Question for Amillennialists

[Spiritual Jew]

Right, so it’s completely untrue that I would be “ignoring” 1 Peter 5:9, as I believe the saints to whom Satan wars against could rely upon the words of Peter to “flee from the devil and pray for brothers and sisters suffering around the world”.

No idea of what your point is here and I don't think you made any attempt to see mine. Whatever. Moving on..

Good to know, you have zero epistolic or gospel evidence.

That is a lie. I have the evidence and have given it. You just don't accept it. But, saying something like this comes across as if you're saying that I don't even attempt to give any epistolic or gospel evidence, but I have. I don't appreciate your dishonest approach to these discussions.

If you did that would really nail down amil against premil.

I do. You just don't accept them as such. But, you're just one person, so I don't really care about that. Others can see it.

Can you imagine if the gospels and epistles stated Satan was locked in the abyss for a long time to prevent warring against the church but then would be released just prior to the coming of Christ?! Man, that would a real win for amil. Unfortunately, for amil, it’s pretty clear that Satan was hindering the gospel, leading believers astray, working through the sons of disobedience, blinding unbelievers, prowling like a lion, throwing saints in prison, and even killing them……

It's about restraint rather than him being incapacitated. You're not even thinking about what he was able to do in OT times compared to NT times. There's a HUGE difference. But, you, just like Premils, don't even acknowledge it.

As to the falling away: The persecution of the saints and The falling away were events leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem.

Matthew 24:9-10 “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake. 10And then many will fall away

“Then shall many be offended — That is, shall stumble and fall, or shall be turned out of the right way. By reason of persecution, many apostatized from the faith, particularly those mentioned by Paul, 2 Timothy 1:15; and 2 Timothy 4:10. And shall betray one another — To illustrate this, it is sufficient to cite one sentence out of Tacitus. Speaking of the persecution under Nero, he says, “At first several were seized, who confessed, and then by their discovery a great multitude of others were convicted and barbarously executed.” Benson

“Many shall be offended - See the notes at Matthew 5:29. Many shall stumble, fall, apostatize from a profession of religion. Many who "professed" to love me will then show that they had no "real" attachment to me; and in those trying times it will be seen that they knew nothing of genuine Christian love. See 1 John 2:19.
Shall betray one another - Those who thus apostatize from professed attachment to me will betray others who really love me. This they would do to secure their own safety, by revealing the names, habitations, or places of concealment of others.” - Barnes

“
And then shall many be offended,.... That is, many who had been hearers of the apostles, and professors of the Christian religion; who were highly pleased with it, and were strenuous advocates for it, whilst things were tolerably quiet and easy; but when they saw the apostles, some of them beaten, and imprisoned; others put to death, and others forced to fly from place to place; and persecutions and affliction, because of Christ and his Gospel, likely to befall themselves, would be discouraged hereby, and stumble at the cross; and fall off from the faith of the Gospel, and the profession of it:
and shall betray one another; meaning, that the apostates, who would fall off from the Christian religion, would prove treacherous to true believers, and give in their names to the persecutors, or inform them where they were, that they might take them, or deliver them into their hands themselves: these are the false brethren, the Apostle Paul was in perils among”- John Gill

The falling away was already occurring in the first century, it’s how they knew it was the last hour:

1 Timothy 5:15 For some have already turned aside to follow Satan.

2 Timothy 1:15 You are aware that all who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes


1 John 2:19 19They went out from us, but they did not belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But their departure made it clear that none of them belonged to us.

You are acting as if Paul was talking about something that was already happening when he wrote 2nd Thessalonians, but he talked about the apostasy as a future event. Of course some were falling away from the faith almost from the very beginning, but this has to do with a mass falling away from the faith, not just some. And it has to do with a major increase in wickedness before the second coming of Christ. He has not yet come! I can't take any view seriously who tries to say that He has already come and that we've already been gathered to Him. He said elsewhere that the gathering will take place "in the air". That has clearly not yet happened! You don't take these things into account. You only see half of the picture and not the whole picture.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Talk about rewriting Scripture. Your unhealthy fixation with the coming of Titus and obsession with AD70 exposes your theology. You butcher the meaning of the text and their relationship to Christ and His real coming.

