Search results

  1. M

    Once saved always saved (OSAS) debunked

    You are telling me you do not know what “works” are? Ok, “From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. In Christian theology, good works, or simply works, are a person's (exterior) actions or deeds, in contrast to inner qualities such as grace or faith.” Therefore “Confession” is a work that results...
  2. M

    Once saved always saved (OSAS) debunked

    Are you a Calvinist?
  3. M

    Once saved always saved (OSAS) debunked

    Let me ask you point blank: Is confession a work?
  4. M

    Why Daniel's 70th week must be in the future

    Some Dispensationalists believe the Millenial Kingdom will be when “everlasting righteousness” will be ushered in. So much diversity in that doctrine…so little comprehension of pure and plain scripture. Interpretation based on preconceptions is not exposition, nor hermeneutics.
  5. M

    Once saved always saved (OSAS) debunked

    Lol…Calvinists redefine “works” to suit their doctrine. Rom 10. “8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised...
  6. M

    Dispensationalists are wrong in Rev 20.

    The leaves are for the healing of “nations”.
  7. M

    Dispensationalists are wrong in Rev 20.

    Lol, I do not know where you got all that…but…ok.
  8. M

    Once saved always saved (OSAS) debunked

    Good morning, Many people are concerned about “falling from grace”. I believe scripture explains itself, so to find the answer we must look at what scripture says. I only know of one way to fall from grace and that is given in Gal 5…”4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to...
  9. M

    Dispensationalists are wrong in Rev 20.

    You are dancing. Healing is done by the leaves of the Tree of Life. Insult all you want, but no syntax in the following verses indicates healing. You evade the truth. And my efforts in this forum are to make you stronger in the actual word of God and not some doctrine of man. The insults I...
  10. M

    Dispensationalists are wrong in Rev 20.

    You can see how this passage can be interpreted according to your doctrinal viewpoint. If the rest of the dead are also saints, then they are raised in a first resurrection AFTER the “martyrs” have already reigned for a MK. Thus two MK’s. If the rest of the dead are the unsaved, then there is a...
  11. M

    Dispensationalists are wrong in Rev 20.

    You read it the way you must to defend your doctrine, but the scripture says the leaves were for the healing of nations. Nowhere else in this passage indicates “healing”. Go eat a sandwich yourself.
  12. M

    Dispensationalists are wrong in Rev 20.

    And here is another difficulty for dispensationalists: Rev 22. “And he showed me a river of the water of life, clear as crystal, coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb, 2 in the middle of its street. On either side of the river was the tree of life, bearing twelve kinds of fruit...
  13. M

    Dispensationalists are wrong in Rev 20.

    Neither do I. But if you read Rev 20 LITERALLY as Tim LaHaye preaches, there are two millenial reigns indicated. Dispensationalists deny it, but it is implicitly plain.
  14. M

    Dispensationalists are wrong in Rev 20.

    I do see that correlation. But “they” refers to previous beings identified in Revelation. “They” refers either to Rev 19:1 or Rev 19:14. In Rev 19:1 it was just a voice which “sounded like” a great multitude. In Rev 19:14 “they” were the armies of God in Heaven. Therefore, once again, you...
  15. M

    Matthew 24:14 vs Colossians 1:5-6

    He went to the Koine’ Greek. Koine’ is a dead language. It is the language of the N.T.
  16. M

    Dispensationalists are wrong in Rev 20.

    As I said you have to insert your “interpretation” for it to make sense in the doctrine of dispensationalism. Nothing you just said is even remotely indicated in Rev 20. You are fitting the verse into dispensationalism instead of reading what the scripture says.
  17. M

    Why Daniel's 70th week must be in the future

    Rev 20 NOWHERE says that Jesus reigns on earth. Quote the scripture from Rev 20 that says so.
  18. M

    Why Daniel's 70th week must be in the future

    Every writer in the four gospels was inspired by God and must be taken together to get the full picture. If you try to minimize that by saying their testimony is inferior to Jesus’ teaching then you suggest God could not inspire them to write holy scripture. My main point is that Mt 24 is not...
  19. M

    Dispensationalists are wrong in Rev 20.

    Rev 20. “4 Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on...