Search results

My goodness. You STILL don't understand the argument. I am not “running away,” and I never argued that every single word in Revelation 11 is symbolic. I have repeatedly explained who the Two Witnesses represent, the nature of their prophetic testimony, how the beast kills their testimony, what...

Same old wooden-literalist claim. Let me know when you finally find your two human flamethrowers standing in Jerusalem, literally shooting fire out of their mouths. Until then, Revelation’s symbolic language remains symbolic.

Ah, so the bag of tricks is “empty,” yet you keep having to declare everything literal instead of proving it literal. Let's deal with your argument rather than your repeated “baloney, malarkey, laughable” routine where you already has been refuted anyway. You quote Zechariah 4:14: “These are...

There you go again. When you cannot actually refute @rwb's biblical argument, you reach for elves, fairy tales, cookies, milk, and ridicule. That may get you a laugh, but it doesn't get you anywhere near proving your interpretation. And then signing it “In Love, Jesus Is The Lord” after mocking...

Oh, now we're finally getting somewhere! You gave an argument instead of simply yelling “BALONEY!” Progress! But unfortunately, your argument defeats itself. You keep repeating the word “literal” as though saying it often enough magically proves that Revelation 11 must be read literally. It...

LOL!

:rolleyes:

Nah, there is a far more serious appointment than anything involving the Sanhedrin: God Himself will judge every false doctrine and every teacher who claims something comes from His Word when it does not. And no, I'm not frustrated at all. You were given a very simple challenge: show from...

Calling it “baloney” is not a refutation. I laid out my position from Scripture and explained why I understand Revelation 11 symbolically. If you believe it is wrong, then address the Scriptures and the arguments I presented and demonstrate where the interpretation fails. Denial and Mockery is...

Oh brother! None of that proves Jesus and John are the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11—you've simply piled more unrelated assertions onto the same unproven conclusion. You still haven't established the identification from Scripture, so I'm zipping this discussion for good. Now go take this...

You seem obsessed with calling me a Pharisee every time I ask you to prove your interpretation from Scripture. Calling me a Pharisee is not an answer. It is becoming a convenient way for you to avoid the question for all to see! And your comparison is backwards. The problem with the Pharisees...

No, the Pharisee comparison actually works against your argument. Jesus did not tell people, “If you don’t accept My claim, you simply cannot hear the Holy Spirit.” He repeatedly appealed to objective testimony: the Scriptures, His works, John the Baptist, and the Father (John 5:31–47). He even...

Here you're doing it again—bringing up what OTHER people believe about Elijah, Enoch, or Moses instead of proving your own claim that the Two Witnesses are Jesus Christ and John the Baptist. LOL!!!!!! I don't care whether someone else incorrectly identifies them as Moses and Elijah. Their...

Lame! And once again, you have not answered the question. You have merely repeated 1 John 2:27 as though it somehow proves that Jesus Christ and John the Baptist are the Two Witnesses. It doesn't! In fact, read the context of 1 John 2:18–27. John is warning believers about antichrists and...

No, you have not answered it. You have answered a completely different question: How do you believe Christians understand spiritual truth? I asked: Where does Scripture identify the Two Witnesses as Jesus Christ and John the Baptist? Repeating “1 Corinthians 2” fifty times will not make that...

Wow... you have now crossed from failing to prove your interpretation into claiming that God Himself is speaking through you, and therefore anyone who challenges your interpretation is resisting the Holy Spirit. That is not exegesis. That is an attempt to make your interpretation immune from...

Childish response. You're arguing against something I never said. I never said you need Bible college, theological training, or the “school of the Pharisees” to understand Scripture. I said you need Scripture to prove your interpretation of Scripture. Big difference. Guess you can't see the...

Wow. Now you're resorting to calling me a Pharisee instead of actually proving your position from Scripture. How exactly do I “sound like the Pharisees” simply because I am asking you to compare Scripture with Scripture and prove your interpretation from God's Word? The Pharisees' problem was...

Really? After all of that, you still have not proven your claim from Scripture. You keep insisting that the Two Witnesses are Jesus Christ and John the Baptist, but repeating your interpretation is not the same thing as demonstrating it biblically. Appealing to the Holy Spirit, John 5:39, John...

Still avoid the questions over there? :laughing: