Another Premillennial absurdity

[WPM]

The OT saints entered Paradise after the NT thief entered. But who entered Paradise after the resurrection on the third day seems to be your issue, not mine.

This has been Paradise since 30AD. This includes all OT and all NT since 30AD:

"I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:"

"After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;"


Both verses are the exact same group of people from different perspectives, ie camera angles. You do know what a camera angle is, right? You claim many yourself from this book.

These two verses portray all OT and NT saints. There is only one type of saint, believer, redeemed soul. All humanity born to Adam and Eve in their fallen condition, changed out of Adam's dead corruptible flesh into God's permanent incorruptible physical body.

You can spiritualize or symbolize existence all you want, but you cannot enter Paradise in Adam's dead corruptible flesh. You can enjoy seated in heavenly places with God's permanent incorruptible physical body once you enter Paradise.

I am simply asking questions. Why are you so defensive? What are you hiding?

So, are the OT saints part of the Church? This is not a difficult question.

 

[Always Believing]

He's right. You offer nothing to support your beliefs. Do you think your opinions alone mean anything without scriptural support for them?

Yes. My opinions are always perfect, and everything I say is right, and the Bible has nothing to do with it. I'm just like you.

 

[Always Believing]

So, basically, you have nothing. You are just promoting what you have been taught, not what the Book teaches. I already knew that. But, thanks for confirming that.

My pleasure.

 

[WPM]

My pleasure.

Time to put your beliefs to the test of repeated Scripture. Time to employ solid hermeneutics that will keep you within safe boundaries.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yes. My opinions are always perfect, and everything I say is right, and the Bible has nothing to do with it. I'm just like you.

You're not like me. I use the Bible to back up my opinions. Whereas I have no idea what your opinions are based on since you won't tell us.

 

[WPM]

My pleasure.

There are multiple posts, Scriptures and arguments you have sidestepped above in order to sustain your claims.

 

[jeffweeder]

Yes. My opinions are always perfect, and everything I say is right, and the Bible has nothing to do with it. I'm just like you.

My experience is that our opinions are far from perfect if the scriptures have nothing to do with it. They are a light shining in a very dark place.

 

[Always Believing]

Time to put your beliefs to the test of repeated Scripture. Time to employ solid hermeneutics that will keep you within safe boundaries.

My pleasure.

 

[WPM]

My pleasure.

You have obviously nothing to bring to the table.

 

[Always Believing]

My experience is that our opinions are far from perfect if the scriptures have nothing to do with it. They are a light shining in a very dark place.

Dittoes. Sarcasm is a lost art these days.

 

[Always Believing]

You have obviously nothing to bring to the table.

Only once or twice. It's the endless stuff I leave on the table.

 

[WPM]

Only once or twice. It's the endless stuff I leave on the table.

You promote teaching that does not abide biblical analysis. Until you address the multiple contradictions in your argument we can only conclude your theology is unscriptural.

 

[Always Believing]

You promote teaching that does not abide biblical analysis. Until you address the multiple contradictions in your argument we can only conclude your theology is unscriptural.

Not with you. Been there and done that once too many times. I've fulfilled my obligations to you.

Heresy, after the first or second admonition, reject.

 

[WPM]

Not with you. Been there and done that once too many times. I've fulfilled my obligations to you.

Heresy, after the first or second admonition, reject.

Avoidance is your MO. The reader can see that you have no answer to any of the Amil arguments. You are clearly way out of your depth on this board. Bye!

 

[Timtofly]

I am simply asking questions. Why are you so defensive? What are you hiding?

So, are the OT saints part of the Church? This is not a difficult question.

Is the church all of Adam's redeemed offspring?

I have answered your question so many times, and yet you still seem to not understand Scripture itself, because you don't take God's Word as an answer, but want my private opinion.

I don't take Amil eschatology as God's Word, but only human opinion.

You constantly avoiding God's Word as my answer, and you only wanting my opinion proves that point. You are only operating on a private opinion level, instead of agreeing with Scripture on this point.

You have not defined the church, so why should I? Sorry if you want me to confirm your private opinions. I don't practice confirming any one's private opinions. Why do you?

I guess I am hiding God's Word from you as you keep thinking I am hiding something.

Where have I ever pointed out people are wrong on who the "church" is? I am not going to define the church for you. At this point it seems you are just using it as a trick question, yourself.

How the OT redeemed fit into the church is not a yes or no question? Especially if you are trying to get my personal opinion. Funny because you seem to reject my opinions as nonsense, when I don't post my opinions at all. The past is too late for me to have an opinion on. Why does it matter, if it was all completed at the Cross?

 

[WPM]

Is the church all of Adam's redeemed offspring?

I have answered your question so many times, and yet you still seem to not understand Scripture itself, because you don't take God's Word as an answer, but want my private opinion.

I don't take Amil eschatology as God's Word, but only human opinion.

You constantly avoiding God's Word as my answer, and you only wanting my opinion proves that point. You are only operating on a private opinion level, instead of agreeing with Scripture on this point.

You have not defined the church, so why should I? Sorry if you want me to confirm your private opinions. I don't practice confirming any one's private opinions. Why do you?

I guess I am hiding God's Word from you as you keep thinking I am hiding something.

Where have I ever pointed out people are wrong on who the "church" is? I am not going to define the church for you. At this point it seems you are just using it as a trick question, yourself.

How the OT redeemed fit into the church is not a yes or no question? Especially if you are trying to get my personal opinion. Funny because you seem to reject my opinions as nonsense, when I don't post my opinions at all. The past is too late for me to have an opinion on. Why does it matter, if it was all completed at the Cross?

LOL. This is a yes or no answer. You cannot give a straight answer because your theology does not make sense. You have a lot to hide. All you can tell us is what you do not believe. This is a classic theological exposure!

So, are the OT saints part of the Church?

This is not a difficult question.

 

[Timtofly]

LOL. This is a yes or no answer. You cannot give a straight answer because your theology does not make sense. You have a lot to hide. All you can tell us is what you do not believe. This is a classic theological exposure!

So, are the OT saints part of the Church?

This is not a difficult question.

I guess if it is a yes or no, then you have had my answer about 4 rounds ago.

My post are not difficult answers.

 

[WPM]

I guess if it is a yes or no, then you have had my answer about 4 rounds ago.

My post are not difficult answers.

So, are the OT saints part of the Church?

 

[Timtofly]

So, are the OT saints part of the Church?

They are the church. Not in part, but in whole. All of Adam's redeemed offspring are the entire church.

I have said that how many times now?

Those in the Millennium are not Adam's offspring. They don't exist in Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Why is Death introduced in the 4th Seal?

Is the church still considered Adam's dead corruptible flesh, or changed like Paul stated that all will be changed?

How can a son of God still be a son of Adam in Adam's dead image?

What is your definition of a church? Still in Adam's dead corruptible flesh or changed out of Adam's dead corruptible flesh?

Was Adam and Eve part of the church before Adam disobeyed God?

 

[WPM]

They are the church. Not in part, but in whole. All of Adam's redeemed offspring are the entire church.

I have said that how many times now?

LOL. Finally! Was that really hard? You have avoided this how many times???