Pre-Trib Only My New End Times Chronology

Bible Highlighter · Apr 14, 2019

"You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies: you anoint my head with oil; my cup runs over." (Psalms 23:5).

iamlamad · Apr 14, 2019

Jason0047 said:
Another example is when God told Peter to kill and eat unclean animals. Yet, God meant that this was going to be the inclusion of the Gentiles. So the eating of unclean animals (Which is offensive to the Jew) = represents the inclusion of the Gentiles. Granted, in Peter's vision I see it as both literal and metaphorical, but the point here is that God does regard metaphors. If we miss those metaphors, we miss what God is trying to say.

In Revelation 14, we read this.

"And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe." (Revelation 14:18).

Now, if we are going to take your extreme literal approach to this verse, we would have to assume that God is gathering literal grapes from off the Earth. But I think it is safe to say that you think that this verse is metaphorical like me. In fact, the grapes being gathered here is a type of food and it relates to God's coming judgment upon the wicked. Food (grapes) = Coming judgment upon the wicked. So we already have the cross reference or parallel verse that makes it all fit later in Revelation 19. The marriage supper is symbol or a metaphor for the battle of Armageddon. Food (grapes) = judgment (Revelation 14). Food (marriage supper) = judgment (Revelation 19).

King David said,

"I have pursued mine enemies, and overtaken them: neither did I turn again till they were consumed." (Psalms 18:37).

Again, metaphorical. King David did not literally consume or eat his enemies.

Many stopped following Jesus because they thought He was referring to cannibalism in reference to His own body (John 6:53). But Jesus was speaking metaphorically.

Jesus said, " "Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you." (John 6:53).

Jesus said to those who who were offended by this statement,

"Does this offend you?" (John 6:61).

I see this as.... "God may ask us to believe or do certain things that do not make sense at first."

Like with Abraham, God was asking him to do something that was very difficult. To take the life of his son. Little did he realize in the time of his test that this was to be a later metaphor of God the Father offering up His Son (Jesus Christ) for the salvation of the whole world by paying the price for man's sins so as to offer mankind the free gift of salvation.

Now, I think there are Christians who may think (as a result of Christ's teaching on non-resistance under the New Covenant) that destroying His enemies literally is offensive to them. I know of some Christians who are Pacifists who are against all forms of war and they reject the GOD of the Old Testament (Which takes Jesus's teachings on non-resistance to the wrong extreme; Note: I do believe we as Christians are to act non violent in this life as a part of our faith, and we should not take up a gun or weapon to go to war). Anyways, I can imagine those Christians who are offended of God of the OT with Christ saying, "Does this offend you?" For people do not realize that in order to have peace, you need to have war. There needs to be a battle to stand for what you believe in. To stand for the Lord and His good ways vs. the evil and sinful ways. But there is a time and a place for everything. For if the Lord says "stop," we stop. If He says "go" we go.

When a person's stomach rumbles full of hunger and they feel like they are almost passing out of lack of food, a good meal truly satisfies. That is the picture here with the battle of Armageddon with Christ's 2nd coming with his saints following Him into the battle. They are finally going to satisfy the Consummation (Mentioned in Daniel). The End. The Consuming (Consummation) of it all. The Lord and His saints will finally be satisfied by the wicked being destroyed from off the Earth so as to bring in age of righteousness (i.e. the Millennium or the 1,000 year reign of Christ).

I don't think my theory is extreme: of course God is not going to put literal humans into a literal wine vat. I will agree that we can't take that as literal. But a carrion eating bird eating dead bodies can most certainly be taken literally. The danger is, taking things that can and should be taken literally and making them metaphors turns the book into nonsense: everything meant to be taken literally becomes something else entirely. Of course God is not going to harvest humans with a sickle meant to harvest corn or wheat.

I agree, a God of love MUST also be a God of justice. A God of love MUST consume sin. You will find no argument with me on this: I am a 21 year military Vietnam Veteran.

The marriage supper is symbol or a metaphor for the battle of Armageddon. Here you have gone too far! The marriage is REAL. God married and then divorced Israel in the Old Covenant. He is going to have another bride and another marriage coming soon. It is REAL, not a metaphor. And with that marriage will be a marriage supper. As I have said before, many people have SEEN with their own eyes the preparations in heaven for this marriage supper. We are just going to disagree on this.

