The 1000 year Millennium from the Bible

[EarlyActs]

TMSO,
here is the short from of my material on Dan 9:






The grammatical difficulty of the passage is that the antecedent that switches at v27b to the evil figure of 8:13+. I have spent about 40 years looking into things here. Here is a well-navigated translation that keeps Messiah, Rome and the evil person distinct as intended:

v24 In 490 years from the return, Messiah will make atonement and bring in righteousness, the righteousness of God, Romans 1:16, 3:21.

v25 The rebuilt temple will include a plaza and will be a defensive structure (it was both).

v26 After 483 years, Messiah will be cut off, but that will not be for himself. Rome (the last of the 4 powers of Dan 2) will come and destroy the city and the sanctuary. The destruction will be like a quick flood. There will be a decreed war until the end.

v27 Messiah will confirm the covenant of Israel--show that what he just accomplished was promised to Abraham from the beginning. This was done through his teaching on both sides of his death (40 days of intense instruction after his death & Res before Pentecost).

V27b Meanwhile the evil person of 8:13 will come doing a new kind of abomination ('on the wings'), but the decree against him will hold (I Thess 'you know what restrains him' comforted the readers) and will destroy him.

Josephus commented on this in his history of the Jewish War (66-73AD); he was a trained priest and this was the accepted understanding of Dan 9 in yeshiva. So the set of questions that start Mt 24 etc are on this topic: IOW, when does the 'end' of Dan 9 happen?

There is much more in my THE COVENANT REVOLT at Amazon. My master's thesis work was on the relation between Luke-Acts and the revolt. Luke is the last of the parallel gospels and says the most on the topic.

The important overall thrust of Dan 9 is that Israel is ruined, but Messiah's accomplishment stands and is eternal. Not quite the answer Daniel was seeking.

 

[TMSO]

Yes Acts 3 declares that those who did not follow the new Moses would be degrading Lu disinherited.

And Paul said, God can/does easily put them back in, even easier then putting the Gentiles in.

". 23 And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’ 24 Yes, and all the prophets, from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also [f]foretold these days. 25 You are sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’ 26 To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.”"

To the Jews first. Hmm... sounds like even Peter himself acknowledged the two programs through the Holy Spirit. That is pretty final, I think. I mean, it is understood then that it is to the Gentiles, second.

 

[EarlyActs]

And Paul said, God can/does easily put them back in, even easier then putting the Gentiles in.

". 23 And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’ 24 Yes, and all the prophets, from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also [f]foretold these days. 25 You are sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’ 26 To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.”"

To the Jews first. Hmm... sounds like even Peter himself acknowledged the two programs through the Holy Spirit. That is pretty final, I think. I mean, it is understood then that it is to the Gentiles, second.

But just a few posts ago you did not think there were 2 programs!

No, it is not a program! It is simply the fact that they were the most familiar with the written revelation (Rom 9:1+), and had the promised lineage, but that is not a "theology" program with 2 salvations, temples, peoples, atonements etc. The damage that D'ism has done it is that is has people "listening" for what it said made sense, instead of to the passage.

Peter means the message was supposed to secure a solid base among Jews who would be missionaries. Then all were to reach the known world, having been kick-started by the returnees from Pentecost and their describing what happened (Jesus and the Pentecost event). This broadly launched the world mission. It reached from Spain to India in the first generation. And these 'whole world' terms are relative to them; God would take care of the rest of the pagan world, which Peter knew (1 P 3, etc).

Even the expression 'four corners of the earth' can be an argument for a smaller world, because it was derived visually.

btw, after 40 years of research with a master's, you can save yourself pasting a passage. Bold font does not mean the sense of the text has been observed.

Have you ever been in a group conversation where someone said 'we are going to the beach.' That does not mean that everyone in the group is. To go to the Gentiles does not end going to the Jews, nor reverse. It is a silly category of thought. It supposes God is a one-act-at-a-time clod, which is entirely against both testaments.

 

[EarlyActs]

TMSO,
The Lk 23 quote of Hos 10 is additionally signficant because Hosea laments how evil Israel was and its alliances, and ends by saying that the king of Israel would be completely destroyed. Many of these passages have a natural fit to the decisive generation of the 1st century than the future.

 

[EarlyActs]

And Paul said, God can/does easily put them back in, even easier then putting the Gentiles in.

". 23 And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’ 24 Yes, and all the prophets, from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also [f]foretold these days. 25 You are sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’ 26 To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.”"

To the Jews first. Hmm... sounds like even Peter himself acknowledged the two programs through the Holy Spirit. That is pretty final, I think. I mean, it is understood then that it is to the Gentiles, second.

I don't think the re-joining was easier than Gentiles, but that once they believed, there was a productive advantage. Notice in 11:14 that he does not believe that very many will believe. ('the hope that some will be saved.').

