There is NO rapture!!!

[chalkstc]

SF,

LOL Frankie. Whosoever, whoso, and him is not YE and YOU.

english 101

i suppose you think the 'son of perdition' was given to Jesus by God to keep??
mos IS collective. there are is a man of sin and a man of faith
its not false, its written.

you are the one who has to gaze into your dome of the rock for an AOD

LOL!........................

John 17:12​

While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.​

KJV


2 Thess 2:3​

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;​

4​

​

​

​

​

Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.​

KJV


Rev 17:8​

The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.​

KJV


Rev 17:11​

And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.​

​

KJV

Not one of the above texts even intimates a collective. Hey, I got a bridge for sale....cheap! LOL!

Bro Frankie

 

[chalkstc]

SF,

I think we can agree that vs 14 was not for the disciples eys, for they are long dead in Christ and the Gospel is still being preached to all nations. So the end is still future.

But yet you say vs 15 is for Jesus present audience of disciples who would see the AOD with their own eyes.

By what authority do you do this?

And John and possibly Timothy were the only disciples we know of that lived beyond 70 AD in order to witness the AOD that you have said happened then.

You said they all or most of them did live beyond 70 AD. I asked for documentation of that statement. If you already answered, I missed it, so tell me who of the disciples literally witnessed 70 AD?

INo assumptions allowed. I know i read somewhere that Paul died around 62 AD. The reason for this is that Nero himself died before 70 AD and Paul died under Nero's rule. And Peter died somewhere close as an old man. So how about the rest of the 11.................proof?

Frankie

 

[Manasseh_]

No contradiction. You changed my words.
I did not say in the second part that one single lifespan generation would 'see' them.
I said "only that all of them will be fulfilled".

Will be fulfilled does not mean physically 'seeing' them be fulfilled.

LoL, I changed your words ?...............if you meant something other than what you wrote then you should clarify exactly what you mean, to the reader of your statement a clear contradiction is present regardless whether you want to accuse me of "changing" your words
...............in other words you're the one confusing others with your statement, please don't blame me if you don't have the skills to better communicate your thoughts.

The one point we must focus on is the fact that this Olivet Prophecy given by Christ was a foretelling of the destruction of Jerusalem and the old Jewish temple stones being totally flattened along with tribulation of the Church by false prophets and antichrists.
Jesus does not say any of this:
final events
final few years before this event
the generation living during that time

Then we are to concede that during the generation of the apostles Christ's gospel of the kingdom of God was published to all nations then ?

that the apostles did witness an abomination of desolation desecrating the temple even though there was no temple left after the complete destruction of it ?

that men at that time really had no need of the weaponry available then, swords, spears, shields, bows, arrows.........etc......that actually had weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, chemical warfare was available ? ..........men did have the capability of such destruction then that God would have to intervene in that generation or there'd be NO FLESH SAVED ?

Christ does say exactly what you imply he doesn't say, and keep in mind the apostles asked that very question, what the end would be like and what would lead up to his RETURN.........remember he had taught them that he must be crucified and leave them after his resurrection on many occasions............where I go you cannot follow, but he also taught that he would return to them.

One more thing that must be remembered, John was one of those apostles who came to him privately, why would Christ give him this scenario of completely different events then toward the end of his life give him the Revelation which was a direct prophecy of the very end times which would lead up to his RETURN.
???

 

[son_flower]

wow

LoL, I changed your words ?...............if you meant something other than what you wrote then you should clarify exactly what you mean, to the reader of your statement a clear contradiction is present regardless whether you want to accuse me of "changing" your words
...............in other words you're the one confusing others with your statement, please don't blame me if you don't have the skills to better communicate your thoughts.

I cant help you dont know the difference between SEE and BE.

Then we are to concede that during the generation of the apostles Christ's gospel of the kingdom of God was published to all nations then ?

Argue with Paul about that one.
He said they received apostleship among ALL nations.

I am concluding here that Paul meant what he said but also that all nations then are not the same as all nations now.
One thing is certain: the gospel has never ceased to go out among all the nations.


rom.1:5By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:

Rom1:8First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.

that the apostles did witness an abomination of desolation desecrating the temple even though there was no temple left after the complete destruction of it ?

The temple was desolated AFTER the abomination.
Abomination CAUSES the desolation. It takes over 3 years.
Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh

Luke says the armies led to the desolation.
The apostles did witness the abomination of the Jews revolt and the armies that then caused the desolation. Yes.

that men at that time really had no need of the weaponry available then, swords, spears, shields, bows, arrows.........etc......that actually had weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, chemical warfare was available ? ..........men did have the capability of such destruction then that God would have to intervene in that generation or there'd be NO FLESH SAVED ?

No that is obviously in the latter time of the generation. Our days. I really do not see God letting it go on much longer.

Christ does say exactly what you imply he doesn't say, and keep in mind the apostles asked that very question, what the end would be like and what would lead up to his RETURN.........remember he had taught them that he must be crucified and leave them after his resurrection on many occasions............where I go you cannot follow, but he also taught that he would return to them.

Manasseh no where does Jesus say 'final few years' ever. I am not implying it. He does not say it.

Those days. That is all you get from Him.
Those days and this generation. Later regarding the return you get "and of that day or hour" only the Father knows.
Peter said the last days began at Pentecost so I safely proclaim those words as true. Gods days are a lot shorter than ours.

The disciples asked 2 questions not just the return question.
Jesus just blasted out the Jews inside the temple He had had it with them and spoke their desolation to them.
He then comes outside and sais no stone would be left unturned.
and then they asked:
Tell us,
1)when shall these things be?
2)and what [shall be] the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

So yes He leads up to the end and what it will be like. He began the whole thing with the temple stones.
Why do you assume our tribulation will be so much worse than those dear apostles who really persevered and were jailed and martyred?
The lions den was horrible and many Christians went through that.
Wars, famine, pestilence. False Christs and false prophets. Earthquakes. Its common to the Church age when the devil is quite mad.
The earth signs are getting worse the earth cant take much more. Jesus did not know the exact time.

He never said 'final few years'.
its the cross that caused all this grief.
He said He did not come to bring peace but to take it.

You are claiming a new temple built by old covenant Jews that would be totally unclean and not a Holy place at all. What is the point of that?

those apostles who came to him privately, why would Christ give him this scenario of completely different events then toward the end of his life give him the Revelation which was a direct prophecy of the very end times which would lead up to his RETURN.
???

They are not completely different events.
They are exactly the same with even more dimension.
Johns past, present and future in a view from heaven.

Does John give the Olivet Discourse? NO?

Did he write the Revelation from Patmos when he was a 'brother in tribulation'? Was the book written for 7 Churches in 7 cities of his time?

Were they in danger if John actually wrote it in clear language without having to signify everything? Yes.

That is a whole other topic do you really want to go there?

One clue to the seals:
Before any of them are opened look:
Rev.5:13And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, [be] unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.

Now at what time does every knee in heaven and earth bow?

 

[son_flower]

SF,

LOL Frankie. Whosoever, whoso, and him is not YE and YOU.

english 101



LOL!........................

John 17:12​

While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.​

KJV


2 Thess 2:3​

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;​

4​

Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.​

KJV


Rev 17:8​

The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.​

KJV


Rev 17:11​

And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.​

KJV

Not one of the above texts even intimates a collective. Hey, I got a bridge for sale....cheap! LOL!

Bro Frankie

So you do think Satan was given to Jesus to keep. That is insane.

John 17:12​

While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.​

I kept them in thy name.

He kept the son of perdition in the Fathers name???

get serious for real brother Frankie

He is talking about Judas.
Luk22:3
Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.

that the scripture might be fulfilled.

perdition means destruction or perishing. nothing more



the big incarnate Antichrist man is a big fat lie from satan himself so we won't recognize who he really is.
antichrist is a spirit in many that dwell on this earth.

love and peace
goodnight

 

[LastSeven]

Matthew 24:34
Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Guys, don't forget that the word "genea" which has been translated into "generation" can also be translated to mean "race" or "family". Perhaps Jesus was talking about the Jewish race. Or the family of believers. Or maybe even the human race as a whole.

 

[chalkstc]

SF,

So you do think Satan was given to Jesus to keep. That is insane.

John 17:12
While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.​

I kept them in thy name.

He kept the son of perdition in the Fathers name???

get serious for real brother Frankie

I'll get serious................you have convoluted all that I said in reponse to your "collective" son or sons of perdition. If you did not understand my reply, you should have asked for clarification instead of twisting my words.

Goodnight and good bye my sister. This communique is fini!!! Nothing more to say when the hearer doesn't hear and yet responds as if they did. Got no time for role playing............"she said.......he said" .

When there is not fruit, the tree is cut down.

Really Sorry,
Frankie

He is talking about Judas.
Luk22:3
Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.

that the scripture might be fulfilled.

perdition means destruction or perishing. nothing more

any son of God who allows satan entry is the son of perdition.
i have cast lots of demons out they themselves will tell you this and not want to let go.

the big incarnate Antichrist man is a big fat lie from satan himself so we won't recognize who he really is.
antichrist is a spirit in many that dwell on this earth.

love and peace
goodnight

 

[son_flower]

son_flower said:

i suppose you think the 'son of perdition' was given to Jesus by God to keep??
mos IS collective. there are is a man of sin and a man of faith
its not false, its written.

chalkstc said:

LOL!........................

John 17:12
While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

​

Not one of the above texts even intimates a collective. Hey, I got a bridge for sale....cheap! LOL!

son_flower said:

So you do think Satan was given to Jesus to keep.

chalkstc said:

you have convoluted all that I said in reponse to your "collective" son or sons of perdition. If you did not understand my reply, you should have asked for clarification instead of twisting my words.

I understood perfectly all you said: >>Not one of the above texts even intimates a collective

Understood perfectly.
There is one option other than collective. Singular. And we both know that single entity is not holy.

So then, as you say, i guess we are done here.

 

[dcyates]

Then what is Jesus doing here ?

Hebrews 9:28

"So Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation, without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him."

He comes here for one reason, and one only, which is salvation.

In Revelation 19:11, Jesus comes for three reasons, to judge, make war, and to rule.

My, my, my. The things some people conflate with this whole rapture nonsense. First the general resurrection. Now salvation itself! How on earth am I putting into jeopardy the entire purpose of the incarnation by denying the rapture as it's commonly understood by dispensationalists?!?

 

[dcyates]

Your suggestion falls short in error for one simple reason.

These men that wrote down the examples given here were obviously inspired by God to write them down and in these particular cases as in all cases like these they are prophetic utterances from God declaring the end from the beginning.

Huh? Nothing I've said in any way denies any of this. I very much believe the Bible to be the inspired word of God, and that it also contains prophetic predictions of future events. I haven't said anything here that could be construed as saying otherwise.

Prophecy although having some descriptive language of it's time period still is a foretelling of actual future events.
If these events do not happen the way they are explicitly stated then they would become false prophecies.
Added to this it would accuse Paul and John the apostles of being false prophets.

See above.
LOL! Again, by denying the doctrine of the rapture as it was dreamed up by a member of the Anglo-Irish Ascendancy in the 19th-century, one is certainly not at the same time declaring either Paul the Apostle or John of Patmos false prophets. I'm honestly sorry, but this is getting downright silly.

Paul made an explicit statement, no mysterious or highly descriptive language was used.

No, Paul's language was not mysterious. At least it would not have been thought mysterious by his original audience. (However, it is proving all too 'mysterious' to many readers today who, quite frankly, don't know how to accurately read the Bible.) To them, it would have been very obvious that Paul was drawing on imagery from Exodus 19 and language from Psalm 47.
Given that, I have NO idea how you can seriously claim that Paul's language was not highly descriptive.

The Lord will return at some point gather his elect (saints) and they will at this point in time be with him.

John likewise when foretelling there would be a 1000 year reign before the rest of the dead would be resurrected again did the same.

Neither said anything that would lead someone to think that any of the direct statements foretelling an actual future event needed to be "spiritualzied" in some way nor did they have any deep mysterious meaning needing to be "taken apart" to understand them.

Apparently you see fit to give yourself license to take a direct prophecy and turn it into something else altogether, cancelling out the future foretold event instead.

Methods like these aren't anything new, gnostics thousands of years ago did the same thing.

My goodness, I have no idea where you're getting any of this! I'm not "spiritualizing" nor "taking apart" anything! Neither am I "cancelling out" the foretold future event.
Please, once and for all, let's get this straight. I believe in Christ's second coming to the earth. Indeed, I eagerly await it -- I pray just as fervently as anybody else, "Amen. Come, Lord Jesus." I believe in the resurrection of the dead and the final gathering of the saints. I've already affirmed such beliefs several times now and it's frankly ridiculous how many times I seem to have to repeat myself.
What I don't adhere to is the belief that all living Christians will someday suddenly start floating up in the air to all meet somewhere around cloud-level. (LOL! How many billions of people would that be floating there about 10,000 feet up? The crowd would fairly blacken the sky.)

 

[chalkstc]

DC,

What I don't adhere to is the belief that all living Christians will someday suddenly start floating up in the air to all meet somewhere around cloud-level. (LOL! How many billions of people would that be floating there about 10,000 feet up? The crowd would fairly blacken the sky.)

Your diatribe is like saying you believe in noses, but do not believe in smelling.

Christ is Coming...we both agree.
He comes to save the elect...we both agree.
He comes to judge the wicked......we both agree.
He comes to rule......we both agree.
He comes to "GATHER" and glorify the saints, both dead ones and living ones at the end of the age............. I think we both agree?

Then what is the disagreement?

The "how" of the gathering. Well, there are past buried believers all over this globe. And in the last 1260 days of this age, there will be saints still breathing air when Christ descends. Agreed? Yes.

Then the text says after this gathering and the raising from corruption to incorruption (dead ones) AND THE CHANGE from mortality to immortality (alive ones)............we are to be "ever with the Lord."

So just how do all these of both groups....all over the globe get to be with Christ in one central meeting place? Paul's tells us............we will rise together and meet the Lord in the atmosphere.

After this gathering of us and joining with Him, where is He going........to Armageddon and then He will stand on the MT of Olives....touching down to same place He ascended up from.

Now, what is your problem of unbelief of the harpazo or seizing by force? There isn't a pogo stick devised that will tell gravity...."no more" It is the Lord who will overide His own law of gravity in order for us to get to Jesus from all over the planet.

"think on these things" and try to refute this Paul given logic!!!

Frankie

 

[Manasseh_]

Huh? Nothing I've said in any way denies any of this. I very much believe the Bible to be the inspired word of God, and that it also contains prophetic predictions of future events. I haven't said anything here that could be construed as saying otherwise.

See above.
LOL! Again, by denying the doctrine of the rapture as it was dreamed up by a member of the Anglo-Irish Ascendancy in the 19th-century, one is certainly not at the same time declaring either Paul the Apostle or John of Patmos false prophets. I'm honestly sorry, but this is getting downright silly.

No, Paul's language was not mysterious. At least it would not have been thought mysterious by his original audience. (However, it is proving all too 'mysterious' to many readers today who, quite frankly, don't know how to accurately read the Bible.) To them, it would have been very obvious that Paul was drawing on imagery from Exodus 19 and language from Psalm 47.
Given that, I have NO idea how you can seriously claim that Paul's language was not highly descriptive.

My goodness, I have no idea where you're getting any of this! I'm not "spiritualizing" nor "taking apart" anything! Neither am I "cancelling out" the foretold future event.
Please, once and for all, let's get this straight. I believe in Christ's second coming to the earth. Indeed, I eagerly await it -- I pray just as fervently as anybody else, "Amen. Come, Lord Jesus." I believe in the resurrection of the dead and the final gathering of the saints. I've already affirmed such beliefs several times now and it's frankly ridiculous how many times I seem to have to repeat myself.
What I don't adhere to is the belief that all living Christians will someday suddenly start floating up in the air to all meet somewhere around cloud-level. (LOL! How many billions of people would that be floating there about 10,000 feet up? The crowd would fairly blacken the sky.)

You know, this is about the 3rd or 4th time that in your reply you basically say I didn't mean what I said earlier, but then you're not even giving reference to what you said earlier. I doubt you even remeber what my reply was in reference to.

I replied directly to an implication that you seemed to make where the 1000 year reign of Christ was not a literal 1000 year reign but was by your implication a "long period of time" only.

You're still doing it again in this reply by implying that Christ does not actually gather his elect in the way he says he does and that we aren't actually gathered by his angels to meet him in the air in the exact way describe by the prophecy.

This is exactly what I have been referring to , you're simply denying a prophecy of God, if it doesn't happen in this fashion then it would be a false prophecy.

I will gather my saints
I will do it in this fashion
I will have my angels gather them from all over the world
I will then have them brought by my angels gathered together to me
So as to meet me in the air.

prophecies aren't clouded in a deep mysterious language needing a lot of interpreting or someone implying that "It just won't happen the way Christ said, it's only an analogy, gracious, that would be millions "floating up in the air blackening the sky"

I'm not talking about any pretrib notions and their false doctrine, I'm talking only about the implications that you continue to make and seem to think it amusing that these prophecies could happen in the exact way they're foretold to happen, so then you want to suggest a different kind of "prophecy"
The prophecies have already been given and you have no authority to suggest a new or different kind or scenario to these established prophecies.

so what is "frankly ridiculous" is not that you have to repeat yourself but the fact that you can't even see what you are implying to another reader with your premises then proceed to be angry because they are only arriving at conclusions that you yourself have introduced. Others are simply disagreeing with your premise. And I'm certainly disagreeing that you think it's absurd and find it amusing that saints are gathered to Christ the way he said they would be , ie, that they do ascend up into the sky , then gathered by angels of Christ then meet him in the air.

 

[interpreter]

DC,



Your diatribe is like saying you believe in noses, but do not believe in smelling.

Christ is Coming...we both agree.
He comes to save the elect...we both agree.
He comes to judge the wicked......we both agree.
He comes to rule......we both agree.
He comes to "GATHER" and glorify the saints, both dead ones and living ones at the end of the age............. I think we both agree?

Then what is the disagreement?

The "how" of the gathering. Well, there are past buried believers all over this globe. And in the last 1260 days of this age, there will be saints still breathing air when Christ descends. Agreed? Yes.

Then the text says after this gathering and the raising from corruption to incorruption (dead ones) AND THE CHANGE from mortality to immortality (alive ones)............we are to be "ever with the Lord."

So just how do all these of both groups....all over the globe get to be with Christ in one central meeting place? Paul's tells us............we will rise together and meet the Lord in the atmosphere.

After this gathering of us and joining with Him, where is He going........to Armageddon and then He will stand on the MT of Olives....touching down to same place He ascended up from.

Now, what is your problem of unbelief of the harpazo or seizing by force? There isn't a pogo stick devised that will tell gravity...."no more" It is the Lord who will overide His own law of gravity in order for us to get to Jesus from all over the planet.

"think on these things" and try to refute this Paul given logic!!!

Frankie

The "rapture" is a figment of Paul's imagination. Jesus never mentioned one.

 

[LastSeven]

It's not a figment of Paul's imagination, it's a figment of the reader's imagination. Paul used figurative language to describe a resurrection/transformation into glorious new incorruptible bodies event which ushers in God's everlasting kingdom where we will all be with the Lord forever.

He describes glory and honour as "clouds" and he describes those who took part in the first resurrection as being "in the clouds".

That kind of figurative language was expected to be understood. But wouldn't it be nice if he had simply used plain English?

 

[chalkstc]

LS,

It's not a figment of Paul's imagination, it's a figment of the reader's imagination. Paul used figurative language to describe a resurrection/transformation into glorious new incorruptible bodies event which ushers in God's everlasting kingdom where we will all be with the Lord forever.

Did the HS tell you his language was figurative? The Hs was sent to show us things to come. He says what He means and means what He says. Paul uses no allegory or parable...................."we meet the Lord in the air" and are ever with Him. Go learn what harpazo means and where and how it is used. You'll find no figurative happening in any of them.

Frankie

 

[LastSeven]

Actually my own common sense tells me the language is figurative.

 

[Gnarwhal]

Actually my own common sense tells me the language is figurative.

Indeed.

Understanding how authors at the time Revelation was written actually wrote things plays a crucial role in understanding the language of the book. Assuming anything less is folly.

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

The early church did not teach rapture, early church fathers don't talk about it, the teaching popped up in post reformation Europe. Coincidence?

 

[chalkstc]

BM,

The early church did not teach rapture, early church fathers don't talk about it, the teaching popped up in post reformation Europe. Coincidence?

What was there to teach? Paul lays it out so clearly that only critics and unbelief don't get it. And you and a host of others on this thread are denying that Paul's writings were part of the "all scripture is inspired". Shame on you!

How can we have an intelligent debate when you can't even agree that all that is written between the two covers of your Bible? Either that, or you simply tear pages from it that you don't agree with. It must make it a lot lighter for you to carry though.....................

Frankie

 

[dcyates]

dc,

IMO, Amill is the same as one saying ABIBLE.

Sigh. Well, as I've said, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Of course Scripture uses figurative, metamorphical, symbolic and allegoric language and parables to transmit heavenly truths to it's hearers. But all these modes are used to confuse those without the Spirit but give wisdom to those with the Spirit.

Really? Well then, since you're so wise in the Spirit -- and I'm evidently so confused -- could you please tell me what this means?

וַאֲנִ֣י יָדַעְתִּי גּׂ֣אֳלִי חָ֑י ֝וְאַחֲר֗וׂן עַל־עָפָר יָקֽוּם׃ וְאַחַ֣ר עוֹרִֽי נִקְּפוּ־ ז֑אׁת וּמִבְּשָׂר֗י אֶֽחֱזֶה אֱלֽוֹהַּ׃ אֲשֶׁ֚ר אֲנִי ׀ אֶֽחֱזֶה־ ֗לִּי וְעֵינַי֣ רָא֣וּ וְלאׁ־ זָר֑ כָּלוּ כִלְיׄתַ֣י בְּחֵקִי׃​

Thanks. I've been having some real problems with this. (But what else can you expect from somebody so utterly bereft of the Spirit?)

And every instance points to a literal truth, happening or still to be fulfilled prophecy.

Example: you have the "strongman" completely bound when Jesus spoke, yet he is still active in the rest of the NT and in the Rev future, and certainly in our lifes in the present. Did "put on the whole armor of God" cease in thew first century?

?!? Now I'm really confused! I think I know what you're trying to say here, but even so, have no idea why you're trying to say it.

What kind of exegesis is that?

Uhh. Good exegesis?

You have the kingdom completed as if there is not an earthly one to come.

What? How so?
Nevermind. I think I've made it sufficiently clear in numerous previous posts that I believe in the full realization of God's heavenly kingdom here on earth.

Prove it without literally tearing pages from your Bible.

I promise, I have never literally torn pages from my Bible -- or from anybody else's Bible, for that matter.
Although, I may have figuratively torn pages from my Bible. But if I have, I assure you it was purely by accident. (I was figuratively walking along while reading it, not paying enough non-literal attention to where I was symbolically going, and figuratively tripped on a metaphorical toy truck.) But as soon as I realized what I had done, I immediately glued them back in again -- metaphysically speaking, of course.
But whatever the case may be, I honestly have no idea how literally tearing pages from my Bible would prove anything at all.

Do you even believe in a SC or are you a preterist also?
Bro Frankie

Sigh, again. Sorry, Bro Frankie, but I've already made myself so clear on this subject, I really shouldn't have to dignify these questions with an answer.