Page 2 of 15 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 213

Thread: Question for partial preterist

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    6,715
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffweeder View Post
    for it will come upon all those who dwell on the face of all the earth. 36 But keep on the alert at all times, praying that you may have strength to escape all these things that are about to take place, and to stand before the Son of Man.”
    "Earth" in the Bible does not mean the planet, but the "land" - and in this case the context of "face of the land/earth" is Judea. However, the alternative (which is my preference personally) is that we are currently in the times of the Gentiles:

    They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. (v. 24)

    So this has to be 70 AD onwards. After an unknown period of time, comes the end:

    ... Then, they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. (v. 27)

    Then Jesus summarizes to the beginning of these sequences of events, which was the destruction of Jerusalem:

    Now when these things begin to take place, straighten up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near. (v. 28)

    "These things" calling back to verse 5 and 6:

    As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” And they asked him, “Teacher, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when these things are about to take place? (v. 5-6)

    The fact that Jerusalem has been destroyed in this way is confirmation that most of the Olivet Discourse has already been fulfilled. I'm not sure if that makes me a preterist, but I'm only taking what I read for what it says.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,711
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by Aviyah View Post
    Luke's version actually gives a fuller quote of what He meant by the tribulation:

    But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it, for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. Alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! For there will be great distress upon the earth and wrath against this people. They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. (Luke 21)

    So I think it's in relation to Jerusalem, not the entire planet. Jerusalem had never seen the scale of destruction that came on it by Rome, and it has never been completely destroyed in that way ever since. But even by comparison to world events/atrocities, the siege still claimed over a million lives - which competes with the battle of Stalingrad - and this is just the body count. If you also consider the living conditions, the infighting and starvation as some Jewish factions burned their own food, it's unlikely we will ever know just how bad it was in 70 AD. Even what we do know about it lines up word-for-word with what Jesus said would happen - and why He urged His followers to run from Judea as far as possible when they saw Rome starting to send its armies.
    Great post but to add to make it the worst time for the Jews is that they lost their temple forever

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,711
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by Brother Mark View Post
    Thank you for this explanation. That answers the first question from the partial preterist view. How then would the partial preterist see this passage:

    matt 24:32 "Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender, and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; 33 even so you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. 34 "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 35 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall not pass away. 36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. 37 "For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. 38 "For as in those days which were before the flood they were eating and drinking, they were marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so shall the coming of the Son of Man be. 40 "Then there shall be two men in the field; one will be taken, and one will be left. 41 "Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken, and one will be left. 42 "Therefore be on the alert, for you do not know which day your Lord is coming. 43 "But be sure of this, that if the head of the house had known at what time of the night the thief was coming, he would have been on the alert and would not have allowed his house to be broken into. 44 "For this reason you be ready too; for the Son of Man is coming at an hour when you do not think He will.

    Specifically. How do you see this passage on the coming of Jesus? And the days of Noah?
    These verses are talking about Jesus coming in judgement not the rapture or the second coming

    Notice that it says that the flood came and took them away they were taken in judgement. In Noah’s day it was better to of been left behind

    That is how it will be at the coming in judgement one will be taken (in judgement) and one will be left behind the like the ones left behind and not taken in Noah’s day

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    ADELAIDE / South Australia
    Posts
    3,758

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by Aviyah View Post
    The fact that Jerusalem has been destroyed in this way is confirmation that most of the Olivet Discourse has already been fulfilled. I'm not sure if that makes me a preterist, but I'm only taking what I read for what it says.
    You said most of it is fulfilled, so that makes you partial pret.

    What seems to be left is the Lord coming like the days of Noah.
    God fixed a day in Noahs time that only the elect would survive. God has fixed a day in the first century that only the elect will survive when Jesus comes again.
    And those castles made of sand....fall into the sea......eventually

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    6,715
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffweeder View Post
    You said most of it is fulfilled, so that makes you partial pret.

    What seems to be left is the Lord coming like the days of Noah.
    God fixed a day in Noahs time that only the elect would survive. God has fixed a day in the first century that only the elect will survive when Jesus comes again.
    Okay, yep I would agree with that too.

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffweeder View Post
    You said most of it is fulfilled, so that makes you partial pret.

