Page 5 of 41 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141516 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 610

Thread: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Durban ,South Africa
    Posts
    7,490

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I'm not sure what you're saying here? Are you trying to claim that there is an explicit reference to an AoD 30 days prior to the revelation of Antichrist? I don't find that anywhere, unless you are trying to claim that the 1st half of Daniel's 70th week precedes the AoD in Dan 9?

    I don't know how you can conclude this with any reasonable assurance because...
    1) That would require an enormous gap in a 490 year period, which of course would render it not a 490 year period, but rather, a 2,490 year period!
    2) The context of the 70th Week is the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Dan 9.26). The AoD in Dan 9.27 does not identify with Antichrist, but rather, with the destruction of the city and the sanctuary in the preceding verse, vs. 26.



    You will get several different interpretations here.

    I do not associate the 70 Weeks prophecy in Dan 9 with the "end of the age." It is, rather, a prediction of the earthly ministry of Christ, who brought a significant atonement in a time of the greatest sin in Israel, the sin of rejecting their Messiah.

    There are 6 things that Messiah did during his earthly ministry, and you can read them Dan 9.24. He did not come to end sin in Jerusalem. He came to bring sin to its full revelation in his death *for* sin. Sin, in other words, was *magnified* by showing where human sin ends up. It ends up crucifying God's word, and by causing suffering in all of humanity. Thus, it brings sin to its terminal point, which is death. It bring sin to fulness so that it can be fully judged and disposed of.

    I do not interpret the 70th Week the way you do, because that would divide up the 69 weeks from the 70th Week, which of course would then render the time period not 70 Weeks, but 2490 years! Sorry, that doesn't wash with me. I once held that position, but gave it up for the reason I now give you.
    Regarding an end to sin in Jerusalem to complete the 490 years. Hmm I guess that's your claim to being the "explicit" one. I would rather associate the explicit fulfillment of the end to sin in Jerusalem with... An end to sin in Jerusalem, which I believe is the truer more explicit fulfillment. Call me the implicit one if you like

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,813

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    I am not sure why you think Luke 21 identifies the Roman invasion with the abomination. Yes similar wording is used. Jane sits in a tree. Tarzan sits in a tree. Therefore Jane is Tarzan . Good logic
    I read a good number of books by E.R. Burroughs. However, I can say with assurance that none of them had a thing to do with the AoD!

    1) All 3 synoptic gospels refer to the Olivet Discourse, and all 3 say the same thing, since they speak of the same Address.
    2) Matthew, Mark, and Luke all refer to a pivotal event in Israel's history in which the temple is destroyed. It is natural to assume this is the AoD in Matt and Mark, and the desolation of Jerusalem in Luke. They all speak of the same event, using similar language. And all 3 speak of an accompanying period of "great tribulation" for the Jewish People. After all, this was being spoken about the Jewish People at a time when only the Jewish People were considered the People of God.

    If you think it's unreasonable to see the desolation of Jerusalem in 70 AD, as being spoken of in Luke 21, as the AoD, I wonder why you haven't heard of so many scholars who think as I do?
    http://biblehub.com/commentaries/luke/21-20.htm

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude
    Luke focused on the Roman army. Good time to flee Jerusalem. Matthew focused on the abomination and false Messiahs. Good time to flee Jerusalem. Doesn't mean it is the same occasion. Mainly Jews that compromise with Islam will stay. The rest will be under threat unless they flee to the wilderness for 3.5 years (Rev 12)

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    17,768

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

    Matthew 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
    22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

    Surely...and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time...such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be....are referring to the same event, in this case, great tribulation.

    The former says this...and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

    At what time? How can it not be this time? yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him(Daniel 11:45). Which would then make the time meant as being at the end of great tribulation, IOW at the end of the time of trouble per Dan 12:1, which is called great tribulation according to Matthew 24:21.

    Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

    Why mention any of this at this point unless the context in the latter part of Dan 11, and Dan 12:1, involves the end of this age? Would not at that time, per Dan 12:1, also apply to many shall wake who sleep in the dust of the earth?