What is more, you miss the point. Your false Preterist insistence on Jesus predicting an imminent coming in 40 years is exposed, after you denying it.

Yeah, the bottom line here is that Jesus did not come in 70 AD. There's no way around that. So, no matter what he or any other preterist tries to say about any of these scriptures, the preterist foundation of believing that Jesus came in 70 AD skews their understanding of all these scriptures that are being discussed.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Ok, what about the words “long time” in Matthew 25:19? The word “long” 4183 just means much or many and the word “time” 5550 just means time in general.

How are you determining that this specific verse is referring to Gods time and not man’s time? This verse doesn’t use words like quickly, short, or near.

Exactly! Much time is a long time. That is the thrust of the parable. We can relate that long period to the thousand years in Rev 20. It represents a long time. It is metaphoric lingo. Satan's little season represents a short period of time near the end. This symbolism is clear to those who grasp biblical allegory. This demolishes the whole defective Preterist thesis.

 

[claninja]

Look, buddy. Jesus did not come in any way, shape or form in 70 AD. You have no way around that no matter what you do. There was no gathering of the elect in 70 AD and no resurrection of the dead, which are both things that are said to occur when He comes again. So, He has not come yet at all. His glorious appearing will occur in the future and it's sad that you don't even look forward to that and think He already came.


You agree with who? I didn't say that I believe 40 years is a long time. I don't believe that. Oh brother. This is hopeless.


Yes, and why did Peter point that out in relation to how long it was taking for the Lord to fulfill the promise of His coming again?


You completely missed the point. Are you even trying? Did you actually read what I said? I didn't say that the apostles taught that Christ's wasn't coming for 1,000 years. I said they didn't know when He was coming. In terms of Peter, I said that he didn't know when He was coming and the reason why he pointed out that no one can say that the Lord is being slow to return is because it could potentially be a long time until He returns. So, his point was that no matter how long it took for Him to return, no one could say He was being slow because He's not being slow from His eternal perspective outside of time. I don't believe Peter would have bothered saying that if it was a certainty that He was going to come in their lifetimes. Why would he bother?

- No one said or argued Christ came down from heaven bodily or that dead bodies literally came out of the ground and flew into the air in 66-70ad…….

Jesus came down from heaven to judge Israel in 66-70ad, In the same manner God came down from heaven to judge nations in the OT, and the guests began to gather into the wedding feast after the cities destruction.

- I agreed with the parable of the virgins-the bride groom delayed. Forty years, or a generation, was a long time from Christ til the destruction of Jerusalem.

BUT we have the epistle to the Hebrews, written literally near the destruction of Jerusalem/ end of a generation, which stating that Christ would no longer delay.

Hebrews 10:37 Yet a little while,
and the coming one will come and will NOT delay;

- Peter pointed out there were scoffers scoffing “where was his coming?” That’s how the chapter starts. That’s the context of 2 Peter 3. So no idea what else you are talking about.

It makes zero sense for scoffers to scoff “where is his coming?” If the apostles taught that Christ would come in more than 1,000 years. If they believed Christ would come within their life time, and it was getting near the end of their lifetime, it makes perfect sense that scoffers would scoff, “where is his coming?”

 

[sovereigngrace]

- No one said or argued Christ came down from heaven bodily or that dead bodies literally came out of the ground and flew into the air in 66-70ad…….

Jesus came down from heaven to judge Israel in 66-70ad, In the same manner God came down from heaven to judge nations in the OT, and the guests began to gather into the wedding feast after the cities destruction.

- I agreed with the parable of the virgins-the bride groom delayed. Forty years, or a generation, was a long time from Christ til the destruction of Jerusalem.

BUT we have the epistle to the Hebrews, written literally near the destruction of Jerusalem/ end of a generation, which stating that Christ would no longer delay.

Hebrews 10:37 Yet a little while,
and the coming one will come and will NOT delay;

- Peter pointed out there were scoffers scoffing “where was his coming?” That’s how the chapter starts. That’s the context of 2 Peter 3. So no idea what else you are talking about.

It makes zero sense for scoffers to scoff “where is his coming?” If the apostles taught that Christ would come in more than 1,000 years. If they believed Christ would come within their life time, and it was getting near the end of their lifetime, it makes perfect sense that scoffers would scoff, “where is his coming?”

You force so much bias false teaching into Scripture. Understandably, you cannot support it with hard Scripture.

He will come physically, visibly, and literally – just as He left.

Acts 1:10 says, “while they (the disciples) beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.”

This passage tells us it is the actual “manner” or tropos (meaning style or mode) of His glorious ascent into heaven that will be the way He will return. How did He go?

Literally, physically, visibly.

•Physically: “This same Jesus.”
•Visibly: “while they beheld, he was taken up” - “as ye have seen Him go.”
•Literally: “In like manner.”

Contrary to what do you have been taught, the second coming of Christ has not happened neither is it a secret event. Such a mistaken view emanates from a wrong understanding of Scripture. Revelation 1:7, speaking of this climactic last day, John says,

“Behold, he (Christ) cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him (the Jews): and all kindreds of the earth (the Gentile nations) shall wail because of him”

This passage unmistakably shows that the glorious Second Advent will be the most amazing public event ever. To such an extent that “every eye shall see him.” The swiftness of Christ’s coming and the speed of the rescue of the saints precludes any possibility of the wicked repenting.

Jesus warned in Matthew 24:23-27: “Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. 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. Behold, I have told you before. 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. 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.”

Christ's coming shall be sudden and visible as lightning. What is more sudden and visually spectacular than lightning? Lightning is not hid! It can be seen by all across the sky. This is no secret snatch in this text.

Jesus tells us in Matthew 26:64: “Hereafter shall ye the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”

This is repeated in Mark 14:62: “ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”

Jesus said in Luke 21:26–27: “for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.”

This is the end of the age. It is the end of the world. He is coming visibly and powerfully to glorify the elect and this corrupt earth when He comes.

 

[sovereigngrace]

- No one said or argued Christ came down from heaven bodily or that dead bodies literally came out of the ground and flew into the air in 66-70ad…….

Jesus came down from heaven to judge Israel in 66-70ad, In the same manner God came down from heaven to judge nations in the OT, and the guests began to gather into the wedding feast after the cities destruction.

- I agreed with the parable of the virgins-the bride groom delayed. Forty years, or a generation, was a long time from Christ til the destruction of Jerusalem.

BUT we have the epistle to the Hebrews, written literally near the destruction of Jerusalem/ end of a generation, which stating that Christ would no longer delay.

Hebrews 10:37 Yet a little while,
and the coming one will come and will NOT delay;

- Peter pointed out there were scoffers scoffing “where was his coming?” That’s how the chapter starts. That’s the context of 2 Peter 3. So no idea what else you are talking about.

It makes zero sense for scoffers to scoff “where is his coming?” If the apostles taught that Christ would come in more than 1,000 years. If they believed Christ would come within their life time, and it was getting near the end of their lifetime, it makes perfect sense that scoffers would scoff, “where is his coming?”

2 Peter 3:3-13 couldn't be clearer: “Knowing this first, that 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. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack (or slow) concerning his promise, as some men count slackness (slowness); but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away [Gr. parerchomai]: with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

What is the focus here (and that of the rest of the New Testament)? Is it Titus or Jesus? What is the promise? Is it AD70 or the final climactic return of Christ, which includes the general resurrection/judgment of the living and the dead and the introduction of the new perfect eternal state?

We glean a lot of helpful detail here relating to what happens to the creature and creation when Jesus comes, and what immediately follows. If we are able to divorce ourselves from what we have been taught, we are looking at a very climactic picture.

Unquestionably, the focus of this message is directed to the end-time-cynics who question God.

These fools question God keeping His “promise.” What promise? It is “the promise of his coming.”

The scorn and derision of these foolish last days scoffers and mockers are directed specifically towards the reality and occurrence of Christ’s future coming.

It is not in any way speaking of Jewish cynics who are mocking the reality of AD70. It is not concentrated upon a supposed group of ‘millennial scoffers’ 1,000 years later. If this is supposed to be a collection of ‘millennial scoffers’ 1,000 years after the second coming, why would they be saying, “Where is the promise of his coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation”? Such a notion is a complete absurdity as Christ’s coming (or parousia) is long past.

