The Revelation 11, Revelation 13, and Luke 17 Connection: Why the Pretrib Timeline Chronologically Collapses

[Spiritual Israelite]

QUOTE
"Matthew 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together

Verse 27 undeniably proves Christ has not come again, in any sense, prior to when these verses are meaning. Verse 27 did not happen, in any sense, prior to the beginning of great tribulation. BTW, all those coming passages submitted above, how many comings should we assume are meant? Just one in total? "

Lol.
WE SEE 3 COMINGS AS CLEAR AS DAY.

No, you see 3 comings when Jesus only referred to one future coming. How are you seeing 3 comings there?

You are using all the conjecture you can muster to convince yourself those 3 comings are irrelevant.
You are literally casting down scripture.

Your basis is clear , " how many comings should we assume are meant"?

There it is.
Your doctrine of many many assumptions.

Your doctrine is void of any exegesis. You just make all sorts of claims while doing nothing to back them up with scripture. You think that's going to convince anyone of anything? Think again.

 

[Davidpt]

You are very repetitive. You can say these things just once and that's enough. No need to repeat this nonsense. You are posting total gibberish. If you're going to make claims in relation to the beast then you need to explain how your view of the beast lines up with John saying that the beast "was" before the book was written and how one of its heads "is" at the time the book was written. That means John saying that the beast "is not" at the time the book was written does not mean the beast did not exist or wasn't active at all. You have no understanding at all of what the beast and other symbols in Revelation represent.

Your primary debating tactic is to shift the goalposts and use rhetorical deflections ("LOL," calling my points "assumptions") to avoid answering the text.


I repeat myself because you never actually answer the question.

When someone encounters an opponent who refuses to address a glaring logical flaw, the only way to maintain the integrity of the debate is to re-state the unresolved contradiction. I repeat the core problem because it remains a problem until you provide a textual solution.


I repeatedly state, "I let the text determine things," thus to force the conversation back to the link between Revelation 13 and 16.

I am trying to force you to defend your foundational premise. I recognize that if your foundational premise (parallelism) creates an impossible timeline where a punishment precedes the crime, your entire system falls apart. I repeat it to keep your feet held to the fire.


You try to control the tone of the debate by projecting absolute confidence and acting as if my arguments are meaningless or simple. I repeat my conclusions ("You have zero Scripture," "This is pure speculation") right after pointing out your timeline flaws. This is an effective way to counter your "LOL" defense. By systematically matching your dismissals with steady, unyielding repetitions of your Scriptural absence, I strip away your rhetorical high ground. I am showing you that no matter how much you laugh, the textual problem isn't going away.

I'm not being repetitive because I lack new ideas---I am being repetitive because I have trapped your timeline, and I am refusing to let you wiggle out of the trap. This is called driving home a contention.