    Daniel 12:3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

    When? At that time, obviously, meaning the same time meant in verse 1.

    Daniel 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

    Unless someone wants to claim the time of the end was thousands of years ago during the days of Antiochus, nothing in this chapter could possibly be about him. The text indicates Daniel was to shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end, and not instead, before the time of the end. IOW no one could have possibly understood this prophecy prior to the time of the end. How then could it possibly be of any use to anyone, if they claim Antiochus is meant per some of Dan 12, if the words were still shut up, and the book still sealed, during the days of Antiochus? Prophecies forewarn events. Who exactly benefited from being forewarned during Antiochus' days if the words were still shut up, and the book still sealed? Nobody did, that's who. There has to be logic to something before it can even be a possible interpretation. Doesn't one at least agree about that?

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    17,768

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post

    If you think it's unreasonable to see the desolation of Jerusalem in 70 AD, as being spoken of in Luke 21, as the AoD, I wonder why you haven't heard of so many scholars who think as I do?
    http://biblehub.com/commentaries/luke/21-20.htm
    Whenever someone brings up scholars, I always feel the need to make the following point. Not all scholars agree 100% with each other about everything. If some scholars tend to see it your way, and some other scholars don't, the latter's conclusions don't count then? They are all scholar's, aren't they?

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Durban ,South Africa
    Posts
    7,490

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I read a good number of books by E.R. Burroughs. However, I can say with assurance that none of them had a thing to do with the AoD!

    1) All 3 synoptic gospels refer to the Olivet Discourse, and all 3 say the same thing, since they speak of the same Address.
    2) Matthew, Mark, and Luke all refer to a pivotal event in Israel's history in which the temple is destroyed. It is natural to assume this is the AoD in Matt and Mark, and the desolation of Jerusalem in Luke. They all speak of the same event, using similar language. And all 3 speak of an accompanying period of "great tribulation" for the Jewish People. After all, this was being spoken about the Jewish People at a time when only the Jewish People were considered the People of God.

    If you think it's unreasonable to see the desolation of Jerusalem in 70 AD, as being spoken of in Luke 21, as the AoD, I wonder why you haven't heard of so many scholars who think as I do?
    http://biblehub.com/commentaries/luke/21-20.htm
    I prefer the Bible wording to cherry picked scholars.
    I don't see a 70 ad abomination in the Bible wording. Luke refers to 70AD. Luke does not mention an abomination. Luke's reference to the army occurs BEFORE the diaspora, that prophecy confirmed by history as I'm sure you agree.

    Matthew mentions an abomination in context AFTER the Gospel is preached to the whole world. And in the context of the second coming.

    I prefer the Bible to cherry picked scholars.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    17,768

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    There is no such thing as a Jewish Christian.

    Using the same logic that should mean there is also no such thing as a Gentile Christian, nor a male or female Christian. Obviously though, when a male or female becomes a Christian they are still a male or a female, regardless. At least in this age anyway. Saying there is no such thing as a Jewish Christian would also be like saying there is no such thing as a white Christian, a black Christian, an Asian Christian, a Russian Christian, etc.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    17,768

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    Maybe my language is failing me, but I understood in your posting #9 a number of CHRONOLOGIES. I think the whole matter of timing lies with when the Great Tribulation begins. Once it begins you have the Beast Abominating and Desolating the Holy Place, and immediately the wrath of God revealed from heaven in the Seals. But the Seals are in Chapter 6 and the Beast's universal power is first found in Chapter 13. But his climb to power is in Chapter 13 but he is active in Chapter 11. But let us then agree that Revelation is NOT Chronological.
    There were indeed chronologies in that post. But apparently somewhere along the line you misunderstood some of the chronologies I proposed.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    188

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

    Matthew 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
    22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

    Surely...and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time...such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be....are referring to the same event, in this case, great tribulation.

    The former says this...and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

    At what time? How can it not be this time? yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him(Daniel 11:45). Which would then make the time meant as being at the end of great tribulation, IOW at the end of the time of trouble per Dan 12:1, which is called great tribulation according to Matthew 24:21.

    Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

    Why mention any of this at this point unless the context in the latter part of Dan 11, and Dan 12:1, involves the end of this age? Would not at that time, per Dan 12:1, also apply to many shall wake who sleep in the dust of the earth?

    Daniel 12:3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

    When? At that time, obviously, meaning the same time meant in verse 1.

    Daniel 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

    Unless someone wants to claim the time of the end was thousands of years ago during the days of Antiochus, nothing in this chapter could possibly be about him. The text indicates Daniel was to shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end, and not instead, before the time of the end. IOW no one could have possibly understood this prophecy prior to the time of the end. How then could it possibly be of any use to anyone, if they claim Antiochus is meant per some of Dan 12, if the words were still shut up, and the book still sealed, during the days of Antiochus? Prophecies forewarn events. Who exactly benefited from being forewarned during Antiochus' days if the words were still shut up, and the book still sealed? Nobody did, that's who. There has to be logic to something before it can even be a possible interpretation. Doesn't one at least agree about that?
    I agree wholeheartedly with your point here. Well, almost. Lol. It seems that i have stirred something up in you when i mentioned [in my something to consider point] about "all those in the book", THE book of life. Deliverance is prophesied to come upon all who are "in THE book ".

    In v.4 Daniel is told to shut up the words and seal the book. What book? Has the book of Daniel already been written? We really don't know how and when the "book" of Daniel was written, other than making an inference from this passage. Daniel was told to first, shut up and words, and then he is told to seal "the book". But, I think that we can safely say that the "BOOK OF DANIEL" had not yet been written. To "shut up the words" implies for Daniel not to write something. I think it means more than just an inability to understand, even tho we must ask admit that we don't fully understand "DANIEL ", the book.

    If, and I say IF, that is the case, we must look to the scriptures for our understanding. What do we have? We have a reference to THE book, just 3 verses earlier. We both agree that this is a reference to the book of life. I don't think that there is any other reference in DANIEL, to "a book", but there in Daniel 12:1. Think about it for a moment. Daniel is told to seal THE! Book. Could it be this simple? One of the most ordinate features of the book of Revelation is...[wait for it...]...A Book with 7 Seals? A sealed book.

    What happens when the 7th seal is broken? [Let me remind everyone reading this... The events that take place with the opening of the seals, IS NOT what is written IN THE BOOK. Two important thoughts. ONLY the Lamb, Jesus, was found worthy to OPEN the book. And secondly, John 5:22-27 says that ALL judgment has been given to Jesus].
    What happens specifically when the 7th seal is opened? Silence. And the prayers of the saints comes up before God at the altar of incense. In other words, it is time to answer the many unanswered prayers of the saints. What does that entail? For starters, vengeance truly belongs to the Lord. If this book [in Revelation] is the book of life, and contains the names of the redeemed from all ages, it could quite possibly also contain a list of prayers of those named. The prayers of vengeance that God will honor! I think that it is the same book that Ezekiel is told to eat. A book that is sweet to the taste, but bitter to digest. John is also told to do the same WITH THE LITTLE BOOK in the hand of the mighty angel. It did the same for John as it did for Ezekiel. It surely must be a book that also contains lamentations, mourning and woe:

    *[[Eze 2:10]] KJV* And he spread it before me; and it was written within and without: and there was written therein lamentations, and mourning, and woe.

    Could it really be that the 7 sealed book is the same book that Daniel was told to seal up till the time of The end? It makes a lot of sense to me that this book must be opened to being deliverance to all those written within, as well as judgment upon the wicked. What better way to define the wrath of God than to judge all those who are NOT written in the LAMBS book of life?

    *[[Rev 13:8]] KJV* And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

    Blessings
    The PuP

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,813

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    I prefer the Bible wording to cherry picked scholars.
    I don't see a 70 ad abomination in the Bible wording. Luke refers to 70AD. Luke does not mention an abomination. Luke's reference to the army occurs BEFORE the diaspora, that prophecy confirmed by history as I'm sure you agree.

    Matthew mentions an abomination in context AFTER the Gospel is preached to the whole world. And in the context of the second coming.