    What seems to be left is the Lord coming like the days of Noah.
    God fixed a day in Noahs time that only the elect would survive. God has fixed a day in the first century that only the elect will survive when Jesus comes again.
    Okay, yep I would agree with that too.
    여러분은 주님 안에서 항상 기뻐하십시오. 내가 다시 말합니다. 기뻐하십시오.
    모든 사람을 너그럽게 대하십시오. 주님께서 오실 날이 가까웠습니다. Philippians 4


  6. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    13,736
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberseeker View Post

    Pre-Mill has a question that also needs to be asked: Why do you trivialise the collapse of the heavenly bodies in order to maintain your belief in a Millennium after the stars have fallen? When I read this in Marks account I can only imagine next a new heavens and a new earth.
    Falling stars are just angels descending from heaven. That happens immediately after the end of the trib because Christ and angels come down from heaven at the second coming. The NHNE comes a long time after the second coming events.
    James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    13,736
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    These verses are talking about Jesus coming in judgement not the rapture or the second coming

    Notice that it says that the flood came and took them away they were taken in judgement. In Noah’s day it was better to of been left behind
    Noah was taken to safety by the Ark, the ones left (means to be rejected and die in the Greek) are the ones not on the Ark.
    James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Thames, New Zealand
    Posts
    2,161
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by ewq1938 View Post
    Falling stars are just angels descending from heaven. That happens immediately after the end of the trib because Christ and angels come down from heaven at the second coming. The NHNE comes a long time after the second coming events.
    Rather peculiar then, to refer to angels as 'ripe figs', Revelation 6:13.
    Your theory fails any kind of test, as Rev 6 is years before the Return of Christ.

    Preterist explanations of prophecy being fulfilled by history, always avoid the cosmic signs and events that will precede the actual fulfilment of the last days of this era. These carefully described cosmic happenings are things that can and will literally occur. Science knows about the; why don't Bible believers?

    Their historical details, the wars, etc; never do quite match the prophesies, either.

    I see preterism used as a means for people to avoid the possibility that they, personally will have to face troublous times. Tough.
    Paul says we Christians should not be in the dark about forthcoming events.
    1 Thessalonians 5:1-10 Believing it's all over, or it's all Spiritual, or God will take me to heaven before anything nasty happens; is a sure way to be in the dark!

  9. #24
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,793
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by ewq1938 View Post
    Falling stars are just angels descending from heaven. That happens immediately after the end of the trib because Christ and angels come down from heaven at the second coming. The NHNE comes a long time after the second coming events.
    Strange how literalists criticize Preterists for sybolising parts of Olivet discourse, then do the same themselves with other parts when it suits them.

    Hey everybody, the heavenly bodies are going to collapse at the time of His 2nd coming. Fortunately, we who follow Christ will be going up.
    "Your name and renown
    is the desire of our hearts."
    (Isaiah 26:8)

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    13,736
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberseeker View Post
    Strange how literalists criticize Preterists for sybolising parts of Olivet discourse, then do the same themselves with other parts when it suits them.
    Falling stars aren't a part of the new heavens or the end of the old heavens. Stars are suns and they aren't going to fall upon the Earth. It only works knowing that stars represent angels and angels will be coming down to the Earth at the second coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberseeker View Post
    Strange how literalists criticize Preterists for sybolising parts of Olivet discourse, then do the same themselves with other parts when it suits them.
    Falling stars aren't a part of the new heavens or the end of the old heavens. Stars are suns and they aren't going to fall upon the Earth. It only works knowing that stars represent angels and angels will be coming down to the Earth at the second coming.
    James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,793
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by ewq1938
    Stars are suns and they aren't going to fall upon the Earth.
    The ancient called everything up there 'stars.' That includes everything from meteors to asteroids, comets and planetary fragments. When the 2nd coming takes place, these heavenly bodies will be collapsing. This scenario is described in Isaiah, Joel, Zephaniah, Matthew, Mark and Revelation.
    "Your name and renown
    is the desire of our hearts."
    (Isaiah 26:8)

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    13,736
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberseeker View Post
    The ancient called everything up there 'stars.' That includes everything from meteors to asteroids, comets and planetary fragments. When the 2nd coming takes place, these heavenly bodies will be collapsing.
    No, the literal heavens won't be collapsing at the second coming and even if they did, none would be falling to the Earth. Again, Christ returning with angels, which are stars in scripture, is the best interpretation IMO.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberseeker View Post
    The ancient called everything up there 'stars.' That includes everything from meteors to asteroids, comets and planetary fragments. When the 2nd coming takes place, these heavenly bodies will be collapsing.
    No, the literal heavens won't be collapsing at the second coming and even if they did, none would be falling to the Earth. Again, Christ returning with angels, which are stars in scripture, is the best interpretation IMO.
    James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

