Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum

(Rapture is a Vatican/Jesuit Lie )
The "Resurrection" has been erroneously labeled The "Rapture". 
THERE IS NO RAPTURE

WHY THE TITLE RAPTURE BIBLE PROPHECY FORUM?
WE STARTED OUT BELIEVING IN A 7 YR PRE TRIBULATION RAPTURE
BUT FOUND OVER TIME AROUND 2006 THAT THE BIBLE DOES NOT SHARE A 
BIBLE VERSE WHATSOEVER INDICATING A 7 YR PRE TRIBULATION RAPTURE

BIBLE VERSES EVIDENCE:

While Yahusha/JESUS was alive, He prayed to His Father: "I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.  John 17:15 (KJV)

Yahusha/JESUS gave signs of what must happen before His Return:  "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:"  Matt. 24:29 (KJV)


WE DAILY STUDY TO SHEW OURSELVES APPROVED 
WE ARE NOT AFRAID TO SAY WE ARE LEARNING DAILY AND 
ARE ABLE TO ADMIT WE MAKE MISTAKES BUT STUDY TO 
LEARN EVERY DAY.

LET YHVH/YAHUSHA BE TRUE 
AND EVERY MAN A LIAR.

To Join and post on this site e-mail for a password
​​​​​​​stevensandiego@ymail.com

WEBSITE: HTTP://WWW.RAPTUREBIBLEPROPHECYFORUM.COM

FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rapture-Bible-Prophecy-Forum/362856490414697

Hebrew 5783-5788   Gregorian 2023-2028

THIS SITE IS ABOUT Yahusha/JESUS
 We are followers of Yahusha/JESUS Only​​​​​​​
Yahusha/JESUS IS GOD/YHVH
Yahusha/JESUS is YHVH/GOD/YHWH-Yahusha/Son:
​​​​​​​Yahusha/JESUS is The WORD

Yahusha is I Am That I Am  (Exodus 3:14)

Yahusha is YHWH  come in the flesh, He put aside His Diety to become a human, born of  a Virgin.

Yahusha is the Word, As The Most High, He spoke all things seen and unseen into existence

When YHWH created Light, He was revealed to the angels. 

John 14:26
"the breath of life"

But the Comforter, which is "the breath of life", whom the Father will send shall teach you all things.

God is not His  Name but a term.  The Holy Spirit is not a person but the very Breath of the Father.

There is no Trinity.  The Father, YHVH  and Yahusha are One  (John 10:30)

THE BOOK OF ENOCH

NOW IS THE TIME!

 FOR A REMOTE GENERATION THE LAST GENERATION FOR THE ELECT!

REFERENCES IN THE BOOK OF ENOCH TO THE BIBLE

https://bookofenochreferences.wordpress.com/category/the-book-of-enoch-with-biblical-references-chapters-1-to-9/chapter-1/

Book of Enoch: http://tinyurl.com/BkOfEnoch

The book of Second Peter and Jude Authenticate the book of Enoch and Vice Versa

Yahusha/JESUS QUOTED FROM THE SEPTUAGINT:

THE APOSTLES QUOTED FROM THE SEPTUAGINT

JEWS WERE CONVERTING TO CHRISTIANITY

FREE DOWNLOADS

All Of The Apocryphal Books Of

The King James 1611 Version

http://www.scriptural-truth.com/apocrypha_books.html 

Pray for one another, as we watch for the Lord's  return!


Bible Prophecy Forum Postings
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

For Fair Use Discussion and Educational Purposes
Link: PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER
Note: Before commenting on any posts please make sure you either watch or read each post in it’s entirety. Before, making a comment, if you don’t have the time to watch or read fully please restrain from commenting. When you do this it will help to reduce confusion.

Thank you for visiting Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum!

Please add us to your favorites!
http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com
Our Facebook page is :
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rapture-Bible-Prophecy-Forum/362856490414697
Please LIKE our Facebook page! Facebook is growing daily!





PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER









IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED......







If most of the Book of Revelation is fulfilled we must be living in the future.




The seals must have already been opened including the sixth seal Day of the Lord therefore we are already raptured.




The seventh seal wrath of God upon the whole world must have already taken place. Therefore the only thing we have left look forward to is the Second Coming of the Lord.




I must have slept through it all because I don't remember ANY OF IT !







According to Your Infallible Word, come Lord Jesus !




Bruce Warner, Scripturalist looking forward to the events of the Book of Revelation to take place soon.





++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Zechariah 12:3,9:
And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people; And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Disclaimer: Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum, ( http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com ) does not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the reply button.

