I have confused nothing. But I do admit you have quite the imagination. You have confused the plain words of the scripture with dispensational/futuristic fantasies, and then demand that they are biblical!
>>>Anyone can quote scripture my FRiend.<<<
But not everyone can write a novel, nor do they wish too. Place me in that category. I will stick with quoting the final authority: God's Word.
>>>Quoting scripture is not an argument.<<<
The scripture is the argument. Why do you work so hard to avoid it? Your didactic statements about some flowery, unbiblical interpretations of the seven churches prove nothing except that someone had too much time on their hands.
>>>Since I have offered by far more relevant evidence to support my assertions and conclusion than you, regardless of whether you subjectively agree with me or not, I have won this debate in the forum of ideas by the objective standard of having offered the greater weight of relevant evidence.<<<
I did not realize it was a contest. But, frankly, I believe you are living in a fantasy world. In all sincerity, I did try to make some sense out of your "interpretations," but I failed. If your intent was to confuse, then you have won the debate.
Philip
Why is your application (without explanation BTW) that all of the Revelation up to 20:8 has been fulfilled, and was fulfilled by the end of AD 70 any more or less "adding words to the Book of Revelation" than the application I suggest (with supporting scripture and evidence BTW) of 2000-year fulfillment of Chapters 2-3?
It is certainly a reasonable question.
I guess I was right - you do not argue in good faith. You're statements border on nonsense because despite your flat denials, you confuse application of scripture with scripture itself. That seems to be a cornerstone of your approach. Your whole schtick is conclusory statements. Go find out what that means. You accuse, assert, and conclude with no reasonable support of fact or evidence. Doesn't seem to bother you. Fine, but I'll quit wasting my time with someone who won't participate in a reasonable discussion.