Douggg · Apr 14, 2019

iamlamad said:
The week begins with the 7th seal and the trumpet judgments. The trumpet judgements START the harming of the earth. At that time few of any people will know who the Beast is. So the answer is, NO. The harming of the earth starts first, 3.5 years before the 42 months of authority begins.

The bible says the 70th week begins with the confirming of the covenant for 7 years. Not the sealing of the 144,000.

It make no sense for the trumpet judgments to begin at the start at the beginning of the 7 years - for no reason.
__________________________________________________________________________

The seven years begin right after Gog/Magog in Ezekiel 39. And you are going to have the trumpet judgements begin immediately after? No, that makes no sense.

iamlamad · Apr 14, 2019

Douggg said:
The bible says the 70th week begins with the confirming of the covenant for 7 years. Not the sealing of the 144,000.

It make no sense for the trumpet judgments to begin at the start at the beginning of the 7 years - for no reason.
__________________________________________________________________________

The seven years begin right after Gog/Magog in Ezekiel 39. And you are going to have the trumpet judgements begin immediately after? No, that makes no sense.

It may not make sense to you, but it made perfect sense to God - so that is what He caused to be written. The truth is, the 70th week is marked by 7's - and that is very much like God.

There has been endless arguments about Daniel 38 & 39 - if or if not it is the battle of Armageddon. We are certainly not going to end that argument today.

If it is a separate war that comes before the week, so be it. Then God will repeat huge hail stones and repeat calling birds to eat flesh. God certainly can do these things twice. I am not sure this is the case here.

Reason? OF COURSE there is a reason: God wants to END Satan's rule as god of this world. But to accomplish that, SOMEONE had to be found worthy to open the seals so the BOOK can be opened. Once the seals are opened, and then the book opened, the first thing to happen will be the first 6 trumpet judgments: THEY are the countdown to Satan losing his kingdom. Finally, at the moment the man of sin enters the temple and declares he is God, Jesus opens the 7th trumpet. The countdown ends and Jesus gets His planet back!

Behind the scenes, at the 7th seal, a confirmation is made of a 7 year covenant and the 70th week officially begins.

Bible Highlighter · Apr 14, 2019

iamlamad said:
I don't think my theory is extreme: of course God is not going to put literal humans into a literal wine vat. I will agree that we can't take that as literal. But a carrion eating bird eating dead bodies can most certainly be taken literally. The danger is, taking things that can and should be taken literally and making them metaphors turns the book into nonsense: everything meant to be taken literally becomes something else entirely. Of course God is not going to harvest humans with a sickle meant to harvest corn or wheat.

I agree, a God of love MUST also be a God of justice. A God of love MUST consume sin. You will find no argument with me on this: I am a 21 year military Vietnam Veteran.

The marriage supper is symbol or a metaphor for the battle of Armageddon. Here you have gone too far! The marriage is REAL. God married and then divorced Israel in the Old Covenant. He is going to have another bride and another marriage coming soon. It is REAL, not a metaphor. And with that marriage will be a marriage supper. As I have said before, many people have SEEN with their own eyes the preparations in heaven for this marriage supper. We are just going to disagree on this.

The problem is that you have the mention of two different suppers in a highly symbolic book and you want me to believe that there are two suppers not far from each other in the same chapter. You want me to believe there is a supper for God's people in heaven (that mentions no details of a supper in heaven), and you want me to believe there is then an immediate call to a supper with the saints going to a battle but it is actually a supper for real literal birds instead. Sorry, I am not buying it; But you are free to believe as you wish. The Bible talks about food/eating in relation to conquering one's enemies in other parts of the Bible. Even Jesus Himself was misunderstood by his disciples in thinking that He was referring to cannibalism (When He wasn't).

But I do not want to keep arguing this topic. If you don't see it, you don't see it, my friend.

In any event, may God bless you.