If you are new to this site and would like to post articles, opinions, youtube videos that are appropriate for this site just e mail me at

stevensandiego@ymail.com
I will send you a PASSWORD

Ybic
Steven



Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

Bruce...

Thanks for bumping this article up by commenting as it is a really good article, and thanks for being the perfect example of the kind of person I was talking about when I said: "but mostly what gets back to me is from those who are opposed, and most likely do not even read the study, but just react to the title…or they know where I stand so react to that."

From your comments it is obvious you did not read the article...it did not say "all" events...it said "most". What is also obvious is that you just want to banter and for some reason attack me. It is getting old Bruce....and frankly it makes you look combative toward a sister in Christ, who is doing what the Lord is placing on her heart.

Enough is enough!

Patti C.

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

While I'll agree on the topics concerning the seed of Abraham and the Israel of God, the spiritual Jew, and so forth; the kingship of those in the faith, all of these things- when we come to this issue I don't see the Revelation being fulfilled "off screen" of the scripture. This just isn't happening. It's proposing that the Lord didn't testify by His Word the fulfillment of pretty much all things biblical. The Lord didn't testify it but leaves that glory to secular men whom He constantly calls "liars" throughout His own scripture. This notion is simply impossible. Or am I misunderstanding? Where is the fulfillment being testified? Are you refering to things like Jewish Wars by Josephus? Secular history? What word is testifying to the fulfillment?

It seems pretty clear to me that the Revelation takes place at the second coming, and is about the second coming, and is the judgment of the churches by the sword of the king of Babylon prior to the second coming. But, is that what you're saying? It's a little difficult to follow what's being said there. On the one hand it seems you're saying everything has been fulfilled, but then saying, there's a future coming of Christ in judgment; on the one hand you're talking about "now" as if there's nothing to be aware of in the future- but then talk about something future "He is coming again"? It seems you're saying "it's all fulfilled" but then saying "He will come in judgment"

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

Dear Brother John;

I am approaching this whole issue one study at a time, and need you to be more specific in your questions. If you read the article above, exactly which part of it do you disagree with and why? If you could site which Scripture that proves it has not been fulfilled (of the things mentioned in this particular article)then we can discuss that.

Of course there are end-time events that have not happened yet...but everything having to do with Salvation was fulfilled in Christ, He established His eternal Kingdom at the Cross, we are in that kingdom when we are born again, it is not some future event...it was established for all people for all time, and that includes the Jews. The Age of Grace is coming to an end, and there will be stages of Judgment that first starts at the house of God. It is definitely obvious that the New Heaven and the New Earth are not fulfilled...but they are being established spiritually, and we will physically be there after the Second Coming.

The main point of this particular article was how believing that so much of what Christ accomplished at the Cross is still future, we are missing the Kingdom right now! We become all form and no power. The pastor who wrote this article was expressing how this power increased when he saw the truth of what Christ fulfilled by His coming and His ultimate sacrifice.

Thank you for commenting, but please narrow down your questions to deal with this specific article, that would be appreciated. Thank you.

YSIC

JESUS IS ALL AND EVERYTHING!!

Patti C.

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

For Fair Use Discussion and Educational Purposes
Link: PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER
Note: Before commenting on any posts please make sure you either watch or read each post in it’s entirety. Before, making a comment, if you don’t have the time to watch or read fully please restrain from commenting. When you do this it will help to reduce confusion.

Thank you for visiting Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum!

Please add us to your favorites!
http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com
Our Facebook page is :
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rapture-Bible-Prophecy-Forum/362856490414697
Please LIKE our Facebook page! Facebook is growing daily!





PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER










Hi Patti,




You make an erroneous assumption !




I read EVERY WORD of the article otherwise I would have NOT COMMENTED on it. This is A FORUM !




If you ONLY want to hear comments which agree with you, don't post them on A FORUM.




I am NOT attacking you, but rather I am NOT AGREEING WITH THE IDEAS YOU PUT FORWARD. Do you NOT know the difference ?




We don't attack people personally on a forum, but we do banter about differing ideas. That is what a forum is !




A wise person once said, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen !"




YBIC,




Bruce Warner, Scripturalist




++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Zechariah 12:3,9:
And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people; And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Disclaimer: Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum, ( http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com ) does not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the reply button.

