Recent comments

Comments found: 10209

Who is Daniel’s son of man?

peter wilkinson → Andrew: This post so closely follows
Mark Edward → Andrew: Regarding Antiochus rising up

Hurtado’s critique of Wright’s account of Paul’s christology

peter wilkinson → Andrew: The argument about the son of
Andrew → peter wilkinson: Here is the full quote about
peter wilkinson → Andrew: Ferguson is wrong: this son
Andrew → peter wilkinson: Daniel 3:33 is the Masoretic
peter wilkinson → Andrew: One has to pay attention to
Andrew → peter wilkinson: Goldingay:The humanlike
peter wilkinson → Andrew: I think what all this points
Andrew → peter wilkinson: But that doesn’t identify the
peter wilkinson → Andrew: In Daniel 7:14, the word
Andrew → peter wilkinson: How is the son of man figure
peter wilkinson → Andrew: I continue to be struck how,

The resurrection of the sleeping saints from their tombs

Greg Brown → Greg Brown: In regard to εις1519, which
Greg Brown → Andrew: Thank you for your insightful
Andrew → Greg Brown: It’s an interesting argument,
Greg Brown → Greg Brown: It was no doubt due to
Greg Brown → Andrew: One way to solve exegetical

Double Post-Tribulational Pre-Amillennialism

Rich → Andrew: Andrew,
Keith Wansbrough → Andrew: After that he must be
Rich → Andrew: You do have a point. :)
Andrew → Rich: Take it up with Wikipedia.
Rich → Andrew: No Preterist timeline?? I
Andrew → Mark Edward: Partly for lack of space—I
Mark Edward → Andrew: I noticed a distinct lack of

16 reasons to think that the “age to come” is now and in history

Andrew → Philip L Ledgerwood: Thanks, Phil. I agree with
Andrew → peter wilkinson: 1. The day of the Lord would
peter wilkinson → Andrew: “I think my argument gives
Philip L Ledgerwood → Andrew: In terms of Ian’s critique, I

N.T. Wright and Paul’s eschatology (with coloured beads)

Andrew → Ian Paul: Thanks for asking. Reponse
Subscribe to Recent comments