Search results

So they show that the "day" of judgment can last 1000 years. 😄 But besides that, there are two times of judgment given in Rev 20, one at the beginning and one at the end of the 1000 years. Revelation 20:4-6 (KJV) 4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them...

Matthew 10:15 (KJV) Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city. Hebrews 6:2 (KJV) Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. 2 Peter 2:9...

Why then is the judgment normally talked about as occurring when Christ returns?

How soon?

Right. A and L were "far off" from Hades where RM was.

He didn’t even give them a chance to hijack anything.

The spirit returning to God can't be the person's soul, or else all people would be with God after they die, even the rich man who went to hell. This is specifically talking about the resurrection, and what that will look like. So it actually reinforces what @Hobie is saying.

Luke 16 doesn't actually say Lazarus and Abraham are in hell/hades. Go read it again.

That was a quick flameout.

He knows he's guilty--and he can figure out the antecedents in several ways.

The difference, of course, is that a person is dead whether a murder is proved or not, which is something God didn't want. But in the marital rape case, what happened was supposed to happen--God wanted it--just someone didn't like the timing.

Happy to do so, on anything the Catholics have correct.

Are you saying John's baptism was dry?

Then perhaps, since belief in Christ went along with those things, it's outdated too? Yet the body of Christ had numerous inductees who were water baptized, like Lydia and the phillipian jailer. Maybe when you use scare quotes you mean something different than the 4 gospels I'm familiar with...

I'm not so sure. You've essentially accused King David of brutal rape.

Or unwilling to admit he was wrong.

So you're pretty much admitting that it's a crime without a criminal--except for the very rare case, like Hunter Biden, where they videotaped themselves doing some kind of onerous activity, like sadomasochism or bondage. You know, "something else". For someone who disagrees with me so...

And how is the judge/jury to know if they're guilty? What level of evidence would you require?

Why is it silly? This scenario has already occurred numerous times with unmarried couples. Why not married couples.

Maybe you can help me find it.