Search results

Both are wrong. The "abomination of desolation" was Christ crucified.

There are two issues here: 1) The question refers to the inaccuracy or possible unbelief of the New Testament writers, or their unwillingness to speculate. In other words, they simply and faithfully stated the things of the Spirit and allowed the Spirit to also translate. This is good, and...

We do know that God can make donkeys talk and raise up stones to give witness if men do not. We also know that all that is in the world was "made manifest" or spoken into existence. But to confuse the inanimate objects of parable language with the subject thereof...is simply foolish. It misses...

Below: It is simple observation or math: Did He ascend (leave)? Yes. Did He come to you after that (return)? If so, then it is wrong to say that He has not already returned and that you still expect Him to.

The point and context are what is written, which we have been told all actually occurred "before the foundation of the world." Which makes the events of time, revelations given to each generation.

That is the point...Jesus announced it, and Paul confirmed seeing it. Which I also confirm seeing.

If you are going to look at things from God's perspective, you need to factor in that He has "no shadow of turning"...and therefore "years", whether thousands or trillions, simply do not apply, but are in fact the "man's eye" perspective.

This is soooo wrong. Anyone who says that Jesus went "to the Father" and also says He is now with them...cannot say He has not already returned, without saying He never ascended or left. Likewise, the same people will insist that Christ will return again in the flesh...as though He had not...

There is no heavenly time frame...no "I was" or "I will be", only "I am."

Jesus told us that the correct generation was "this generation" (the one living at the time). Paul then confirmed it saying he "was" crucified and "was" raised up with Christ.

I am not sure either.

I was just going to comment, but first things should be first, and you were getting ahead of yourself. The Jews made the wrong decision. But that does not mean that the church adopted the right understanding after the apostles themselves did not even understand. But it is a good point to...

You are contradicting yourself. You say that I am right, but then build a case for how you are convinced that I am wrong. Which is it - what do you mean to be saying? Regardless, yes, not only was what Jesus said a fictitious story, but all that is manifest in the world is also. All is a...

Thayer's Greek Lexicon τρώγω; to gnaw, crunch, chew raw vegetables or fruits (as nuts, almonds, etc.): ἄγρωστιν, of mules, Homer, Odyssey 6, 90, and often in other writers of animals feeding; also of men from Herodotus down (as σῦκα, Herodotus 1, 71; βότρυς, Aristophanes eqq. 1077...

Symbols are what is used in parables to give a likeness of the subject using another object. So, to answer your question: In this case, the two words (parable and symbol) mean the same thing. I am not misunderstanding, I understand perfectly well. On the contrary, you are taking Him literally...

It doesn't. I addressed two different things separately in one post. Don't mix things up. If you cannot reason that Jesus referring to an inanimate object to make a point is not a parable and symbolism, then as He said, "How then will you understand all parables?" The first lesson on...

That's just the leaders of the flesh seeing to the flesh and the world. The Temple is spiritual.

God being the great architect of the universe that He is, "Why?" might be the first question of circumstances, but "Why me?" usually gets in the way. I like to think that we don't really have a perspective...like not sitting in the best seats only to be told to go to the back row. And then the...

Reminds me of a song: "To All The Squirrels I've Loved Before."

Matthew 24:28 "For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together."