Bible Highlighter · Apr 14, 2019

iamlamad said:
I don't think my theory is extreme: of course God is not going to put literal humans into a literal wine vat. I will agree that we can't take that as literal. But a carrion eating bird eating dead bodies can most certainly be taken literally. The danger is, taking things that can and should be taken literally and making them metaphors turns the book into nonsense: everything meant to be taken literally becomes something else entirely. Of course God is not going to harvest humans with a sickle meant to harvest corn or wheat.

I agree, a God of love MUST also be a God of justice. A God of love MUST consume sin. You will find no argument with me on this: I am a 21 year military Vietnam Veteran.

The marriage supper is symbol or a metaphor for the battle of Armageddon. Here you have gone too far! The marriage is REAL. God married and then divorced Israel in the Old Covenant. He is going to have another bride and another marriage coming soon. It is REAL, not a metaphor. And with that marriage will be a marriage supper. As I have said before, many people have SEEN with their own eyes the preparations in heaven for this marriage supper. We are just going to disagree on this.

Was Jesus going to far for saying that we must eat of His flesh and drink of His blood?

Many stopped following Jesus because of this statement made by Him.

Oh, and the marriage is also symbolic to an extent, too. The body of Christ is not literally a woman. It is a picture of our uniting with Christ. So the marriage is also symbolic to a good degree, too. We are told to be as chaste virgins for Christ. This obviously does not talk about being an actual virgin literally.

"For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ" (2 Corinthians 11:2).

Bible Highlighter · Apr 17, 2019

Update:

I added Commentary #6.

I also edited my chronology to include the "abomination of desolations" as the "beast idol" or the "image of the beast" being erected at the midpoint of the Tribulation (with the ceasing of the Jewish sacrifices).

No doubt if the Jews see this idol image in their temple, they better run for the hills (i.e. the mountains of Judea).

Bible Highlighter · Apr 17, 2019

Update:

I just added End Times Commentary #7.

I wanted to show the biblical evidence of why I believe there will be both a Pre-Trib Rapture, and a Mid-Trib Gathering.

Bible Highlighter · Apr 18, 2019

Update:

I added End Times Commentary #8 involving the 8 Kings.

Douggg · Apr 18, 2019

Jason0047 said:
1st King = Egypt
2nd King = Assyria
3rd King = Babylon (Statue of Neb. starts) (Different Beast Animals Start)
4th King = Medo Persia
5th King = Greece

Jason, the problem with that interpretation is the kingdoms and kings in Daniel 7 don't start with Egypt, but Babylon and Nebuchadnezzar.

The same in Daniel 2.

_________________________________________________

What about this instead...

Daniel 7
Babylon empire
Medes persian empire
Greek empire
Roman Empire
........king 1 Julius Caesar
........king 2 Augustus
........king 3 Tiberius
........king 4 Caligula
........king 5 Claudius
........king 6 Nero
........king 7 little horn

10 kings in the end times
.........little horn comes up among them
.........becomes the prince who shall come
.........becomes the Antichrist
.........becomes the revealed man of sin
.........becomes the beast, king 8

Bible Highlighter · Apr 18, 2019

Douggg said:
Jason, the problem with that interpretation is the kingdoms and kings in Daniel 7 don't start with Egypt, but Babylon and Nebuchadnezzar.

The same in Daniel 2.

_________________________________________________

What about this instead...

Daniel 7
Babylon empire
Medes persian empire
Greek empire
Roman Empire
........king 1 Julius Caesar
........king 2 Augustus
........king 3 Tiberius
........king 4 Caligula
........king 5 Claudius
........king 6 Nero
........king 7 little horn

10 kings in the end times
.........little horn comes up among them
.........becomes the prince who shall come
.........becomes the Antichrist
.........becomes the revealed man of sin
.........becomes the beast, king 8

Daniel 7 is not meant to be a chronological frame work for the eight kings. The key to understanding on the frame work of the order here is Revelation 17:10.

"And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space." (Revelation 17:10).

John was speaking from his perspective and time period.

The one that is would be Rome (Which is the 6th king or kingdom).
Tracing back to the different empires or kingdoms it is not hard to figure out.
Greece was conquered by the Romans.
The leopard has four heads (Which more than likely represented the 4 provinces that came about after Alexander's death). We can also see the fall of the other major empires. But the basis for the connection is Revelation 17:10 for the eight kings.

