Revelation Rebuttal M. O. T. Shortly To Come To Pass 1

Hello, it's William Bell. Welcome to the All Things Fulfilled channel. And in this video, what I'm going to do is respond to a young man who he did a response on a video I did on the book of Revelation, 1260 days. And he basically indicated in the video that nothing I said in it was true, that it was a total distortion of the truth. So what I want to do is respond to him in this video because a couple of guys sent it to me and I said, well, let me go ahead and respond to him. Now, I had a discussion with this guy sometime back a couple of years ago on Sal's Showtime's debate talk for you and hadn't seen him in two years. Nevertheless, you know, I'm going to go ahead and make a quick response. Well, when I say quick, I'm just going to go through the points that I have that he touched on, which was about 10 points in his video. And so we'll just go through that as quickly as we can. But welcome to the channel. If you're new, be sure and subscribe and then hit the bell to the right so that you'll get a notification anytime that we do new videos. So let's go ahead and get started. All right. He starts off with Revelation 1 and verse 1, which is a time statement that indicates that the message of the book of Revelation was shortly to come to pass. If you go back and watch that video, you'll see all the points that I made in the video, but he misses the point of the text. The verse in Revelation 1, 1, which says the revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him to show to his servants things which must shortly come to pass. And he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant, John, who bore witness of all things that he saw and blessed as he who reads and those who keep the words of this prophecy for the time is at hand or near. However, let's just focus on verse 1. And when I say that he misses the point, what I mean is the verse speaks primarily to the prophecy and when it began and would be fulfilled. In other words, it focuses on the fact that this prophecy would shortly be fulfilled in a short time in its entirety. And so what this gentleman misses is the entire point of his example that he gave about telling someone that, you know, he's going over to their house and then after he's on his way, he picks up his phone, he calls him and says, I'll be there shortly, is missing the point of verse 1. And what I mean by that is, is that there are two issues at hand in Revelation 1 and also verse 3. The first issue is the fact that these were things that were going to shortly be fulfilled, not shortly begin, not a message where you pick up somebody says, OK, I'm on my way, so I'll be there shortly. No, what he's saying is that this is something that was going to occur, a prophecy that was going to be fulfilled in a short time. And then verse 3 is there to say that the time for these things to begin to be fulfilled in a short time is near. And therefore, we have both aspects of the prophecy. Now, he claimed that I was making a redundant point. Well, he should have told John that because John was the person who wrote these were things that were shortly come to pass for the time is near. So they were going to come to pass shortly. They were going to be fulfilled in their entirety shortly. And the time was near for that to happen. Then he cites in support of that second Peter chapter three. But what he does is he takes the position of the scoffers. It was the scoffers who were denying that Christ's coming was imminent, was soon to take place. Peter, in writing the second epistle said, this second epistle I write to you in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder. In other words, he had already taught the imminence of the coming of the Lord and judgment in the first epistle. You can read first Peter one verse five, where he says the salvation was ready to be revealed in the last time. Think about verse six or seven, where he said after they had suffered a little while. And then in verse five of chapter four, he says that God was ready to judge the living and the dead, who will give an account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. Same word had told us. And then in verse seven, but the end of all things is at hand, that imminent statement, same one that's in revelation, using the word in goose there. In the I think it's an adjective form there. And then in verse 17, for the time has come that the judgment must begin at the house of God. It begins with us first, what shall the envy of those who do not obey the gospel? So, and not only that, but if you go to the fifth chapter of first Peter, he talks about that. He was a elder and a partaker of the glory that was about to be revealed, use the word mellow there. So all through the chapter or the book of first of first Peter, he uses words that talk about the imminence of the judgment, the coming of the Lord, the resurrection, et cetera, in that first epistle. Now, when he gets to the second epistle, he says, I'm simply reminding you of the things that I said in the first epistle, which means that we have to carry over not only the subject matter, but we have to carry over the imminent time statements as well. And we've had person after person admit to us that the time statements in chapter one, or excuse me, in the first epistle refer to 70 AD and therefore we're imminent. And thus, if that's the case, then you've already given up second Peter chapter three, but let's get back to this point. So when we understand the eminence that was taught in the first epistle and Peter is reminding them, and then you have the text saying that in the last day, scoffers will come, um, walking after their own lust and saying, where is the promise of his coming? Look, that's the position of messenger of truth because he's denying that these events were near in Peter's day. And thus he's taking the position of the scoffers. He's scoffing at us because we say that it was near in their day. And that's what his video is all about. It's nothing but a scoff at the apostolic writings at the teaching of the Holy spirit in the first century. So he tries to do this by citing second Peter chapter three in verse eight, which pretty much all the dispensationalists do when they are trying to get around the time statements and not just dispensationalists, but some of the others as well, whether they be partial preterists or whether they be, um, amillennialists, et cetera, uh, the futurists do that. But the text says, do not be ignorant of this one thing that a day is with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. Now he says, well, it's been 2000 years. So that just means it's only been 2000, uh, two days past. Look, that is not what the text says. Ladies and gentlemen, he should slow down and read the passage again. It says a day or rather it doesn't say a day is a thousand years. It says a day is as a thousand years. So it's just an illustration there, a comparison. It's a simile there. If you were to look at, um, Acts chapter two, where the Bible says there were cloven tongues like as a fire or as fire, it doesn't say they were fire. It says they were as fire. So we have to make the distinction between what the Bible is saying and what we think it's saying, because we're trying to prove our own point from that. And, uh, the fact of the matter is Peter is quoting from Psalm 90, which is a text about what transpired during the wilderness when God's wrath was going to come upon Israel for their rebellion in the wilderness, a period which covered 40 years. That would be the proper application of the use of that term in its proper context. And Israel was about to go through a second judgment, uh, the judgment of the, um, the second Exodus, if you please. And it was likewise a 40 year period in the new Testament, which makes the use of that term very appropriate. I have, uh, I guess a dozen or more videos on second Peter three, and we cover those points. And, um, I recommend that you take a look at them. And so what he's doing is taking the scoffers position. It was the scoffers who were saying, no, the Lord is not coming soon. That's not what Peter taught. Peter used second Peter three, eight to emphasize the point that God was coming or that the Lord was coming soon, just as he had taught in the first epistles. But these guys