If you are new to this site and would like to post articles, opinions, youtube videos that are appropriate for this site just e mail me at

stevensandiego@ymail.com
I will send you a PASSWORD

Ybic
Steven



Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

It's not the verses or interpretation of the symbolisms that I'm questioning, it's this conclusion:

the past fulfillment interpretation of the book of Revelation
having already been fulfilled
the wrath and destruction in the Book of Revelation is fulfilled
these things were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem

The thought that the destruction of Jerusalem, for rejecting Christ and calling for pagan Caesar to be her king instead, as we propose, is a great issue in the Book of Revelation, tells us that the destruction is all past and fulfilled. The implications to this proposition are enormous!


It may be the implications are more enormous than the author is realizing. The first implication- the one that I question- is that the Lord doesn't bother to testify in His Word the very culmination of His entire Word. In other words, where in the scripture is this "destruction of Jerusalem" that "fulfils" the Revelation? I'm looking in my bible and I only see one destruction of Jerusalem, and that prior to the first advent by the sword of one Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon. Were in the bible can I read of the Lord's testimony concerning this other event? I presume then the author puts a book beside my bible and says, "Here I have the testimony of man, such as this man Josephus who is not inspired or even of the faith, who will tell you of the ..." and I'm saying, "I trust this man as far as you can throw him. His words and testimony are meaningless to me."

Again, it's proposing that the Lord testify and establish His Word throughout the course of His history and then? Got tired and left the final chapter to Josephus to testify? To understand the Word of God I'm required to have faith in Josephus, or what other man whose testimony is not established by God? The implication here is that the Lord is making it so we have to have faith in the word of man in order to understand the Word of God- for how else is the author proposing a fulfilment in "the destruction of Jerusalem" without attaching the testimony of men to the scripture itself, where else is he getting a destruction of Jerusalem if not from the writings of uninspired secular minds of men? The Lord tells us throughout the entire scripture not to trust the word of man "yea let God be true and every man a liar"; now this implies that in order for us to understand the Revelation, we must listen to the words of the very ones the Lord said don't listen to.

The implication is that the word of Josephus the uninspired secular historian is more important than the Word of God, since it is only by this word of men that we can understand the Word of God; and what has more glory the one giving the word, or the one giving understanding of the word? Clearly the latter. But I myself am certain that the Lord would not fail Himself to testify of the fulfilling of these things had they happened as proposed. He didn't fail to testify the first destruction of Jerusalem according to His Word, and He wouldn't have the second time if it were the fulfilment of His Word.

Note that I'm not saying there wasn't a destruction of Jerusalem in 70ad (in fact, I'm not saying there was, either- because I don't trust secular history one bit- why would I?) but that it is not the fulfillment of the Revelation, and if anything was a sign to that generation that the Sinai covenant was over. It happened "off screen" because it was not necessary to record for we know through what is written that the age came to a close after the gospel began to the Gentiles.

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

Hi John,

Ah, now I understand. Ok, let me start by saying that the statements you quoted from the author were about something I haven't fully tried to prove, so have not done enough research on. I wanted to use the whole article and not censor it, so I left it in.

That being said, right now I do believe that 70 AD was the fulfillment of the destruction. Jesus said plenty about it..."not one stone left on another"..."your house is left to you desolate"..."flee to the mountains". And also historically the nearly 2000 years of exile...I will look into it more, but there is already a good case for it being so.

If you do not agree, maybe you could present the reasons and the scriptures to prove this is not so. I would be interested in whatever you find, and it will help me discern the appropriate understanding, also.

Thanks for your input!

Patti C.

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

The reasons I reject the teaching are many, but above I gave the first reason- being that what you're talking about isn't in the bible. There's no testimony of a seige of Jerusalem after the gospel went to the Gentiles in the scripture, so I can be sure that the Lord Himself isn't testifying with this author about these things being fulfilled in any alleged incident only recorded in the words of men. Meaning, if there were no Jewish Wars by Josephus et. al. you would not right now being making this proposal of an alleged "fulfilment" of scripture not recorded in scripture because you wouldn't even be aware of the alleged destruction of Jerusalem at all. Because it's certainly not recorded in the bible.

But the author here is asking me, not only to fully trust the alleged testimony of uninspired men regarding this biblical matter, but to fully accept this testimony as establishing the very culmination of the Word of God. This is naturally preposterous; why would I possibly "bite" on this proposal? For all I know, there was no Josephus or seige of Jerusalem in 70 ad and "the Roman seige of Jerusalem" by Josephus, et. al. is just a fabricated document written in the middle ages to try to get Christians to think the Revelation was already fulfilled. Why would I possibly trust the word of man? Not only to trust in it, but to trust it to the point that I'm saying that it's revealing the fulfilling the Word of God?

It's just impossible that the Lord wouldn't testify to the fulfilment of His Word in His Word, as He has consistently done. Like I said I certainly agree with the ideas of the city being the church and we currently the kings and priests, and the waters of the gospel for healing the nations, and all of that is sound to me. It's the part where you go "and the Revelation is already fulfilled and so and so alleged word of man proves it" that's when I raise an eyebrow and ask, "Wait- you actually believe the history as told by men is trustworthy?" I'm confident you'll find this to be an unwise decision at some point. I am confident we stick with the bible and only the bible and we're good to go.

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

Hi John,

I have to say that I have never doubted that in 70AD the Temple was destroyed and the city of Jerusalem plundered and made desolate by the Romans. It is interesting that you question this.

My first thought of why there was no account of this happening in the NT, is that the books, therein, were written before 70AD. With the exception of the Book of Revelation, which most believe was written in 96AD…that is still disputed though, and there is good evidence that it too was written before 70AD. That is a whole new study that I won’t get into here. But, I will give a few excepts from a study done by a man named Matt Slick, about the other books.

######################

Destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. , Luke and Acts

Link of article or video : http://www.carm.org/when-were-gospels-written-and-by-whom

“None of the gospels mention the destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 A.D. This is significant because Jesus had prophesied concerning the temple when He said "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down," (Luke 21:6, see also Matt. 24:1; Mark 13:1). This prophecy was fulfilled in 70 A.D. when the Romans sacked Jerusalem and burned the temple. The gold in the temple melted down between the stone walls and the Romans took the walls apart, stone by stone, to get the gold. Such an obvious fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy most likely would have been recorded as such by the gospel writers who were fond of mentioning fulfillment of prophecy if they had been written after 70 A.D. Also, if the gospels were fabrications of mythical events then anything to bolster the Messianic claims -- such as the destruction of the temple as Jesus said -- would surely have been included. But, it was not included suggesting that the gospels (at least Matthew, Mark, and Luke) were written before 70 A.D.

Similarly, this argument is important when we consider the dating of the book of Acts which was written after the gospel of Luke, by Luke himself. Acts is a history of the Christian church right after Jesus' ascension. Acts also fails to mention the incredibly significant events of 70 A.D. which would have been extremely relevant and prophetically important and would require inclusion into Acts had it occurred before Acts was written. Remember, Acts is a book of history concerning the Christians and the Jews. The fact that the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple is not recorded is very strong evidence that Acts was written before A.D. 70. We add to this the fact that Acts does not include the accounts of "Nero's persecution of the Christians in A.D. 64 or the deaths of [the apostle] James (A.D. 62), Paul (A.D. 64), and Peter (A.D. 65),"1 and we have further evidence that it was written early.

######################################

To me this is the most compelling argument for the account of what happened in 70AD not being included in the Word of God.

JESUS IS ALL AND EVERYTHING!!

Patti C.

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

the account of what happened in 70AD not being included in the Word of God.


Right and this is why I'm rejecting the doctrine, it's not in the bible. So the Lord definitely isn't teaching this doctrine to anyone, someone else is. So all you're really doing is telling me, "Here are my reasons for why the Lord isn't testifying with me about this..." and I'm saying, "I don't think I really need to hear your reasons for why the Lord doesn't establish this doctrine- the very fact that He's not testifying with you proves your doctrine isn't His."

The last post the author makes the case that this "70ad fulfilment" is so important that should anyone have been around they would surely have recorded it, because that's how important it would be. That's how important this event would be if it were the fulfilment of the Revelation. Someone would have to write the account which would be included in our bibles as the testimony of God to the fulfilment of His Word.

But since there's not a peep in the Word of God about it, the author then concludes that- no one must've been around during the time (I guess the Lord fell asleep?), so the gospels must've been written earlier..." when actually he should be thinking, "God didn't bother to have anyone record anything about this in His Word, so it must not be as important as I've thought it was, and in fact must have nothing to do with the Word of God" ; as we have agreed this doctrine is not proceeding from the mouth of the Lord, true? This is not of the Word of God, then how can it possibley be "of faith" when faith comes by hearing the Word of God; if faith comes from hearing the Word of God, and this doctrine is not in the Word of God, then what else can I possibley conclude but that the doctrine is not of faith? And if it's not of faith, then what is it?

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

Just to note when I say, "your doctrine is not His" I'm meaning in this particular - not that I'm saying "then this man is a false prophet" or "this man is not a Christian" or anything. Just, these meaning- in regard to this specific doctrine right here.

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

I see what both you and Patti are saying and my personal belief is that most of Revelation is yet to be fulfilled however, I do tend to think that the prophecy regarding the destruction of Jerusalem has already been fulfilled because of the reasons Patti stated above but there are also unfulfilled prophecies regarding their situation as well that are prophesied about and are yet future. I do understand you believe you cannot trust these conclusions because they are not found in scripture. My question to you though would be, when unfulfilled future prophecies of the Bible are fulfilled how are you going to believe them if their fulfillment isn't already written about in scripture? My point is what if you are not personally there to witness the fulfillment, if they happen in the future their fulfillment isn't going to be written in the Bible. Perhaps I am misunderstanding you but it sounds like you are saying the only way you will believe a prophecy is already fulfilled is if it's fulfillment is written about in scripture or you witness it first hand to where no secular sources of reporting it qualify, is that a fair assessment?

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

Bear in mind I'm not saying I don't trust the conclusions, I'm saying I don't trust your sources from which you're drawing the conclusions. Also bear in mind that if we were talking about history or something, I wouldn't have any problem with citations of Josephus and such. But when we walk into the proverbial sanctuary of the Lord to talk about His Word and everything that entails then we should be leaving Josephus et. al. at the door. Only the Word of God should ever be brought in here.

So again it's the source- I'm not saying "It's all lies!" but I am saying "It may as well be treated as such": Josephus and friends may well have written an exacting true account of the event- but it's not in the scripture and as such is factually not of faith, and not testified by the Lord. Even if it's true (and I don't doubt that it is, not that I'm saying "It never happened" that it's also possible that it never happened, and is complete fiction: I simply cannot determine this in any regard thus it's instability and uncertainty, as always with the word of men) then it was a earthly sign for the generation witnessing it that the old covenant and all with it were to be swept away. Whatever the sign may have been to them, it wasn't to us or anyone after because if it meant the fulfilment of the Word of God (specially the Revelation) then the Lord would've testified to its completion and we'd be reading in the book of Titus "and thus is came to pass according to the Word of the Lord; that He would throw down the stones of the temple" but this book is fiction and doesn't exist, of course.

About the recognition of the fulfilment, I would yes either have to experience it first hand or get a direct "It is done" from the Word of God. Again, it's not that I'm saying "everything not of the bible is false and a lie" but that I can't be sure of it, and as such it's no good to me in most matters, and just right out in biblical matters.

When Jesus was talking about the temple I think He is teaching beyond the physical, and about the spiritual- so He's prophesying about the spiritual temple, and not the physical temple; just as when he cursed the fig tree, He was prophesying about the spiritual fig tree, not that physical tree and its lack of physical figs that was literally in front of Him. After all, Jesus said "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up" and He wasn't speaking of the physical temple even though they thought He was.

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,


Got it. One point to consider though, when you have extra biblical sources confirming biblical assertions it in some cases strengthens the case for the assertion. Otherwise you could argue circular reasoning, corroboration or collusion.

Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

For Fair Use Discussion and Educational Purposes
Link: PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER
Note: Before commenting on any posts please make sure you either watch or read each post in it’s entirety. Before, making a comment, if you don’t have the time to watch or read fully please restrain from commenting. When you do this it will help to reduce confusion.

Thank you for visiting Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum!

Please add us to your favorites!
http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com
Our Facebook page is :
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rapture-Bible-Prophecy-Forum/362856490414697
Please LIKE our Facebook page! Facebook is growing daily!





PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER

RE: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED..........







So what, FOR THE MOST PART, do you think is fulfilled, and what FOR THE LEAST PART do you think is YET TO BE FULFILLED ?




Let's get to the meat of it rather make such a vague statement !







Bruce Warner, Scripturalist for the Lord





++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Zechariah 12:3,9:
And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people; And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Disclaimer: Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum, ( http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com ) does not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the reply button.

If you are new to this site and would like to post articles, opinions, youtube videos that are appropriate for this site just e mail me at

stevensandiego@ymail.com
I will send you a PASSWORD

Ybic
Steven



Re: IF MOST OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS FULFILLED,

Bruce,

If you have been reading my studies you know what I think has been fulfilled, and have proven biblically why I have come to those conclusions.

I think it would be good for you to state what you think has been fulfilled or not, and prove it the same way.

Just making a list without supporting evidence from His Word really serves no purpose.

JESUS IS ALL AND EVERYTHING!!

Patti C.