This text shows us that today is the only day of salvation. Peter responds to the mockers scoffing at the apparent delay in Christ's return: “the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation” (2 Peter 3:15). Romans 2:4 reaffirms that salvation is limited to this side of the second coming.

The actual wrath described by the Holy Spirit comes suddenly and unexpectedly upon these foolish last days scoffers and mockers. There is no escape. They are the recipients of total destruction.

We also see in this reading that “the day of the Lord will arrive (or heko) as a thief in the night; in the which (en heé)” or literally translated “in which” (the word “the” being absent from the original). The detail described arrives with Jesus.

What happens to creation when Jesus arrives? 1. The heavens shall pass away / perish with a great noise. 2. The elements shall be ‘loosed by being set on fire’, 3. The earth shall be ‘burned up utterly / consumed wholly. 4. The works that are within the earth shall be ‘burned up utterly / consumed wholly. The Premillennialist claims to be a literalist, so there is no spiritualization that can explain this away. It is water-tight.

The description of the destruction could not be more comprehensive. It is undoubtedly the end. It involves wholesale and unavoidable annihilation for the wicked. It embraces the full gamut of fallen creation.

What is this replaced with? A future millennium filled with sin and sinners, crying and dying? No. The Holy Spirit tells us that it the “new heavens and a new earth” that follows Christ’s return.

The arrival of the “new heavens and a new earth” are here significantly connected to “his promise.”

The Holy Spirit then assures the last days elect that their lot is not wrath or destruction. They experience the new heavens and new earth at His appearing.

Unquestionably, the focus of this message is directed to the end-time-cynics who deny Christ, despise His Word and scorn the likelihood of His return. The near 2,000 years that has already elapsed since our Lord’s first Advent is used as a basis for their mocking. They use this supposed delay as an opportunity to propagate their foolishness. 2 Peter 3 makes clear, those that would consider this as an opportunity for scorn will be swiftly and assuredly caught in their own folly at His coming. Like the wicked locked outside the ark and the iniquitous left behind in Sodom, the end-time scoffers will be caught unexpected when the judgment arrives suddenly. These evildoers will be exposed when Christ returns and pours out His wrath upon them. That is the whole emphasis of this passage – the sudden and unanticipated destruction of the wicked at Christ’s return.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Preterists would in no way use this passage to state the destruction of Jerusalem was imminent to when Jesus spoke those words. This has nothing to preterism. It’s just some weird strawman that SG attempted to invent in order to deflect from providing any scholarly evidence to back up his claim that eggizo doesn’t mean imminent when in the perfect tense.

Stop avoiding the issue. Was the second coming (which you say was AD 70) imminent to those living in Jesus day?

 

[claninja]

Stop avoiding the issue. Was the second coming (which you say was AD 70) imminent to those living in Jesus day?

The 2nd advent as believed by orthodoxy, no, that’s still future. The coming of Christ down from heaven in judgement upon Israel in the same manner as God in the OT, which is also an orthodox belief known as orthodox preterism or partial preterism, ? Yes, that was imminent to the authors of:

Hebrews who stated Christ would come in a little while without delay (Hebrews 10:37)

James, who stated the coming of the Lord had drawn near (James 5:8)

Peter who stated the end of all things had drawn near (1 Peter 4:7)

cracks me up that you post “stop avoiding the issue”, when you won’t event address or clarify the strawman argument you created about 40+ years somehow equaling “imminent”…….the hypocrisy is strong…..

 

[sovereigngrace]

The 2nd advent as believed by orthodoxy, no, that’s still future. The coming of Christ down from heaven in judgement upon Israel in the same manner as God in the OT, which is also an orthodox belief known as orthodox preterism or partial preterism, ? Yes, that was imminent to the authors of:

Hebrews who stated Christ would come in a little while without delay (Hebrews 10:37)

James, who stated the coming of the Lord had drawn near (James 5:8)

Peter who stated the end of all things had drawn near (1 Peter 4:7)

cracks me up that you post “stop avoiding the issue”, when you won’t event address or clarify the strawman argument you created about 40+ years somehow equaling “imminent”…….the hypocrisy is strong…..

Answer the question please, and stop avoiding. Was the "coming of Christ down from heaven in judgement upon Israel" imminent to those living in Jesus day?

