Search results

So, you disregard all historical documents besides the Bible then? None of them contain any truth? Nothing truthful was ever written about what happened in Jerusalem and how the city and the temple was destroyed? Nothing we read in any history books can be trusted?

No, you're wrong! LOL!!! You have terrible reading comprehension skills. Where did I say otherwise? Nonsense. It refers to the 70th week that immediately followed the 69th week. The desolation described here relates directly to the destruction of the city and the sanctuary.

I say the same about you. You are being hypocritical here.

LOL. What then did you mean when you said "People often confuse Jeremiah 31 with the New Covenant"? Can you not see how that statement comes across? Did you not even read the passage? Where does it say anything about God not giving favoritism to the rich and powerful? And, you're saying God is...

No, you are incorrect. Wrong. You are butchering the text to make it fit your doctrine (not talking about the Amil doctrine itself, obviously, but your overall understanding of things). Look at the following text carefully for the first time in your life, please. Daniel 9:25 Know therefore...

I agree that it's ludicrous to believe that Daniel 9:26 is future, but it's also ludicrous to think that Daniel 9:27 is future because it relates directly to Daniel 9:26. The destruction of the city and the sanctuary in verse 26 is related directly to the desolation described in verse 27.

Agree. But, we have to constantly deal with false accusations from some Premills like this. They waste so much time making straw man arguments against Amill. I'd say at least 75% of the time they debate with us, they misrepresent our view. They get so proud of themselves while thinking they won...

The silence shows that they just like to make unfounded accusations. It's dishonest and evil. They do it just to stir things up and make trouble and to divert attention away from their false doctrine. When they are challenged and asked to back up those accusations, they suddenly turn quiet.

Right. That is never said about Michael. He is said to be a protector of Israel in particular, not the world (Daniel 12:1), and he apparently has a similar role in heaven, according to Revelation 12:7-9. But, he is never said to be the restrainer of wickedness in the world. That is the Holy...

So, what do you think is the reason that Jesus said nothing and the Apostles did not write about that supposed future reign on the earth then? Yeah, you have death being swallowed up in victory when Christ returns, and you even reference Isaiah 25:8 in relation to that, but somehow you don't...

The church, of course. The elect are everyone who belongs to Christ. Romans 8:31 What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? 32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? 33 Who...

No one here is saying that it will "literally turn this earth into an asteroid belt", so why are you arguing against that idea? But, the changes that will take place are enough to consider the heavens and earth to be made new, won't they? How do you figure that these changes to the heavens and...

Yep. He does not appear to be ready for solid food. 1 Corinthians 3:1 Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are...

I say you are dismissive because you don't specifically address most of what I say. You didn't address the rest of what I said about what the word can mean such as in Revelation 20:7-9 where it refers to individuals from throughout the world rather than nations because they number "as the sand...

You say you don't dismiss my points, but you do. You don't address them at all. I'm done.

It comes from the NT scripture that sheds light on the Jeremiah passage, but I know you don't believe that the NT sheds light on the OT, so you're not going to understand that.

I can't even believe you said this. How can you act as if Jeremiah 31 isn't related to the new covenant when Hebrews 8:6-13 explicitly applies Jeremiah 31:31-34 (quoted in Hebrews 8:8-12) to the new covenant? Hebrews 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is...

Okay, since you actually brought up something new instead of repeating yourself yet again, I will address this. Where does that verse say "Gentile nations"? Nowhere. It just says "the nations". Remember when I showed you that the Greek word "ethnos" has more than one definition? It's...

This is ridiculous. Only those who believe in Jesus are in the one fold. You say the Jews are yet blinded for the most part. That means there are at least some believing Jews, right? Christ's sheep are ONLY those who believe, so believing Jews are one of the folds and believing Gentiles are the...

Is there something about my saying that I'm done that you didn't understand? You just dismiss everything I say and I don't want to deal with that anymore. Please ask God for wisdom (James 1:5-7).