Search results

Even Tertullian the early Church father who was Chiliast recognized Zechariah 14 as an historic passage fulfilled at the first advent, saying, “But ‘at night He went out to the Mount of Olives.' For thus had Zechariah pointed out: 'And His feet shall stand in that day on the Mount of Olives'...

Hello! But none of them describe what you attribute to Rev 20. That is because it is false teaching. First of all, Zechariah 14 makes absolutely no allusion to a future 1,000 years after the second coming, or does Zechariah 14 compare with any of the detail outlined in Revelation 20 (start...

This is why it is impossible to engage with you. Name calling and avoidance are your MO. Sad!

Not so. You arbitrarily force text after text into your so-called future millennium regardless of the wording of the inspired text, context and consistent meaning. Rev 20 is a dumping ground for all types of events and texts that are totally unrelated. Your failure to corroborate any Premil...

How about discussing the Op, instead of all these are distractions.

I believe there are multiple reasons to reject your thesis. Let me give some of the main ones. (1) Please remember, this is Premil's No 2 proof-text and, yet, they cannot give us any compelling or reasonable correlation between Zechariah 14 and Revelation 20. There is therefore not the...

This is just a smokescreen to justify your avoidance.

2 Peter 3:10 relates to the second coming and is climactic. Zechariah 14 relates to the First Advent, and also refers to AD70, and the awful result of Israel's rejection of Christ. What is more, the details pertaining to these two different events have no correlation whatsoever. This is a...

Once again, you avoid every point and the biblical evidence. This is a typical Premil response. I refer you back.

Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons, Gaul, (now France) (AD 150) Irenaeus is in rock-solid agreement with the general assessment of Justin, which is not surprising, since they both held similar eschatological beliefs and ministered around the same era in history. The earliest Chiliast writers all tended...

I agree. You lack biblical support for your theory.

Of course. You have nothing to support your thesis. That is why you must run. This is the Premil MO.

Lol. You are stirring the pot. You obviously do not even understand what ad hominem is. Me exposing your lack of hermeneutics or hard evidence is not ad hominem. If you have an answer give it, if not admit it or stop derailing.

Not so. Facts!

But the Bible doesn't say that.

Congratulations. You just ignored all my points. You have to!

But your millennial kingdom is the same old same old. You have the removal of the curse and corruption at the second coming and yet sin, death and decay continues and expands.

Zechariah 14:1 declares, “Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.” There are strong grounds for relating this to the great victory that was wrought through Christ’s sinless life, His atoning death and His victorious resurrection. In keeping with...

There you go again: more false charges. You cannot seem to help your self. That is your MO. This is my study, as are all my posts. You just have no answer to it. You say you do not "appreciate it when I do this." Do what? Present hard facts that refute Premil. No wonder: it exposes your claims...

None of those passages teach what you are advocating. I suspect you know that. That is why you do not expound them. I will ignore your ad hominem and name-calling. It is petty and unneeded. Premils cannot resist that when their beliefs are exposed. .. and I do not engage with links. Present...