Check out this article here:

Seven Heads and Ten Horns | RevelationLogic

Side Note:

The thing is that not only does history confirm the fall of the great empires such as Egypt and Assyria, but the Bible also records the fall of these empires, too.

Douggg · Apr 18, 2019

Jason0047 said:
Daniel 7 is not meant to be a chronological frame work for the eight kings. The key to understanding on the frame work of the order here is Revelation 17:10.

Daniel 7 gives the criteria for the little horn person. And that person in the text of Daniel 7:23-24 comes up among ten kings of the fourth kingdom.

There is no fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth kingdoms.

The text of Revelation 17:10 says there are 7 kings directly in the text. Six are accounted for in the text.

That leaves one king unaccounted for. That king has to be the little horn person of the fourth kingdom in Daniel 7.

Whenever a person takes what certain symbolism is defined as in Revelation, and makes by their own rationale a derivative symbolic definition - they are going away from both the text and the meaning given directly in the text.

The seven heads on the beast in Revelation 17 are seven mountains on which the woman sits - a place.

And there are seven kings associated with that place.

Because the sixth king ruling at the time, associated with that place, was Nero. The kingdom is the fourth kingdom, which the 7 kings belong to. The Roman Empire.

When you go to a different number of kingdoms, you lose connection with Daniel 7.
___________________________________________________

Is that site your website, Jason?

Douggg · Apr 18, 2019

Jason0047 said:
Daniel 7 is not meant to be a chronological frame work for the eight kings. The key to understanding on the frame work of the order here is Revelation 17:10.

"And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space." (Revelation 17:10).

John was speaking from his perspective and time period.

The one that is would be Rome (Which is the 6th king or kingdom).
Tracing back to the different empires or kingdoms it is not hard to figure out.
Greece was conquered by the Romans.
The leopard has four heads (Which more than likely represented the 4 provinces that came about after Alexander's death). We can also see the fall of the other major empires. But the basis for the connection is Revelation 17:10 for the eight kings.

Check out this article here:

Seven Heads and Ten Horns | RevelationLogic

Side Note:

The thing is that not only does history confirm the fall of the great empires such as Egypt and Assyria, but the Bible also records the fall of these empires, too.

Jason, I looked at your commentary on the Antichrist, assuming that is your site.

You wrote...

"However, referring Jesus as “the Christ” places emphasis on the office of Christ (or the Messiah), whereas referring to Jesus with the proper name “Christ” places emphasis the uniqueness of the person who fills that office."

You left out the most important part of being "the" Christ, the office.

And that is, to be the King of Israel, descended from David, to lead the Israel, the Jews and the world into the messianic age of peace and harmony.

When you leave that core factor out, being the King of Israel - it completely alters the understanding of the end times prophecies.

You have committed the same almost universal error of referring to the person as the Antichrist when he is not in the role of being the Antichrist, but other roles.

It is like calling someone mayor, or governor, or senator, when a person is in the role of being president of the United states.

little horn
prince who shall come
the Antichrist
the revealed man of sin
the beast

These are all different roles - like mayor, governor, senator, president.

Would you call President Eisenhower - governor Eisenhower?

Bible Highlighter · Apr 18, 2019

Douggg said:
Jason, I looked at your commentary on the Antichrist, assuming that is your site.

You wrote...

"However, referring Jesus as “the Christ” places emphasis on the office of Christ (or the Messiah), whereas referring to Jesus with the proper name “Christ” places emphasis the uniqueness of the person who fills that office."

You left out the most important part of being "the" Christ, the office.

And that is, to be the King of Israel, descended from David, to lead the Israel, the Jews and the world into the messianic age of peace and harmony.

When you leave that core factor out, being the King of Israel - it completely alters the understanding of the end times prophecies.

You have committed the same almost universal error of referring to the person as the Antichrist when he is not in the role of being the Antichrist, but other roles.

It is like calling someone mayor, or governor, or senator, when a person is in the role of being president of the United states.

little horn
prince who shall come
the Antichrist
the revealed man of sin
the beast

These are all different roles - like mayor, governor, senator, president.

