Two Witnesses is finished and the beast ascends out of the...

I think you are STILL missing the point of what I am saying. You asked, “How important is it to determine the entity types of the Two Witnesses?” It is extremely important! Because if you misunderstand who the Two Witnesses are, then you will misunderstand what their testimony, death...

Wow... You have repeated the word “literal” many times, but simply calling everything literal does NOT demonstrate from Scripture that Revelation 11 is meant to be interpreted that way. Not wise! In fact, your interpretation immediately runs into a serious problem: you are not consistently...

What? LOL. I am not sure what you mean by a “forest of camouflage,” because that does not actually address the biblical argument I presented. My post did not merely speculate about the “entity type” of the Two Witnesses. I compared the symbolism of Revelation 11 with other Scriptures...

Why Does Scripture Mention Their “Feet”? This detail is important! Throughout Scripture, feet are associated with being sent forth with the Gospel: And: Therefore, when the Spirit causes the Two Witnesses to stand upon their feet, the picture is one of God's people becoming mobilized again...

Who Are the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11? The Bible does NOT teach that the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11 are two literal men who suddenly appear at the end of the world or even the first century. Revelation itself identifies them symbolically: Elsewhere Scripture identifies the...

Ahem... You just repeated yourself. I already broke down the article point by point above — Israel and the Gentiles, the Old Covenant riches, the "poor in spirit," the crumbs and the dogs tied to Matthew 15, Abraham's bosom as the covenant people. None of that got a response. You just came back...

You missed the point. Parable was there for our learning, not for us to figure out what it looks like for Rich man in hell and or random man called Larazus in heaven. Read the article.

That is pretty weak because your interpretation is based almost entirely on speculation. It actually demonstrates that you do not understand what the parable is communicating. No, the parable is not talking about the conscious state of some random group of ten literal, physical virgins. You are...