tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1716815605967465685.post3895535185175786787..comments2023-12-18T05:36:36.374-05:00Comments on The Biblio-Files: Last Things FirstEronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01644110164885028118noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1716815605967465685.post-24689046312295676052007-07-01T23:34:00.000-04:002007-07-01T23:34:00.000-04:00Steven, It seems that the first part of your post...Steven,<BR/> It seems that the first part of your post is cut off. I suppose the answer to your question is bound up with the already/not yet tension that pervades the NT. What is your proposal?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04707821779840617967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1716815605967465685.post-83575582269847654362007-07-01T03:54:00.000-04:002007-07-01T03:54:00.000-04:00age.'2 Peter 3'3 First of all, you must understand...age.'<BR/><BR/>2 Peter 3<BR/>'3 First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, "Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation."<BR/><BR/>When some people scoffed that nothing had changed , why didn't the author of 2 Peter point out what had changed with the advent of Jesus, and point out the forthcoming destruction of Jerusalem as a big change, rather than imply that no change would happen for many, many years?<BR/><BR/>Surely the author of 2 Peter could have found some change more recent than the flood with which to refute these scoffers?Steven Carrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11983601793874190779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1716815605967465685.post-49967747009813398992007-07-01T03:53:00.000-04:002007-07-01T03:53:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Steven Carrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11983601793874190779noreply@blogger.com