It's not my website, but I agree with the placement of the kings (Which is what we see in standard Eschatology with other prophecy teachers like Chuck Missler, etc.; Note: I do not believe everything Chuck says, especially his teaching on Eternal Security). Anyways, the little horn is said to overcome the saints (Daniel 7:21). Revelation 13:7 is said that the beast overcomes the saints. So the titles here are interchangeable. The saints being overcome happens as the beast when he enforces the mark and not as the man of sin (as per Revelation 13, and yet is referred to as the horn in Daniel 7:21). This is because the beast takes over the little horn's body, and people will think it is the same guy. When it says he (the little horn) is of the 4th, it is counting from the 3rd king onward (Which is where Daniel's prophecy would begin) out of the 8 kings blueprint given to us in Revelation 17:10. One beast kingdom that IS would be the great kingdom that John was familiar with at that time. That would be Rome. For counting from the 3rd kingdom as being #1 onward would be Rome.

Counting from Revelation 17:10:
1st King = Egypt (1st Kingdom that has fallen)
2nd King = Assyria (2nd Kingdom that has fallen)
Counting from Daniel:
#1. 3rd King = Babylon (Statue of Neb. starts) (Different Beast Animals Start)
(3rd kingdom that has fallen).
#2. 4th King = Medo Persia (4th kingdom that has fallen).
#3. 5th King = Greece (5th kingdom that has fallen - from John's perspective).

The One That is:

#4. 6th King = Rome (Kingdom that is from the perspective of John's time).

The one that is to come:

7th King = Antichrist Empire / Unknown.

The antichrist is of #4 kingdom from the counting of Daniel. He is the little horn coming out of Rome (or in having a strong alliance with Rome) and rising to power as his own king (little horn). Will he also have Jewish heritage? The Scriptures I posted to you before do also imply that. So it is possible. It could also simply mean that he becomes a Jew, as well. People can convert to Judaism (like Rahab).

• Daniel 11:30a and Daniel 11:30b DRB (Douay-Rheims Bible) says,

"For the ships of... the Romans shall come upon him, and he shall be struck, and shall return, and shall have indignation against the covenant of the sanctuary, and he shall succeed: and he shall return and shall devise against them that have forsaken the covenant of the sanctuary."

I see this above verse as saying that after the antichrist (man of sin) (7th king) declares himself to be god in the Jewish temple, both the Romans, and the Israelites will come up against him in battle at sea and they will have struck him (killed him), and he will return as the Beast (8th king) (to other people it will appear as the same guy or same little horn). By their going to war with the antichrist, the Romans and Israelites break the 7 year treaty, and he comes back as the beast seeking revenge upon them (Thus destroying Rome first, and then Israel whereby he sets up the Abomination of Desolations).

Douggg · Apr 18, 2019

Jason0047 said:
Anyways, the little horn is said to overcome the saints (Daniel 7:21). Revelation 13:7 is said that the beast overcomes the saints. So the titles here are interchangeable.

Hi Jason,

Even though it is the same person, and the same actions by the same person. The titles are not interchangeable because the role of the person has changed, when he becomes the beast.

As the little horn, he is the 7th king of the Roman Empire (of that particular family line). As the beast, he is the 8th king of the Roman Empire, having been of the 7 other kings.

Jason0047 said:
When it says he (the little horn) is of the 4th, it is counting from the 3rd king onward (Which is where Daniel's prophecy would begin) out of the 8 kings blueprint given to us in Revelation 17:10

It is talking about the 4th kingdom in Daniel 7 (and Revelation 17). It is not counting from any kings in Daniel 7.

The 7 kings of Revelation 17 are 7 kings of the 4th kingdom. The 7th king is not counting from the 3rd king there either, but from king 1 of the 4th kingdom.

Bible Highlighter · Apr 18, 2019

Douggg said:
Hi Jason,

Even though it is the same person, and the same actions by the same person. The titles are not interchangeable because the role of the person has changed, when he becomes the beast.

As the little horn, he is the 7th king of the Roman Empire (of that particular family line). As the beast, he is the 8th king of the Roman Empire, having been of the 7 other kings.

It is talking about the 4th kingdom in Daniel 7 (and Revelation 17). It is not counting from any kings in Daniel 7.