 

[grafted branch]

Exactly! Much time is a long time. That is the thrust of the parable.

Right, much time is a long time. In post # 204 you said …



For us mere earthlings who are promised approximately 70 years on this earth, 40 years is a long time. It is not “a brief period of time.” It is therefore far off in earthly terms.



It appears you would agree that from mans perspective the parable could be referring to 70 AD.

We can relate that long period to the thousand years in Rev 20. It represents a long time. It is metaphoric lingo. Satan's little season represents a short period of time near the end. This symbolism is clear to those who grasp biblical allegory. This demolishes the whole defective Preterist thesis.

Why are you relating this to the 1,000 years? What makes you think “long time” is metaphoric lingo and not meant to be understood as a 40 year long period of time?

The parable of the wicked tenants in Luke 20:9-18 is also seen in Matthew 21:33-46. In Luke 20:9 the husbandmen went into a far country for a long time. In Matthew 21:45 the chief priest and Pharisees perceived he spake of them. Here is an example of “long time” apparently referring to the time until the destruction of Jerusalem (approx 40 years). Why wouldn’t “long time” in this parable line up with “long time” in the parable of the talents?

 

[grafted branch]

Christ's coming shall be sudden and visible as lightning. What is more sudden and visually spectacular than lightning? Lightning is not hid! It can be seen by all across the sky. This is no secret snatch in this text.

I came across a non-Christian web site that was discussing how far away lightning can be observed by the human eye. Most of the responses from people were in the 100 to 150 mile range (160 to 240 kilometer). Someone gave a formula to show that under perfect conditions theoretically a person could observe lightning from approximately 273 miles (440 kilometers) away. Here’s the formula …



D = (2RH + H2 – 2Rh – h2)1/2

D is the maximum distance that lightning can be observed
R is the distance from the surface of the earth to the center of the earth, estimated at 4,000 miles
H is the height of the clouds, based on Wikipedia’s top most cloud layer that lightning comes from, which is 49,000 feet
h is the height of a person, 6 feet



Lightning is literally a local event and not a global event. If Christ’s coming is global why would a local, 273 mile radius, event be used to describe his coming?

 

[claninja]

Answer the question please, and stop avoiding. Was the "coming of Christ down from heaven in judgement upon Israel" imminent to those living in Jesus day?

and i could ask the same of you..stop deflecting my clarifying question on your argument about Luke 21:25-28, 36, which is a classic strawman.

The coming of Christ in judgement upon Israel (destruction of Jerusalem), in like manner of God coming down from heaven to judge nations, was NOT imminent during Christs lifetime, as you seem to falsely argue I believe.

the clause “your redemption is near or is imminent”, as found in Luke 21, is dependent on “when you see these things begin to occur” NOT when Jesus made the prediction. I concur with numerous scholarship and commentaries, from amil to premil, that this passage refers the apostles redemption from Jewish persecution and polity that would be imminent WHEN the destruction of Jerusalem began to occur and NOT imminent to when Jesus spoke the words 40 years previously.

 

[sovereigngrace]

and i could ask the same of you..stop deflecting my clarifying question on your argument about Luke 21:25-28, 36, which is a classic strawman.

The coming of Christ in judgement upon Israel (destruction of Jerusalem), in like manner of God coming down from heaven to judge nations, was NOT imminent during Christs lifetime, as you seem to falsely argue I believe.

the clause “your redemption is near or is imminent”, as found in Luke 21, is dependent on “when you see these things begin to occur” NOT when Jesus made the prediction. I concur with numerous scholarship and commentaries, from amil to premil, that this passage refers the apostles redemption from Jewish persecution and polity that would be imminent WHEN the destruction of Jerusalem began to occur and NOT imminent to when Jesus spoke the words 40 years previously.

Please do not portray yourself as being in align with Amil and Premil scholarship, when you reject and dismiss the reality of a millennium in Rev 20. You take that teaching from the Jesuit Hahn. What else do you rip out of the Bible? Name one single orthodox Protestant scholar that promoted such error? Why would anyone take your posts serious when you feel the liberty to rip actual events out of the Bible?