    I prefer the Bible to cherry picked scholars.
    Well, I think you're going to have a very hard time with that. I did not cherry pick these scholars. These were what biblehub made available to their readers. A variety of positions were represented. I was just showing you what you asked for, examples of scholars who believed 1) Luke 21 was about the Roman desolation of Jerusalem, and 2) the desolation of Jerusalem in Luke 21 was the same thing as the abomination that causes desolation in Matt 24 and Mark 13.

    I have no idea why this is so important to you? I've changed my mind on this matter a number of times. I'd like to think I have a better position now that I used to have. My arguments have become stronger because I've learned to base my positions of *explicitly stated things,* rather than interpreted parables, symbolic interpretations, or vague inferences.

    Luke 21 clearly and unambiguously talks about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. So does Matt 24 and Mark 13 because they are all talking about the same things! The AoD in Matt 24 and Mark 13 is the desolation of Jerusalem in Luke 21. Nothing could be clearer to me. But if you want to believe otherwise, be my guest. I have no axe to grind with you.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Durban ,South Africa
    Posts
    7,490

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Well, I think you're going to have a very hard time with that. I did not cherry pick these scholars. These were what biblehub made available to their readers. A variety of positions were represented. I was just showing you what you asked for, examples of scholars who believed 1) Luke 21 was about the Roman desolation of Jerusalem, and 2) the desolation of Jerusalem in Luke 21 was the same thing as the abomination that causes desolation in Matt 24 and Mark 13.

    I have no idea why this is so important to you? I've changed my mind on this matter a number of times. I'd like to think I have a better position now that I used to have. My arguments have become stronger because I've learned to base my positions of *explicitly stated things,* rather than interpreted parables, symbolic interpretations, or vague inferences.

    Luke 21 clearly and unambiguously talks about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. So does Matt 24 and Mark 13 because they are all talking about the same things! The AoD in Matt 24 and Mark 13 is the desolation of Jerusalem in Luke 21. Nothing could be clearer to me. But if you want to believe otherwise, be my guest. I have no axe to grind with you.
    You say that I asked for examples of scholars. I didn't.

    Regarding "axe to grind" , we are just exchanging ideas and having a robust debate. Its important to me as is any interpretation of the end times, the more people understand the better. So obviously we are sharing our understanding, hoping the other sees the sense in our position.

    But sure we can agree to disagree, I haven't covered Mark 13, but I just feel you underestimate the extent that firstly the abomination is associated with the end times, and secondly that Matthew 24 is focused on the question mentioned in Matt 24:3 "what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” It's entirely possible and proven that sometimes the Gospel writers emphasize different things To claim they don't would be incorrect. Regarding your self perception that you rely on explicitly stated things, I see my view as based on explicitly stated things, and yours as not even implicit in the text, so that's a subjective argument of yours. Its Bible verses that count.

    At least we never resorted to insults haha

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,907
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by bluesky22 View Post
    Already over. Fulfilled in 70AD.
    And how did you reach that conclusion?

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    6,907
    Blog Entries
    13

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    And regarding your points 1 and 2. Sure I agree with them. Luke refers to the Romans of 70AD and the subsequent diaspora.
    But the events of 70AD and the subsequent diaspora is NOT the great tribulation, that needs to be shortened to save lives, is it?

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,813

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude View Post
    You say that I asked for examples of scholars. I didn't.
    No, not specifically. Your complaint was that the scholars I provided were "cherry picked."

    What you specifically implied I lacked was reasonable evidence to believe that Luke 21 can be legitimately interpreted as the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem and following. I showed you this was entirely reasonable, on my part, because a number of scholars have felt the same way.

    Your view is that your own interpretation of the Bible, with your limited knowledge and experience, trumps scholars, me, and everybody else. In other words, you believe the world is flat. Everybody else should obviously agree with you, because *you* said it?

    If you want to believe the Bible, great. But why not consult *wise men* on the matter, and not just make yourself, and your own limited experience, the supreme authority on what the Bible said? After all, it is often misinterpreted by all of us! Consult Bible scholars (I am not one), not as the supreme authority, but as helpful guides in the process of coming to your conclusions about what the Bible says. That's my advice to you.

