Search results

This is a very weak argument. He taught plenty of things that were already known, so why not this as well? I believe it is. I see no reason why Jesus would have nothing to say about that when He had plenty to say about other things relating to the end times. The resurrection of the dead was...

It would be nice if you actually addressed what I said in my post instead of just giving me your view on this. I can't make any sense of what you're saying here at all, so we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.

You have some unique views all to yourself. I think you are clearly wrong here. What decree was made 483 literal days before the revealing of Jesus as the Messiah? I'm pretty sure there was none. How do you know this? It's weeks of years. That can be determined by looking at the decree made as...

Yes, I disagree, because what you're saying does not fit the context of 2 Peter 3:8. All Peter was saying in 2 Peter 3:8-9 is that no one should think that the Lord is being slow to return because time has no effect on the Lord. None whatsoever. So, from His perspective He is not being slow to...

Again, what you're saying does not take into account that it clearly says Satan's little season occurs right after the thousands years ends. Revelation 20:3 He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years...

In what sense do you think everlasting righteousness will be brought in when Jesus returns? That is clearly false. Jesus, the Messiah, was cut off after the 69 weeks were complete. That places His death some time within the 70th week. Where does that say that "when the fullness of the Gentiles...

Exactly. There is no indication whatsoever anywhere of there being any gaps in the 70 weeks. People have to make that up to support their false doctrines.

No, it isn't. He said "YOU ARE...a holy nation", not "YOU WILL BE...a holy nation".

Do I do nothing but misrepresent Premil the way he constantly misrepresents Amil? Do I randomly respond with pointless one liners? No. So, I don't really care what you think about me. It's clear to everyone here except maybe you that Tim never offers anything of substance in these threads.

Exactly. The idea that salvation has been postponed for the Jewish people is simply not taught anywhere in scripture. What more does God need to do to provide the opportunity for their salvation than to send His Son to die as a sacrifice for their sins, which He did long ago? And a good number...

Why does it say Satan is loosed after the thousand years has ended if it's not meant to be taken as an actual period of time (not a literal thousand years, but still figuratively representing a long period of time with a beginning and ending)? I don't believe that makes any sense. You have not...

I have no idea of what you're talking about here. Can you not just speak plainly?

Have you read his posts? He adds nothing to the discussions. Adults tell children when they're in the wrong and that's all I'm doing in this case.

That is not at all what I was saying. What I'm saying is that it makes no sense to assume any given verse is literal when you consider that the book contains a lot of symbolism. It's hyper-literalist to assume any given verse is literal unless it explicitly indicates otherwise. It's not always...

Anyone who cannot recognize Revelation 19:11-21 as describing the Second Coming has to be completely lacking in discernment. I mean completely. 100%. Not to be ignorant about what? I think you are ignorant about what 2 Peter 3:8 means. In 2 Peter 3:8-9 Peter was talking about not being ignorant...

He considered it a "problem" for Amil to have to decide if a given text is literal or symbolic. Why is that a "problem"? Premils need to do that as well. It's not as if everything is literal. No one in their right mind would claim that. Yet, his argument would only make sense if all of the text...

Where is your scriptural evidence to support this claim? You're always all talk and no scripture. That is not true. All you are able to do is misrepresent Amils. You can't counter our arguments with a coherent argument of your own, so you resort to this instead. What are you talking about here...

That is a "problem" that we all have since we all understand that some of the text is literal and some is symbolic and we all have to discern which is which in any given verse or passage. Is your Caps Lock key stuck? Where are you getting this nonsense from? So what? This is pointless. What...

Good grief, man. That is not at all what we're saying. We believe that believers will all be changed to have immortal bodies and will be caught up to Christ in the air when He returns. We believe He will then destroy everyone else left on the earth. It says "the flesh of all people", not some of...

How do you figure? My beliefs are very similar to his, overall. My beliefs are certainly much closer to his than, say, a partial preterist Amil.