Search results

1 Corinthians 15 proves Amil. There is not mention of your supposed future millennium. Where do you get a thousand years in 1 Corinthians 15:22-24? It is simply not there. You have to force it into the text. This is one of the most troubling aspects of Premil. It is always adding to the sacred...

Not true! That is not what it says. There are only 2 peoples on this earth in God's eyes - the redeemed and the wicked. These both are armies in conflict with each other. When Jesus returns the elect are caught up, the wicked are destroyed. These 2 peoples/armies carry one of 2 marks - God's...

I didn't think you would address them. You cannot. To do so would make you an Amil.

I think you are wasting your time. I doubt anyone is going to read this. It looks incoherent. I am certainly not going to even attempt it.

What do you mean "it will be copy paste from here on regarding this repeated question"? That is all you do. Why break a habit of a lifetime? Readers can verify this by reading any thread you have been involved in. Multiple posts have been sidestepped above and countless arguments and Scriptures...

Yes to all, bar your lie at the end. It is a no! Nowhere can it be found in Scripture. Now will you stop avoiding my questions.

In your opinion, but not supported by any other Scripture. This is proof we are in Rev 20. After the second coming, there is no more time, sin, death or marriage or procreation.

What do you mean "it will be copy paste from here on regarding this repeated question"? That is all you do. Why break a habit of a lifetime? Readers can verify this by reading any thread you have been involved in. Multiple posts have been sidestepped above and countless arguments and Scriptures...

But Rev 19 is climactic. All flesh is destroyed. Read the passage! Rev 20 goes right back to the first resurrection - Jesus Christ. It shows the victory of the redeemed no longer residing in Abraham's bosom after the resurrection but reigning in heaven with Jesus. Jesus overcome all this 2000...

You espouse so much error in such a short space that it is hard to know where to start. There is so much Scripture you must dismiss or ignore in order to make such speculations. Christ is Israel's king - true Israel, not apostate Christ rejecting Israel. He is reigning on David's throne since...

You are not even addressing my objections. To do so would expose the error of your interpretation. Where is your corroboration for your interpretation of this elsewhere in the Book? Where teaches this thousand years after the second coming in any other passage?

When you write a book of gibberish i do not even start to read it. You have just wasted your time.

Mr Avoidance: Do the 7 heads belong to the beast? Do the 7 heads belong to the beast?

You are totally not getting it! I am using your contradictory reasoning to expose your argument. But alas, you cannot even see that. You said: "Revelation Chapter 13 describes (The Beast) with personal pronouns He, His, Him, a human man." This is your reasoning. This is the grounds why you...

You do not directly address posters arguments. You do not answer their questions. Multiple Premils and Amils have highlighted your habitual avoidance and your dependence on the same evasive cut-and-pastes. When that does not work, you rely on infantile name-calling. LOL. I already exposed the...

Your theology has been exposed. You obviously have a lot to hide. You cannot even address simple questions. All you have is your usual cut-and-paste. That is why most posters avoid your evasive and infantile name-calling writings. I will keep asking until you address this. Revelation 13:1...

You did not answer my question: where does it say Jesus is on earth in Rev 20? This above is where you and Premils err. Premil hangs its doctrine on a very precarious frayed thread: that of Revelation 20 following Revelation 19 chronologically in time. To hold this, it has to dismiss the...

2+2=4, not 22. Jesus is coming to judge the nations not reign on earth for 1000 years. You failed to support your claims in Rev 20 as I requested. Because it does not exist there. You forcing him to the text. Revelation 20 take us right back to the first advent. You falsely glue them together to...

Where you seem to get confused every time is building your theological edifice upon a notable preconceived error: that Rev 20 is yet future. That is the sole grounds of your thesis. But you have zero corroboration for that because every second coming passage we look at is climactic. It involves...

The end of the world is the second coming. That is what Peter shows. You keep adding your supposed future millennium into text after text where it does not belong. That is calked adding unto Scripture. That is forbidden by God.