  13. #28

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberseeker View Post
    Preterists and Pre-Millers BOTH need to reexamine their thinking in regards to this verse. It's simply not credible for Preterists (including PPs) to apply a symbolic interpretation to a section of scripture that was spoken in such a 'matter of fact' manner! I appreciate some of their useful research concerning fulfilled prophecy, but this is not one of them. A better approach for Pret's (IMHO) would be to see AD 70 as an initial fulfillment, but precursing a greater fulfillment yet to come.

    Pre-Mill has a question that also needs to be asked: Why do you trivialise the collapse of the heavenly bodies in order to maintain your belief in a Millennium after the stars have fallen? When I read this in Marks account I can only imagine next a new heavens and a new earth.
    Matthew 24:3, "The disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?"

    Clearly, his disciples were asking about the sign of his coming, and of the end of the world. This time was no different than our time today. They were wanting to know how the end of times will unfold and what signs will be given that we may know when they will occur. So, I do not think Jesus ignored their question and instead, just began to give them prophecy regarding the destruction of the temple and times to come in Jerusalem in 70AD.

    Matthew 24:
    12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
    13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
    14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.


    Take a look at these passages. He refers to the "end" when he says, "he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." Was the end here 70AD? Was it before the 1000-year period? Was it after the 1000-year period?

    He goes on to say, "this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."
    Do you really think this gospel of the kingdom was preached in all the world by 70AD? History has Apostle Thomas passing through and in the southern parts of India in 72AD when he was martyred. Are we to say at that time, even in all of India that the gospel preached to all of them? And not just small clusters of people round and about the area where Thomas preached.


    Matthew 24:
    15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
    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.


    Jesus goes on the speak of the man of sin (son of perdition), who will be revealed. And this period will be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. Many attribute this tribulation period to be in 70AD. But Jesus attributes it to the person when the man of sin is revealed.

    This is also addressed by Apostle Paul (2 Thessalonians 2) below. Regarding the man of sin, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming. What coming? The end at 70AD? Was it before the 1000-year period? Was it after the 1000-year period? Are these 2 different wicked men of sin?

    2 Thessalonians 2:
    1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
    2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
    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;
    8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
    9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,


    Matthew 24:
    27 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.
    28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.


    More signs regarding when coming of the Son of man be. Who is the carcass here and why are the eagles gathering them?

    Matthew 24:
    29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
    30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.


    So here, Jesus is answering his disciples question regarding when. He says immediately after the tribulation of those days. He also revealed the signs. The signs are listed below:
    Did they see the Son of man coming in the clouds in 70AD with power and great glory? If so, then the next coming will be the 3rd coming of the Lord right?

    Matthew 24:
    31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
    32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
    33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
    34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.


    Again, jesus continues talking about the gathering of his elect with the great sound of a trumpet and more signs. Did a gathering of the elect occur n 70AD? Also, he even says that generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

    Matthew 24:
    35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
    36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.


    Then he says Heaven and earth shall pass away, and also that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. When is the day refereed to that no man knowth? Does this apply to 70AD? Was it before the 1000-year period? Was it after the 1000-year period?

    The stars will fall from Heaven, and Heaven and earth shall pass away is described by Jesus regarding the answer to their question. With everything passed away, where are they going to live for the 1000-year millennial?

    Matthew 24:43
    But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.


    Then we have Peter preaching the words that Jesus told him to his disciples below. Again, he says the same thing Jesus said, "the Lord will come as a thief in the night." He says the heavens shall pass away and the elements of heaven and earth will melt with fervent heat. He also says the works shall be burned up. Peter refers to this as the coming day of God. Is this burning-up period of day of the Lord before 1000-years?

    2 Peter 3:
    10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away 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.
    12 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?


    Then Paul gives comfort to his fellow brethren regarding those that trouble them. Again when the Lord shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, in that day.

    Notice again, Paul says in that day. Not 1000-years apart.

    2 Thessalonians 1:
    6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;
    7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
    8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
    9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
    10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Posts
    15,513

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by bluesky22 View Post
    It contains both perspectives as they are closely related. It’s hard to find pure pp sites. I try. Mods can remove the link if they choose.