 

[sovereigngrace]

I came across a non-Christian web site that was discussing how far away lightning can be observed by the human eye. Most of the responses from people were in the 100 to 150 mile range (160 to 240 kilometer). Someone gave a formula to show that under perfect conditions theoretically a person could observe lightning from approximately 273 miles (440 kilometers) away. Here’s the formula …



D = (2RH + H2 – 2Rh – h2)1/2

D is the maximum distance that lightning can be observed
R is the distance from the surface of the earth to the center of the earth, estimated at 4,000 miles
H is the height of the clouds, based on Wikipedia’s top most cloud layer that lightning comes from, which is 49,000 feet
h is the height of a person, 6 feet



Lightning is literally a local event and not a global event. If Christ’s coming is global why would a local, 273 mile radius, event be used to describe his coming?

This has to be the worst argument i have ever heard in support of Preterism. This reveals how bereft you are of hard Scripture. You are obviously running out of arguments.

 

[sovereigngrace]

and i could ask the same of you..stop deflecting my clarifying question on your argument about Luke 21:25-28, 36, which is a classic strawman.

The coming of Christ in judgement upon Israel (destruction of Jerusalem), in like manner of God coming down from heaven to judge nations, was NOT imminent during Christs lifetime, as you seem to falsely argue I believe.

the clause “your redemption is near or is imminent”, as found in Luke 21, is dependent on “when you see these things begin to occur” NOT when Jesus made the prediction. I concur with numerous scholarship and commentaries, from amil to premil, that this passage refers the apostles redemption from Jewish persecution and polity that would be imminent WHEN the destruction of Jerusalem began to occur and NOT imminent to when Jesus spoke the words 40 years previously.

In what year did it become imminent?

 

[claninja]

Please do not portray yourself as being in align with Amil and Premil scholarship, when you reject and dismiss the reality of a millennium in Rev 20. You take that teaching from the Jesuit Hahn. What else do you rip out of the Bible? Name one single orthodox Protestant scholar that promoted such error? Why would anyone take your posts serious when you feel the liberty to rip actual events out of the Bible?

Ironically, Premils claim you, and other amils, rip the millennium out of the text and turn it into something it’s not…….so i guess we are in the same boat.


If you are going to deflect from first providing scholarly evidence against helps word studies’ definition of eggizo in the perfect tense as being literally imminent, and clarifying your strawman argument on Luke 21:25-28, 36, then I’ll pass on answering your questions….

 

[claninja]

In what year did it become imminent?

I’ll pass until you’re ready to answer some of my questions. But hey, if you answer, then I’ll be happy to oblige this request.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Ironically, Premils claim you, and other amils, rip the millennium out of the text and turn it into something it’s not…….so i guess we are in the same boat.


If you are going to deflect from first providing scholarly evidence against helps word studies’ definition of eggizo in the perfect tense as being literally imminent, and clarifying your strawman argument on Luke 21:25-28, 36, then I’ll pass on answering your questions….

More avoidance. You cannot even provide legitimate support for your claims. You are winging it. Sadly, the Jesuit Hahn has left you holding the baby and you do not know what to do with it.

Amils, Premils and orthodox Partial Preterist believe in an actual millennium. You do not. You believe it is an actual illusion – namely that Revelation 20 is an invented delusion. Sad! The fact is: it was instituted at the first resurrection and continues through to near the end. After Satan has his final throw, we see the general resurrection/judgment in Revelation. These are all imaginary to you because they expose your theology. You are on your own with those who follow Hahn on this.

Name one single orthodox Protestant scholar that promoted such error? Your silence is deafening!!!

 

[sovereigngrace]

I’ll pass until you’re ready to answer some of my questions. But hey, if you answer, then I’ll be happy to oblige this request.

I have repeatedly.

Of course you will, because your theology does not add up.

 

[Christian Gedge]

I think it’s important to understand the hyperbolic language of first century literature

Lukes description has an interesting comment not found in Matthew and Mark: “the sea and the waves roaring.” Its context suggests a major celestial disturbance. Is there any historical record of violent tidal activity in AD 70? If not, can any preterist suggest a figurative meaning? Ive never heard one.

Hi Claninja. ALL first century literature?? ALL the Olivet discourse?? Can you answer my query here please.