Dr. Alan Kurschner continues his discussion about Premillennialism in part 2 given at the Things to Come conference at Zion's Hope last January. In this message, he highlights Satan's confinement in the abyss, and asks if it is relative or absolute. How one answers this question is crucial for understanding the End Times.

Marquis Laughlin, founder of Acts of The Word Ministries, continues his chapter-by-chapter Director’s Commentary on the book of Revelation.

In this episode he discusses the culmination of God’s plan for the ages, the end of evil, and the glorious 1000-year reign of Christ found in Chapter 20.

Dr. Alan Kurschner explains many reasons why he embraces Pre-Millennialism. He explains various views on the Millennium, and gives particular emphasis on the victory of Jesus and binding of Satan.

This was Part 1 of 2 parts given at the Things to Come conference at Zion's Hope last January.

Ron Wallace, Bible teacher with  The Bible Fragrances Biblical Studies Institute, contonues with part 5 of Christ's Teachings about His Second Coming.

In this episode, Ron looks at Luke 17:20-37.  He will review what has been taught about the Kingdom of God because of the question to Jesus, "When will the kingdom of God come?"

Ron will also teach about a very important statement made by Jesus: "The days are coming when you will long for one of the days of the Son of Man AND YOU WILL NOT SEE IT."

Dinally, in this passage, we will see proof that the ones who are taken to the side of the Lord at the rapture, mentioned in Matthew 24:40, are not - and cannot be - ones who are taken in judgment as illustrated by the ones taken away at the flood.

Marquis Laughlin, founder of Acts of The Word Ministries, discusses Revelation chapter 19 as part of his Director’s Commentary series.

While addressing several classic misperceptions surrounding Christ’s return to conquer the kings of the earth and reign victoriously, Marquis provides an eye-opening look at the glorious prophecies of our Lord’s future victory over the power of Satan, the Antichrist, and his false prophet.

Dr. Alan Kurschner explained why the Great Commission contradicts pretribulation ‘any moment’ rapture theology. In several of his end-time passages, Jesus uses expressions such as the “end” (telos) and “end of the age” (synteleias tou aiōnos). The Olivet Discourse began with the question from his disciples about the end: “As he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, his disciples came to him privately and said, ‘Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign of your coming (parousia) and of the end of the age?’” (Matt 24:3).

Ron Wallace brings part 4 of his series on Christ’s teachings about His second coming and today will look at two parables of servants in Luke 12: those servants who have trusted in Christ as Savior are the prepared ones, and these will be taken at the rapture when Christ returns. Those servants who have not trusted in Christ are unprepared and will be left behind.

Ron will also give some thoughts about the two Divine mandates, self-defense; those who never heard the gospel, and more on the false theory of degrees of punishment in hell.

Marquis Laughlin, founder of Acts of The Word Ministries, continues his Revelation Director’s Commentary series. Today, he examines Revelation chapter 18 and the fall of Mystery Babylon the Great.

When does this major prophetic event unfold? How does it affect the world and the reign of the antichrist?

Dr. Alan Kurschner addressed the predictive prophecy by Jesus about the apostle Paul in Acts 23:11: “The following night the Lord stood near Paul and said, “Have courage, for just as you have testified about me in Jerusalem, so you must also testify in Rome” (cf. Acts 19:21).

The evening after Paul spoke in front of the Sanhedrin, the risen Lord gave him a prophecy that he “must” [dei] testify in Rome. This prophecy no doubt encouraged Paul in his ensuing hardships keeping the faith and being a bold witness to fulfill God’s purposes in his ministry. It would be a few years before this prophecy was fulfilled. The implications this has on the belief in imminence are evident: Jesus would not return for his church during this period. God’s will during Paul’s ministry would not be to send his Son back to rapture the church. His will was for Paul to spread the good news of his Son throughout the regions of the Roman Empire. But not only in the Roman Empire, but to proclaim the gospel to Caesar himself. “For last night an angel of the God to whom I belong and whom I serve came to me and said, ‘Do not be afraid, Paul! You must stand before Caesar, and God has graciously granted you the safety of all who are sailing with you.’” (Acts 27:23–24)

This prophecy was given to Paul during a storm on the sea as they were sailing to Rome. The prophesy states that Paul “must [dei] stand before Caesar” to testify of the gospel. God ordained that the Jewish apostle Paul would testify before the Gentile Roman Caesar, proclaiming the Name above all Names. So once again, this similar prophecy indubitably contradicts imminence theology. Jesus’ return was not imminent.