    FP does not scare me ( as it seems to some ). It’s just a matter of timing, all the same stuff as far as I can see right now. I will look into every view, as, the search for Truth requires this I feel. Dispensationalists hate the preterist view, as it’s polar opposite to theirs, so this makes sense why some sites would “ban” the view. BF is overwhelmingly dispensational so that makes sense.
    Not about being 'scared'. Are you scared of dispensationalism? Scared is the wrong term brother.

    Do you have a scripture for what Paul stated? Like to look at it and research it. I’ve read several articles talking about the ( supposed ?) problems/issues. Some I don’t understand yet, some, our position is misunderstood, all all in between. All worthy of research imo.

    I personally don’t care who has the truth, I just want it.
    If you care about truth (and you do), then preterism should be rejected as strongly, or IMO, more strongly than dispensationalism. (IMO, there are severe problems with both, but a stronger problem with full preterism).

    2 Timothy 2:16 But avoid irreverent, empty chatter, which will only lead to more ungodliness, 17 and the talk of such men will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, 18 who have deviated from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already occurred, and they undermine the faith of some.

    Saying the resurrection has already occurred undermines the faith of some. The same (i.e. undermining the faith of some) cannot be said of dispensationalism. Nor can it be said of PP. But it can be said of preterism.
    Matt 9:13
    13 "But go and learn what this means: ' I DESIRE COMPASSION,AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
    NASU

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    9,868
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Question for partial preterist

    Quote Originally Posted by Aviyah View Post
    Luke's version actually gives a fuller quote of what He meant by the tribulation:

    But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it, for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. Alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! For there will be great distress upon the earth and wrath against this people. They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. (Luke 21)

    So I think it's in relation to Jerusalem, not the entire planet.
    A few problems with this view. yet also one thing I agree with you one.
    Luke 21 is indeed about 66 AD (not 70 AD)
    Jesus stated a SIGN which when SEEN would mean it is TIME to leave Jerusalem.
    In 66 AD Cestius Gallus came with armies and surrounded Jerusalem, but then left.
    After he left the Christians left Jerusalem.

    There was NO AoD seen at this time.
    Matthew 24:15 speaks of the AoD being SEEN in the Holy Place, which CANNOT mean OUTSIDE Jerusalem, as outside the city was where the unclean things were put. Hebrews confirms this understanding of BOTH the Holy place and that outside the city is unclean - and also why Jesus was crucified OUTSIDE the city.

    This means Luke is NOT expanding Matthew, but rather giving something Jesus stated which was SEPARATE to what Matthew recorded.

    It is also important to note that staying in Judea was not considered safe, so Luke 21:21 states to flee to the mountains.
    Yet you should note that while Luke 21 was ONLY about Jerusalem and the surrounding countryside, Matthew 24 speaks of a far greater tribulation:
    Mat 24:21* For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be.*
    Mat 24:22* And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.*

    This means it STARTS in Jerusalem, but doesn't end there.

    Jerusalem had never seen the scale of destruction that came on it by Rome, and it has never been completely destroyed in that way ever since. But even by comparison to world events/atrocities, the siege still claimed over a million lives - which competes with the battle of Stalingrad - and this is just the body count. If you also consider the living conditions, the infighting and starvation as some Jewish factions burned their own food, it's unlikely we will ever know just how bad it was in 70 AD. Even what we do know about it lines up word-for-word with what Jesus said would happen - and why He urged His followers to run from Judea as far as possible when they saw Rome starting to send its armies.
    It possibly was the single greatest loss of life in Jerusalem so far.
    However in the 1st crusade we read:
    According to Raymond of Aguilers, also writing solely of the Temple Mount area, " in the Temple and porch of Solomon men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins."
    So a lot of blood and Jews were killed there in 1099.
    If Jerusalem were to be attacked today the death toll would be higher than that in 70 AD.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 108
    Last Post: Dec 27th 2014, 01:38 AM
  2. Discussion The Coming of the Son of Man: A Partial Preterist & Futurist Party
    By Matthehitmanhart in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: Sep 4th 2011, 07:47 AM
  3. Replies: 155
    Last Post: Dec 2nd 2010, 08:19 PM
  4. Question for Partial Preterists Re: Near/Far Prophecy
    By AtlGatekeeper in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: Oct 25th 2010, 03:40 AM
  5. Replies: 15
    Last Post: Aug 12th 2010, 04:01 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
  •