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude
    Regarding "axe to grind" , we are just exchanging ideas and having a robust debate. Its important to me as is any interpretation of the end times, the more people understand the better. So obviously we are sharing our understanding, hoping the other sees the sense in our position.

    But sure we can agree to disagree, I haven't covered Mark 13, but I just feel you underestimate the extent that firstly the abomination is associated with the end times, and secondly that Matthew 24 is focused on the question mentioned in Matt 24:3 "what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” It's entirely possible and proven that sometimes the Gospel writers emphasize different things To claim they don't would be incorrect. Regarding your self perception that you rely on explicitly stated things, I see my view as based on explicitly stated things, and yours as not even implicit in the text, so that's a subjective argument of yours. Its Bible verses that count.
    My focus is on one particular statement that explicitly indicates the temple would be destroyed, brick by brick. That is about as graphic as you can get, if you want "explicit!" And yet, we have all these voices claim that this is peripheral to what Jesus "really meant," that it has to do with a "2nd desolation," and with the "endtimes."

    Right there in Luke 21 we get a clear representation of what Jesus meant by the AoD, because in that passage Jesus spells out that the "desolation" in "Abomination of Desolation" refers to the desolation of Jerusalem, with Roman armies encircling it, and a great dispersion following. Even more, we have the "great" in "Great Tribulation" explained there as a long, long period of dispersion, lasting until the end of the age. It is the longevity of the Jewish Diaspora that makes this "Great Tribulation" so "great!"

    But believe what you will. I can't get past the "brick by brick" graphics myself (or "stone by stone").

    Quote Originally Posted by DurbanDude
    At least we never resorted to insults haha
    Nothing explicit anyway.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    9,813

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trivalee View Post
    But the events of 70AD and the subsequent diaspora is NOT the great tribulation, that needs to be shortened to save lives, is it?
    The idea is not so much to save lives, but to preserve Israel from extinction. A long, extended Diaspora threatens the very survival of Israel's ethnicity. The story of Esther shows us the danger the Jews faced. The ploy of the ancient Egyptians was to murder baby boys, causing the Hebrews to be integrated into their own ethnicity. The Holocaust was a modern example of people trying to commit genocide. It is no different with extremist Muslims, particularly on the Palestinian issue.

    It is *for the elect* that the Jewish People are saved. In other words, it is for the Christian converts among the Jews, and for Christians in general, that Israel is being preserved. We represent grace on behalf of Israel, as well as on behalf of all nations who would consider adoption of the Christian religion.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Durban ,South Africa
    Posts
    7,490

    Re: Has the Great Tribulation started or is it still in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    No, not specifically. Your complaint was that the scholars I provided were "cherry picked."

    What you specifically implied I lacked was reasonable evidence to believe that Luke 21 can be legitimately interpreted as the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem and following. I showed you this was entirely reasonable, on my part, because a number of scholars have felt the same way.
    I always and repeatedly and wholeheartedly agreed that Luke 21 refers to 70AD. You argue against your own strawman and how can you have a logical discussion if you aren't even reading my posts? It's a little shocking actually that you haven't yet realised my standpoint when I repeat myself with clarity.

    This thread testifies that I consistently regard Luke 21 as referencing the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD. It is entirely reasonable that you believe Luke 21 references the fall of Jerusalem and I have never even hinted otherwise , always openly agreeing with you on that.

    Edit: in posts 16, 35, 54, 65 I agreed that Luke 21 refers to the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Discussion Tribulation, Great Tribulation, and the Wrath of God
    By seeker_truth in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: Jun 6th 2018, 05:28 AM
  2. The great tribulation. Only one? Or more than one?
    By divaD in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 183
    Last Post: Feb 14th 2017, 10:31 PM
  3. Information What is the Great Tribulation
    By Vakeros in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: Mar 29th 2013, 10:39 PM
  4. The Great Tribulation
    By jeffweeder in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: Dec 10th 2009, 07:04 AM
  5. When is the great tribulation?
    By vinsight4u8 in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: Apr 17th 2009, 11:09 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •