event wise, from the next? The flood was near to Noah, but it is far removed from us.

Jeffrey overlooks this and imagines the event both near and future to us! He offers as proof, the coming “New World Order!” Try this with Noah’s flood. It too was an end-time prophecy, i.e. one of the antediluvian world. How much newspaper exegesis and coming New World Orders will it take to convince the world that the flood is in our future? That amounts to the task b

Luke 21:28

Jeffrey’s premise ignores simple hermeneutic principles. Three questions we must always ask when reading the bible, (1) Who’s speaking, (2) Who’s spoken to and (3) About whom or what is spoken. Grant ignores this as he seeks to build a case for futurism and the coming Antichrist who will rule the New World Order.

In Luke 21:28, the audience is so clearly identified that the Lord mentions them by name. According to Mark’s account of this prophecy, the audience consisted of Peter, James, John and Andrew, (Mark 13:5) all of whom were contemporary disciples of the first century. Applying these pronouns to apostles, verse 28 addresses disciples in the first not the 21st century. So there is no mistake about “when” the events were to occur. The message closes on this note: “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place.” (Luke 21:32).

What must Jeffrey do to fill pages in his book? He must ignore Jesus’ words of a first century fulfillment and fill the space with newspaper headlines. The net results, it sounds sensational and current, though it misses the mark.

Revelation 1:3

Here again is a prophetic chronological marker that breathes imminence of first century fulfillment. To “futurize” Revelation, one must ignore audience relevance (those to whom the message was first written) and project future generations into prophecy. John wrote of things which must shortly take place.

John pronounced a blessing on the obedient readers who would be blessed by the contents of the book because “the time is [was] near. It was near to the original audience hence the use of the present tense, “is.” Why is it difficult to see that the nearer something is chronologically to one generation, the farther it will be event wise, from the next? The flood was near to Noah, but it is far removed from us.

Jeffrey overlooks this and imagines the event both near and future to us! He offers as proof, the coming “New World Order!” Try this with Noah’s flood. It too was an end-time prophecy, i.e. one of the antediluvian world. How much newspaper exegesis and coming New World Orders will it take to convince the world that the flood is in our future? That amounts to the task be

f this prophecy, the audience consisted of Peter, James, John and Andrew, (Mark 13:5) all of whom were contemporary disciples of the first century. Applying these pronouns to apostles, verse 28 addresses disciples in the first not the 21st century. So there is no mistake about “when” the events were to occur. The message closes on this note: “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place.” (Luke 21:32).

What must Jeffrey do to fill pages in his book? He must ignore Jesus’ words of a first century fulfillment and fill the space with newspaper headlines. The net results, it sounds sensational and current, though it misses the mark.

Revelation 1:3

Here again is a prophetic chronological marker that breathes imminence of first century fulfillment. To “futurize” Revelation, one must ignore audience relevance (those to whom the message was first written) and project future generations into prophecy. John wrote of things which must shortly take place.

John pronounced a blessing on the obedient readers who would be blessed by the contents of the book because “the time is [was] near. It was near to the original audience hence the use of the present tense, “is.” Why is it difficult to see that the nearer something is chronologically to one generation, the farther it will be event wise, from the next? The flood was near to Noah, but it is far removed from us.

Jeffrey overlooks this and imagines the event both near and future to us! He offers as proof, the coming “New World Order!” Try this with Noah’s flood. It too was an end-time prophecy, i.e. one of the antediluvian world. How much newspaper exegesis and coming New World Orders will it take to convince the world that the flood is in our future? That amounts to the task b

at must Jeffrey do to fill pages in his book? He must ignore Jesus’ words of a first century fulfillment and fill the space with newspaper headlines. The net results, it sounds sensational and current, though it misses the mark.

Revelation 1:3

Here again is a prophetic chronological marker that breathes imminence of first century fulfillment. To “futurize” Revelation, one must ignore audience relevance (those to whom the message was first written) and project future generations into prophecy. John wrote of things which must shortly take place.

John pronounced a blessing on the obedient readers who would be blessed by the contents of the book because “the time is [was] near. It was near to the original audience hence the use of the present tense, “is.” Why is it difficult to see that the nearer something is chronologically to one generation, the farther it will be event wise, from the next? The flood was near to Noah, but it is far removed from us.

Jeffrey overlooks this and imagines the event both near and future to us! He offers as proof, the coming “New World Order!” Try this with Noah’s flood. It too was an end-time prophecy, i.e. one of the antediluvian world. How much newspaper exegesis and coming New World Orders will it take to convince the world that the flood is in our future? That amounts to the task b

itten) and project future generations into prophecy. John wrote of things which must shortly take place.

John pronounced a blessing on the obedient readers who would be blessed by the contents of the book because “the time is [was] near. It was near to the original audience hence the use of the present tense, “is.” Why is it difficult to see that the nearer something is chronologically to one generation, the farther it will be event wise, from the next? The flood was near to Noah, but it is far removed from us.

Jeffrey overlooks this and imagines the event both near and future to us! He offers as proof, the coming “New World Order!” Try this with Noah’s flood. It too was an end-time prophecy, i.e. one of the antediluvian world. How much newspaper exegesis and coming New World Orders will it take to convince the world that the flood is in our future? That amounts to the task b

event wise, from the next? The flood was near to Noah, but it is far removed from us.

Jeffrey overlooks this and imagines the event both near and future to us! He offers as proof, the coming “New World Order!” Try this with Noah’s flood. It too was an end-time prophecy, i.e. one of the antediluvian world. How much newspaper exegesis and coming New World Orders will it take to convince the world that the flood is in our future? That amounts to the task before Jeffrey with the end-time of the last days of first century Israel. It’s impossible.

When we ignore the words of the scripture, the words of Christ apply, “O fools, and slow of hear to believe all that the prophets have spoken” (Luke 24:25)