I agree. You have been lied to, and it's despicable.
You're really going to tell PennEd that his own uncle lied to him about what he witnessed? THAT is what's TRULY DISPICABLE.
---
I agree. You have been lied to, and it's despicable.
I'm not going to waste hours explaining to you again how events that were said to happen soon, did happen shortly thereafter, but the events described later on in the same chapter are talking about yet future events to come. Which is why the book of Revelation itself says this:
Revelation 1
18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;
And I'll remind you that John wrote the book of Revelation after the destruction of the second temple in 70 AD.
The end.
---
They Pharisees said the same thing about Jesus.They don't.
Wrong this lie started to support dispensationalism has been refuted.
Revelation was undoubtedly written before 70 AD backed by both internal and external evidence.
Several dissertations based on sound analysis are available which attest to this.
*******This response post is for those who may not know and are interested in historical accuracy.
His uncle was told a narrative, he believed it and passed it along. Hardly an uncommon occurrence in today's world.You're really going to tell PennEd that his own uncle lied to him about what he witnessed? THAT is what's TRULY DISPICABLE.
---
We have been through it already which was a waste of time as you ignore everything and bang the same Narrative – with no substance and everything else has been debunked
Never said God rejected his people - his people were those that followed him as Abraham and all the others were not Israelites that was after Jacob and Jews are named after Judah -
are you saying Abraham was rejected because he was not an Israelite?
Th followers of Jesus were Israelites, kept the law and rituals, temple etc...
The people God rejects are the ones that don’t follow Gods commands no one else - you will see the intermarriage throughout and confirmed in the bible - there is no so-called pure blood line
follow the conversation with Rev1v8 – if you have anything of substance reply
His uncle was told a narrative, he believed it and passed it along. Hardly an uncommon occurrence in today's world.
His uncle was told a narrative, he believed it and passed it along. Hardly an uncommon occurrence in today's world.
You're a prime example of passing along lies making it a common occurrence in today's world and you can't even see it. PennEd was talking about family and other people who witnessed it and had markings on them to prove it happened.
---
I'm passing along verifiable information, which you reject out of hand in favor of an intentionally contrived narrative.You're a prime example of passing along lies making it a common occurrence in today's world and you can't even see it. PennEd was talking about family and other people who witnessed it and had markings on them to prove it happened.
---
We've got museums full of moon rocks too.He uncle was an eyewitness. smh You're calling every single person who survived or saw what happened a liar. That's extremely immature. If I wasn't there it didn't happen. Just makes no sense at all. It's certainly not research. There are museums full of evidence, survivor testimony, eyewitness testimony, video testimony, written testimony, and camps you can visit to this day. To try and deny that much evidence is foolish and childish. But to call every survivor a liar? That's just arrogance to the extreme that you believe you can rewrite history. People like me are here to make sure you don't.
Imagine a Christian from south pole, he never heard of such thing, except Jesus is his Lord ana savior.The evidence is overwhelming.
We're not talking about a single source or one government's version of events.
We have Nazi documents, concentration camps, photographs, eyewitness testimony from survivors, testimony from German soldiers and officials, physical evidence at the camps, and records gathered by multiple countries that were enemies of each other.
To deny the Holocaust happened, you don't just have to reject one piece of evidence.
You have to reject an enormous amount of independent evidence that points to the same conclusion.
As Christians, we should be committed to truth wherever it leads.
If the evidence supports something, then we should accept it, even if it challenges our assumptions.
You don't have to agree with every number, every historian, or every political use of the Holocaust to acknowledge the basic historical reality that millions of Jews and others were systematically persecuted and murdered by Nazi Germany.
At some point, denying that happened requires more faith than accepting the evidence for it.
The evidence is overwhelming.
We're not talking about a single source or one government's version of events.
We have Nazi documents, concentration camps, photographs, eyewitness testimony from survivors, testimony from German soldiers and officials, physical evidence at the camps, and records gathered by multiple countries that were enemies of each other.
To deny the Holocaust happened, you don't just have to reject one piece of evidence.
You have to reject an enormous amount of independent evidence that points to the same conclusion.
As Christians, we should be committed to truth wherever it leads.
If the evidence supports something, then we should accept it, even if it challenges our assumptions.
You don't have to agree with every number, every historian, or every political use of the Holocaust to acknowledge the basic historical reality that millions of Jews and others were systematically persecuted and murdered by Nazi Germany.
At some point, denying that happened requires more faith than accepting the evidence for it.
I don't think we're disagreeing.Imagine a Christian from south pole, he never heard of such thing, except Jesus is his Lord ana savior.
He is allowed to question, to research, to make his own pov.
I don't think this is a matter of salvation.
I know in some country people were educated to be atheists. But those people questioned, researched, humbled and came to Christ.
People should be allowed to question history stuff.
Imagine a Christian from south pole, he never heard of such thing, except Jesus is his Lord ana savior.
He is allowed to question, to research, to make his own pov.
I don't think this is a matter of salvation.
I know in some country people were educated to be atheists. But those people questioned, researched, humbled and came to Christ.
People should be allowed to question history stuff.
And yes, people absolutely should be allowed to question history, research for themselves, and examine the evidence.
Absolutely agreeI don't think we're disagreeing.
A Christian in the South Pole who's never heard of the Holocaust isn't in danger spiritually because of that.
It's not a salvation issue.
And yes, people absolutely should be allowed to question history, research for themselves, and examine the evidence.
My point is simply that questioning and denying are not the same thing.
Honest investigation is a good thing.
But if we're committed to truth, we should also be willing to follow the evidence wherever it leads, even when it challenges our conclusions.
That's true for history, science, and theology alike.
Truth doesn't fear investigation. It welcomes it.