A possible objection to this (as well as to the prophecy about Peter’s death above) is the claim that God “secretly” gave Paul this prophecy; therefore, imminence can still be intact. This is a strained and illogical attempt to maintain imminence for the following reasons: (1) the biblical fact remains that Jesus could not return before this prophecy took place; (2) it impugns the character of God by making him contradict himself, telling Paul one thing and the church the opposite; (3) the prophecy given to Paul was not kept in “secret.” He openly shared it with the ship’s crew in order to encourage them that God would keep them safe (Acts 27:23–26). And even if he had not shared the prophecy, that would not make a difference one way or the other. The prophecy was a promise by God, and he would not break it.

I want to make one further point. Pretribulationism claims that Paul taught imminence in his first epistle to the Thessalonians. They reason that since Paul does not mention the great tribulation before the occurrence of the rapture in his epistle, therefore the rapture is imminent. Notwithstanding the glaring fallacy of this argument by silence, that was not the purpose for Paul writing his epistle. He was addressing the consternation of the Thessalonians who had loved ones that recently died. Paul was reassuring them that they would see them again. So there was no reason for Paul to address what would or would not happen before the rapture. That is a pretribulation presupposition being read into the text. Ironically, it would be his second epistle to the Thessalonians, where he teaches that the Antichrist will arrive before the rapture. But here is my point: How could Paul teach imminence in First Thessalonians since years later, after he penned the epistle, he would receive a prophecy from the Lord stating that he would testify in Rome before Caesar? In other words, the prophecies about him testifying in Rome contradicts that Paul was teaching imminence in his Thessalonian epistle.

In conclusion, this prophecy about Paul testifying in Rome undermines the notion that the rapture could happen during Paul’s ministry before he testified in Rome before Caesar. The Roman wheels of justice moved slowly, so it would take not days, weeks,

Dr. Alan Kurschner addressed the predictive prophecy by Jesus about the apostle Paul in Acts 23:11: “The following night the Lord stood near Paul and said, “Have courage, for just as you have testified about me in Jerusalem, so you must also testify in Rome” (cf. Acts 19:21).

The evening after Paul spoke in front of the Sanhedrin, the risen Lord gave him a prophecy that he “must” [dei] testify in Rome. This prophecy no doubt encouraged Paul in his ensuing hardships keeping the faith and being a bold witness to fulfill God’s purposes in his ministry. It would be a few years before this prophecy was fulfilled. The implications this has on the belief in imminence are evident: Jesus would not return for his church during this period. God’s will during Paul’s ministry would not be to send his Son back to rapture the church. His will was for Paul to spread the good news of his Son throughout the regions of the Roman Empire. But not only in the Roman Empire, but to proclaim the gospel to Caesar himself. “For last night an angel of the God to whom I belong and whom I serve came to me and said, ‘Do not be afraid, Paul! You must stand before Caesar, and God has graciously granted you the safety of all who are sailing with you.’” (Acts 27:23–24)

This prophecy was given to Paul during a storm on the sea as they were sailing to Rome. The prophesy states that Paul “must [dei] stand before Caesar” to testify of the gospel. God ordained that the Jewish apostle Paul would testify before the Gentile Roman Caesar, proclaiming the Name above all Names. So once again, this similar prophecy indubitably contradicts imminence theology. Jesus’ return was not imminent.

A possible objection to this (as well as to the prophecy about Peter’s death above) is the claim that God “secretly” gave Paul this prophecy; therefore, imminence can still be intact. This is a strained and illogical attempt to maintain imminence for the following reasons: (1) the biblical fact remains that Jesus could not return before this prophecy took place; (2) it impugns the character of God by making him contradict himself, telling Paul one thing and the church the opposite; (3) the prophecy given to Paul was not kept in “secret.” He openly shared it with the ship’s crew in order to encourage them that God would keep them safe (Acts 27:23–26). And even if he had not shared the prophecy, that would not make a difference one way or the other. The prophecy was a promise by God, and he would not break it.

I want to make one further point. Pretribulationism claims that Paul taught imminence in his first epistle to the Thessalonians. They reason that since Paul does not mention the great tribulation before the occurrence of the rapture in his epistle, therefore the rapture is imminent. Notwithstanding the glaring fallacy of this argument by silence, that was not the purpose for Paul writing his epistle. He was addressing the consternation of the Thessalonians who had loved ones that recently died. Paul was reassuring them that they would see them again. So there was no reason for Paul to address what would or would not happen before the rapture. That is a pretribulation presupposition being read into the text. Ironically, it would be his second epistle to the Thessalonians, where he teaches that the Antichrist will arrive before the rapture. But here is my point: How could Paul teach imminence in First Thessalonians since years later, after he penned the epistle, he would receive a prophecy from the Lord stating that he would testify in Rome before Caesar? In other words, the prophecies about him testifying in Rome contradicts that Paul was teaching imminence in his Thessalonian epistle.

In conclusion, this prophecy about Paul testifying in Rome undermines the notion that the rapture could happen during Paul’s ministry before he testified in Rome before Caesar. The Roman wheels of justice moved slowly, so it would take not days, weeks,