The 7 kings of Revelation 17 are 7 kings of the 4th kingdom. The 7th king is not counting from the 3rd king there either, but from king 1 of the 4th kingdom.

I already stated my reasons, and I respectfully disagree.

There is nowhere in Daniel 7 says (or alludes) to the start of the counting of the 1st king mentioned as mentioned in Revelation 17:10. Daniel simply mentions 4 kings. Revelation mentions 8 kings. But we line up the map of the kings based on Revelation 17:10 based on the existence of the kingdom in John's time. We look at history and the Bible and we can see those kingdoms that have fallen based from John's perspective in John 17:10.

Also, I have already provided verses that both the beast and the horn as overcoming the saints. So this proves the names are in fact interchangeable, unless you believe both the antichrist and the beast will overcome the saints at separate points in time each (Which is nonsensical).

Douggg · Apr 18, 2019

Jason0047 said:
There is nowhere in Daniel 7 says (or alludes) to the start of the counting of the 1st king mentioned as mentioned in Revelation 17:10. Daniel simply mentions 4 kings. Revelation mentions 8 kings.

I was going by your statement of the counting starting at king 3. It was not clear what you meant.

But since you had the seven kings in Revelation 17:10 beginning with the kingdom of Egypt - I assumed that you were talking about king 3 of those seven kings being the king of Babylon.

Daniel 7 does not have 7 kingdoms but 4 kingdoms. With the little horn associated with the fourth kingdom.

In Revelation 17:10 there are 7 kings. Those too, are associated with the fourth king kingdom of Daniel 7.

So those 7 kings begin with king 1 of the fourth kingdom.
______________________________________________________________

Revelation mentions 8 kings - but not 8 kingdoms.

Bible Highlighter · Apr 18, 2019

Douggg said:
I was going by your statement of the counting starting at king 3. It was not clear what you meant.

But since you had the seven kings in Revelation 17:10 beginning with the kingdom of Egypt - I assumed that you were talking about king 3 of those seven kings being the king of Babylon.

Daniel 7 does not have 7 kingdoms but 4 kingdoms. With the little horn associated with the fourth kingdom.

In Revelation 17:10 there are 7 kings. Those too, are associated with the fourth king kingdom of Daniel 7.

So those 7 kings begin with king 1 of the fourth kingdom.
______________________________________________________________

Revelation mentions 8 kings - but not 8 kingdoms.

Daniel is saying there is 4. John is saying there is 8 and that the one that is within his present time would fit as being the Roman Empire during his time as King 6. 5 are fallen (Kings 1-5 on the Revelation list). The Revelation shifts the order of the Daniel list of 4 in being in the middle based on these facts given to us in Revelation and biblical history. It makes perfect sense.

lismore · Apr 18, 2019

GingerBeer said:
I have a better chronology for the end times

The gospel will be preached throughout the whole world

there will be people faking it and some pretending to be Jesus or something like that

some wars will start and some will be rumoured to start

there will be earthquakes in various places

there will be famines

there will be illnesses that spread far and wide

then the end will some.

Side Note:

This post will not be re-worked because it got it right the first time and no hyperlinks are necessary because anybody with a bible - electronic or printed - can find the chronology in the Gospel according to Matthew.

Also the Fig Tree! Matthew 24:32

Douggg · Apr 19, 2019

Jason0047 said:
Daniel is saying there is 4. John is saying there is 8

four what? and eight what?

I am not clear about what you are saying.

In Daniel 7, the text itself say four kingdoms and four kings

In Revelation 17:10 it only says 7 kings. And Revelation 17:11 it says the beast is the eighth (king, implied).

In Daniel 7, the four kingdoms and corresponding four kings are...

Babylonian - Nebuchadnezzar
Medes Persians - Cyrus
Greeks - Alexander
Roman - little horn

____________________________________________________________

In Daniel 7:23-24, what kingdom does it say the ten kings are of? The fourth kingdom.

In Revelation, the ten kings are still of the fourth kingdom, and they rule at the same time as the beast. Thus the beast is of the fourth kingdom.

Pre-Trib Only My New End Times Chronology

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Lamad

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

Lamad

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Maranatha

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency