Eschatology part 3

[dwb001]

Do you believe the Millennium period theory, that involves a time after Christ's return, is for the purpose of Land Promises to the jews/Israel?

If I understand your question correctly... No.

 

[theWind]

If I understand your question correctly... No.

Oh, well good.

We can put that silly part of the theory to rest then.

All God's promises to the nation of Israel have been paid in full.

There is no viable argument for any need for a 1,000 year period of time upon the earth after Christ's return. That helps people to understand the Pre-Mil theory is a misinterpretation of Rev. 20.

 

[dwb001]

Oh, well good.

We can put that silly part of the theory to rest then.

All God's promises to the nation of Israel have been paid in full.

There is no viable argument for any need for a 1,000 year period of time upon the earth after Christ's return. That helps people to understand the Pre-Mil theory is a misinterpretation of Rev. 20.

Yes there is no human need for the 1000 years.
But Jesus will be back and staying here for 1000 years as per Rev 20.

 

[theWind]

Yes there is no human need for the 1000 years.
But Jesus will be back and staying here for 1000 years as per Rev 20.

There won't be a "here" per God Almighty's book that He wrote about all things to come. More of a compendium of books, really.

But believe what you like.

 

[dwb001]

There won't be a "here" per God Almighty's book that He wrote about all things that will come. More of a compendium of books, really.

But believe what you like.

Rev 20 says it will be here... we will be here... and an interesting time will be had by all.
This world does not pass away until the judgement, Rapture and New Earth arrives.

 

[theWind]

Rev 20 says it will be here... we will be here... and an interesting time will be had by all.
This world does not pass away until the judgement, Rapture and New Earth arrives.

So, ... if one were to conclude that Rev. 20 said one thing ...

... while all these other verses said something that completely contradicted that, ...

Matt. 24:29-31
2 Peter 3:10
Isaiah 13:9-11
Nah. 1:5
2 Thess. 1:7-9

... what do you think would be the sensible conclusion to come to about the first conclusion?

If we find a verse in the Scriptures that appears to teach a certain concept, but then find ample evidence in multiple other places in Scripture that clearly contradicts that, we have a decision to make.

"When an honest man discovers he is mistaken, he will either cease being mistaken, or he will cease being honest."

Are you an honest man?

 

[dwb001]

So, ... if one were to conclude that Rev. 20 said one thing ...

... while all these other verses said something that completely contradicted that, ...

Matt. 24:29-31
2 Peter 3:10
Isaiah 13:9-11
Nah. 1:5
2 Thess. 1:7-9

... what do you think would be the sensible conclusion to come to about the first conclusion?

If we find a verse in the Scriptures that appears to teach a certain concept, but then find ample evidence in multiple other places in Scripture that clearly contradicts that, we have a decision to make.

"When an honest man discovers he is mistaken, he will either cease being mistaken, or he will cease being honest."

Are you an honest man?

All the verses you post confirm and enforce the Rev view of the End Times.
I see no contradiction between your select verses and my understanding of Revelation.
I think maybe your conclusions are the ones in conflict.
I believe you are preaching to yourself but you don't recognise it yet.

 

[theWind]

All the verses you post confirm and enforce the Rev view of the End Times.
I see no contradiction between your select verses and my understanding of Revelation.

That's ok. Others, who are not refusing to see it, see it very clearly.

I believe you are preaching to yourself but you don't recognise it yet.

You're right, and I do recognize it, but that's only because there's nobody else here on this site reading this besides you and your alter-egos.

 

[dwb001]

That's ok. Others, who are not refusing to see it, see it very clearly.

You're right, and I do recognize it, but that's only because there's nobody else here on this site reading this besides you and your alter-egos.

What alter-egos?
I am just one man.
And I don't think I have multiple personalities.
At least the voices in my head say they are not.