Search results

When did it end, and what happened?

These verses in Revelation 14 (and this teaching) belong to the 4th of 7 recaps in Revelation, and culminate with a record of the climactic return of Jesus. Revelation 14:14-20 states, “And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man (Christ), having...

Wrong! This couldn't be clearer to those who take Scripture as it reads. You have to spiritualize away so much Scripture to let your beliefs fit.

I believe it fully. I recognize the symbolic recaps in Revelation that fit in with the rest of Scripture.

Who is Peter warning in this chapter? And, what is he warning them about?

Not so. It is a totally non-corroborative doctrine.

You are definitely and carefully ducking around this major contradiction in your position. That is why you are not addressing one single point that I am presenting in regard to this. That is your MO. You constantly avoid the multiple contradictions in your position. You have to! To acknowledge...

Why do you keep avoiding my main point? 2 Peter 3:3-15 tells us: “there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming (parousia)? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the...

Not so. Please read what I wrote before making these claims. The Pretrib theory has not one single proof-text. It must be taught to you. Many of us have abandoned it because it is not in the Bible.

Yes it is! The earth does doesn't pass away until after Satan's little season, not at the end of the millennium. That is more than 1000 years after the second coming in your theology. There are so many contractions in your view that it is self-defeating. The 1000 years DOTL doesn't add up.

There is nothing in the Op that questions the impending return of Jesus Christ. It is actually addressed toward the error of inventing a period of time in between "this age" and "the age to come," which the Bible does not recognize.

No you did not, and you know it. (1) Anyone who contends that 2 Peter 3 supports the Premillennial theory that the day of the Lord lasts a literal 1,000 years after the second coming must surely see the absolute absurdity of their notion in the light of the destructive nature of the passage...

Not true! There is nothing you or any other Premil can do with 2 Peter 3 apart from explain it away. It is Amils that take literal passages like this literal. This is a watertight passage. Peter could not have made it any more destructive or climactic. Your conclusion is nonsensical - propelling...

That is not true. You are twisting the facts.

You have obviously no answer to the truth presented here. Telling!

No. You explained it away. 2 Peter 3:3-13 tells us: “there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of His coming [Gr. parousia]? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation...

Revelation 19 is climactic. It is the end of the world. Revelation 20 starts the 7th of 7 parallels. Premils cannot or will not see that because it decimates their teaching. Revelation 19:11-16 makes clear, “And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called...

And they claim to be literalists?

You know I am Amil, although Amils and Postmils agree a lot. This period has been ongoing since the first resurrection. You are explaining away the literal detail of 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 19 in order to facilitate your end-time views. Premils have to do that with so many Scripture. An...

Not so. The time period mentioned (a thousand years) relates to a long period of assumed delay before the coming of Christ, not some supposed time period after it. Amils take this literal! This is complete, wholesale, and total destruction - for those left behind. There are no survivors! Check...