Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour. 1 John 2:18 ESV
The revelation of Yeshua the Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, Revelation 1:1 ESV
Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near. Revelation 1:3 ESV
And he said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. And the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, has sent his angel to show his servants what must soon take place." "And behold, I am coming soon. Blessed is the one who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book." Revelation 22:6-7 ESV
And he said to me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near. Revelation 22:10 ESV
"Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done. Revelation 22:12 ESV
He who testifies to these things says, "Surely I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Yeshua! Revelation 22:20 ESV
Keep in mind audience relevance which seeks to discover what the original audience understood a passage to mean. He said he was coming soon, His coming was seen as imminent. You cannot read the New Testament with out seeing the imminent expectation that they had for the return of Christ. The same event cannot be imminent at two different periods separated by nearly two thousand years.Now someone will say, "yes, but one day is to the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day." That is what 2 Peter 3:8 says. In context it is simply saying that God is a God who keeps his promises. God is not bound by time, but we are, and God speaks to us in language that we understand. Though God is not bound by time he can tell time.Don Preston in his tract "Can God tell time" give the following argument.
I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near: a star shall come out of Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out of Israel; it shall crush the forehead of Moab and break down all the sons of Sheth. Edom shall be dispossessed; Seir also, his enemies, shall be dispossessed. Israel is doing valiantly. Numbers 24:17-18 ESV
Here Balaam the prophet made a prediction of Christ's coming. He says his coming is not now or not near. The coming of Christ was not at hand! It was over 1400 years away and that is a long time. Believers, if 1400 years is a long time could 2,000 plus years be soon?In Daniel chapters 10-12 we have a vision encompassing a period of time from 536 BC to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD; which is about 600 years. Daniel was told:
and came to make you understand what is to happen to your people in the latter days. For the vision is for days yet to come." Daniel 10:14 ESV
Remember, this vision was relayed to Daniel from God. While God is not bound by time, he was communicating to man who is bound to time. God called this 600 year period of time "long;" he said it involved "many days."Daniel contains another important example of how God used time words. Chapter 8 contains a prophecy that extends from 530 BC to about 165-164 BC and the death of Antiochus Epiphanes. The time covered is about 365 years. How did God express the prophecy? Did he say it was at hand? Did he say SOME of it was at hand while some of it was for a long time off? No! God viewed the prophecy as a whole. He said:
The vision of the evenings and the mornings that has been told is true, but seal up the vision, for it refers to many days from now." Daniel 8:26 ESV
Here is a prophecy that covers 365 years and God called it "many days from now." Bereans, if God called 365 years a long time, how can man say that time, when God is speaking to man, means nothing?This is an important question in light of the traditional interpretations of Revelation. Daniel was told to seal up his vision because the time for its fulfillment was a long time away—365 years. John was specifically told NOT TO SEAL UP HIS VISION BECAUSE WHAT HE SAW WAS AT HAND! John is told his vision, not part of his vision, was "at hand" and "must shortly come to pass!" Reader, did God call the 365 years for the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy a "long time" and call the fulfillment of Revelation, which most commentators say has not been fulfilled after 2000 years so far, "at hand?" To say the least, this would hardly be consistent!Many do not realize the Bible gives an example of man attempting to change the meaning of time words used by God; and God's response. In Ezekiel 7, God through Ezekiel said the Day of the Lord was at hand. The Day of the Lord in this context was when God used Babylon to punish Israel for her sin. This is the concept of the Day of the Lord; it is not an "end of time" idea. It is when God used a nation to punish another as it related to his chosen people.In chapter 11 Israel responded to the threat of coming judgment. They insisted that although Ezekiel said it was at hand it was really not. It was time to build houses, not worry about judgment. One can almost hear some of those people: "Well, yes, Ezekiel has said the Day of the Lord is at hand, but after all, 'one day is with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day,' Psalms 90:4"When Israel turned God's words of imminence into meaning-less-ness, God responded:
And the word of the LORD came to me: "Son of man, what is this proverb that you have about the land of Israel, saying, 'The days grow long, and every vision comes to nothing'? Tell them therefore, 'Thus says the Lord GOD: I will put an end to this proverb, and they shall no more use it as a proverb in Israel.' But say to them, The days are near, and the fulfillment of every vision. For there shall be no more any false vision or flattering divination within the house of Israel. For I am the LORD; I will speak the word that I will speak, and it will be performed. It will no longer be delayed, but in your days, O rebellious house, I will speak the word and perform it, declares the Lord GOD." And the word of the LORD came to me: "Son of man, behold, they of the house of Israel say, 'The vision that he sees is for many days from now, and he prophesies of times far off.' Therefore say to them, Thus says the Lord GOD: None of my words will be delayed any longer, but the word that I speak will be performed, declares the Lord GOD." Ezekiel 12:21-28 ESV
Yahweh told Ezekiel to tell Israel that her days of changing the time for his predictions were over. He had said judgment was at hand; Israel said it was not at hand. Yahweh would not tolerate it.What we have then, is an example of man saying that while God had said something was imminent it really was not; it was for a long time off. We have God's response; when God said "at hand" he meant "at hand!" He did not mean hundreds or thousands of years; he meant "soon!"Has God changed his vocabulary? Is it true that "at hand" once DID mean "at hand" but now it can mean "a long time?" If so, where is the evidence for the change? Surely, the honest student can clearly see there has been no such change in God's vocabulary. God can tell time; God can read a calendar. When God says something is at hand it is near. For man to argue otherwise is to reject the inspiration of the Scriptures; it is to impugn the faithfulness of God; it is to impugn the ability of God to communicate; it is to do the very thing Israel of old did and for which they were condemned! This is a very serious matter indeed!Now I'm sure that your thinking if the Lord did come back in 70 AD how did we miss it for all these years. How could he have come back and we not have known it. The problem here is one of preconceived ideas. It is because of the paradigms that we have developed. We think that the second coming is an earth burning, heaven melting, geography changing event, so we assume it could not have already happened.I submit to you that either Scripture is wrong about the time of the second coming and thus not inerrant or our paradigms are wrong about the nature of the second coming. Which one of those are you more comfortable with, an incorrect paradigm or an uninspired Scripture?Obviously, from a physical perspective all this has not happened. But is it just possible that our view of the nature of the second coming is wrong?
Now concerning the coming of our Lord Yeshua Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2 ESV
These are the same Thessalonians that Paul wrote 1 Thessalonians 4 to.
For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 ESV
How is it that the Thessalonians thought that the second coming had already happened? If they viewed the nature of these things as physical how on earth could they have thought that they already happened? If their concept of the second coming was an earth burning, heaven melting, geography changing event how could they have thought it had already happened? If Paul was teaching the second coming as an earth burning, heaven melting, geography changing event all he would have had to say to the Thessalonians is "hello" look out your windows the earth is not on fire, the sky is still blue. Paul never corrects their idea of the nature of the second coming he simple says it has not happened yet. They must have viewed the nature of the second coming differently that we do.Remember our hermeneutical principle that the implicit is to be interpreted by the explicit. The time statements are explicit and we must interpret what we don't understand in light of what we do understand. The Lord said clearly that he was going to return quickly why is it that we don't believe Him? We could believe him if we made a paradigm shift in our understanding of the nature of his return.



TRUST THE BIBLE AND THE AUTHOR...……………………………