Search results

No, I'm not. Why does it indicate that? When you consider a passage like Romans 9:6-8, you should understand that that are two Israels rather than one, with one replacing the other. So, the term "spiritual Israel" does not imply a replacement. That would be the case only if I claimed that there...

How do you interpret this passage: 2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then...

Yes, he was. Otherwise, why is he not mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15:22-23 where Paul gives the order of bodily resurrections unto incorruptible bodies? Where is your evidence to support this claim? I guarantee you have none because scripture never teaches this and this concept contradicts...

Here is the passage yet again: Luke 24:25 Then Jesus said to them, “O foolish men, and slow of heart to trust and believe in everything that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and [only then to] enter His glory?” 27 Then beginning with Moses...

So, why do you never do that? Your posts rarely contain any scriptural support. You can't be expected to be taken seriously when that is the case. You should do something to back up your claims. What rhetorical question are you talking about?

I believe that no one would interpret 2 Peter 3:10-12 in such a way that it's not referring to the end of the world if it wasn't for doctrinal bias. It's interesting how Premils throw their literal rules of interpretation out the window when it comes to passages like that one.

I agree with how you see it. As you showed, there are scriptures which indicate that the earth will last forever. We can't just ignore those. It says the meek shall inherit the earth. When? When Jesus returns. For how long? It wouldn't be much of an inheritance if we only inherit the earth for...

Can you explain how any unrepentant sinners will survive the return of Christ in light of what is taught in passages like this: 2 Thess 1:6 God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you 7 and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord...

You mean like you do with straightforward passages like Matthew 25:31-46, Matthew 28:18, John 5:28-29, Ephesians 1:19-23, 2 Thess 1:7-10, 2 Cor 15:22-24, Acts 17:31 and 2 Peter 3:10-13. Passages like those, if taken literally, teach that Jesus has been reigning since His resurrection, that He...

LOL. In other words, you have nothing to refute what I said, so you'd rather just stop talking to me than admit that.

How so? All you do is make claims and do nothing to explain what you mean or back up your claims. How can I possibly take you seriously when that is the case? Tell me how exactly I believe in replacement theology. How does that signal a belief in RT? I do not believe that spiritual Israel...

Why would I acknowledge something that isn't true? Yes, I do. Look at how you talk, Randy. And you have the gall to complain about how Paul and I talk? Ridiculous. I do understand what it means. Who are you to tell me if I understand something or not? I know that I do understand it and I know...

So, based on these comments, it looks to me that you are perfectly fine with insults, but you believe we just need to do it in a friendly way like you. Otherwise, we come across as angry. Do I have this right, Randy?

Exactly. Somehow, him disagreeing with us and throwing insults at us is somehow just him being friendly, but if we disagree with him we are being angry and making Amil our idol. He believes in Premil and spends a lot of time defending it, so does that mean we can accuse him of having Premil as...

LOL. You can't be serious. Here you go again acting like you know me personally or something. You don't know me at all. Not one bit. So, you have no place telling me I'm "out of control". I think you're using that as an excuse to not address my arguments. Randy, you are such a hypocrite. You try...

Of course I can. You're touting your own principles of interpretation which I believe are flawed.

Why would anyone want to refute God's Word? No one here wants to do that. But, it's very easy to refute your doctrine. At least, when we can actually understand what you're saying. It clearly is not all chronological, so what is your point? Obviously, the sounding of the seventh trumpet...

Exactly. The end of the 69th week leads up to the Messiah's arrival, not up to His death, as keraz is falsely claiming.

I agree. Your attempts to change the meaning of a simple word like "after" is very disgusting. So, why are you not interpreting it that way in Daniel 9:26 then? That verse says that the Messiah, which we know is Jesus, would be cut off some time following the 69th week. It doesn't say how long...

Exactly! Well said. How can we believe in replacement theology when we don't believe anyone or anything has been replaced? How can Randy not understand what we're telling him about this? It has to be that he is purposely trying to annoy us by continuing to use that term. I can't think of any...