 

[TMSO]

But just a few posts ago you did not think there were 2 programs!

No, it is not a program! It is simply the fact that they were the most familiar with the written revelation (Rom 9:1+), and had the promised lineage, but that is not a "theology" program with 2 salvations, temples, peoples, atonements etc. The damage that D'ism has done it is that is has people "listening" for what it said made sense, instead of to the passage.

It's clear. Jews first. What does that mean? Gentiles second. The fact that you ignore what the Holy Spirit said is telling. Again, it is one program with two parts, if you see redemption as a program. If you see redemption as a plan instead, then two programs. (Actually, I think covenenant theology and dispensationalism each say SEVEN. A little more than two.

Peter means the message was supposed to secure a solid base among Jews who would be missionaries.

Peter's purpose was for the salvation of the Jews. Peter did not have the vision from God yet. To Peter, the gospel was for the Jews. It wasn't until Cornelius that He saw the deeper purpose of God. And his thoughts were not verified until the Gentiles also spoke in tongues, showing that the Gentiles received the same spirit as the Jews.

Then all were to reach the known world, having been kick-started by the returnees from Pentecost and their describing what happened (Jesus and the Pentecost event). This broadly launched the world mission. It reached from Spain to India in the first generation. And these 'whole world' terms are relative to them; God would take care of the rest of the pagan world, which Peter knew (1 P 3, etc).

Even the expression 'four corners of the earth' can be an argument for a smaller world, because it was derived visually.

What was taught in the past was that AD 70 and everything around it happened so as to scatter Christians who did not leave Jerusalem, out into the world. Jesus had commanded that they wait at Jerusalem only until the Holy Spirit came, and then to go out into the world.

btw, after 40 years of research with a master's, you can save yourself pasting a passage. Bold font does not mean the sense of the text has been observed.

Have you ever been in a group conversation where someone said 'we are going to the beach.' That does not mean that everyone in the group is. To go to the Gentiles does not end going to the Jews, nor reverse. It is a silly category of thought. It supposes God is a one-act-at-a-time clod, which is entirely against both testaments.

This is a silly argument, which undermines both covenant theology and dispensationalism.

 

[3 Resurrections]

It has been assumed that the one who restrains lawlessness is the Holy Spirit. It is actually more likely then what you said. A lot more likely.

It's not even possible that the restrainer would be the Holy Spirit, because the restrainer was a person who would be taken out of the way, and the Holy Spirit is never taken away from this world; Christ promised the Holy Spirit would remain with the believers forever.

You also wrote "I read another comment you wrote elsewhere that said you scoured the Old Testament for such a reference, and could only find reference in Matthew 17." To that I would reply, no, I don't remember ever writing that. You are mistaken. There are both OT and NT references to the "kings of the earth" or the "kings" being the high priests of the land of Israel. And I never said the high priests instituted the tax. But their agents did collect it for them to bring the funds to Jerusalem for the temple upkeep. The high priests as the "ruler of the people" were responsible to see that God's commands for this were carried out.

Apparently you don't understand where all of this is coming from. The moment Jesus left, we entered the end times. There is no waiting for when the end times started, it started the moment He left. And it is still going on.

No, the last days did not continue for some 2,000 years and counting. As soon as Jesus entered His earthly ministry, this was the "last days" when God was speaking unto humanity by His Son (Hebrews 1:2). Those "last days" had advanced into the "LAST HOUR" by the time 1 John was being written. That "LAST HOUR" has not been lingering for 2,000 years and counting. It ended back in the first century when the "end of all things is at hand", or was presently taking place back then. We are now in one of the "ages to come" which Paul wrote about.

The words "AT HAND" God interpreted for us back in Ezekiel 12:21-28 as events being fulfilled in the same days as when He first gives a prophecy about them. For an "at hand" prophecy prediction, God not only speaks the word, but He also performs it "in your days" to the ones first hearing that prophecy. The "at hand" prophecy is NOT "prolonged" into "times that are far off". The passage about the "thousand years as one day" doesn't mean timespans are irrelevant to God. It means that a prophecy given a thousand years in advance is just as surely fulfilled by God as a prophecy given one day in advance. This verse is usually butchered in its interpretation.

 

[TMSO]

It's not even possible that the restrainer would be the Holy Spirit, because the restrainer was a person who would be taken out of the way, and the Holy Spirit is never taken away from this world; Christ promised the Holy Spirit would remain with the believers forever.

I forgot that you aren't trinitarian. I believe the Holy Spirit is the third person of the trinity. And again, the rapture occurs when the Holy Spirit is removed from the position of restraining, because the Holy Spirit remains with believers.

You also wrote "I read another comment you wrote elsewhere that said you scoured the Old Testament for such a reference, and could only find reference in Matthew 17." To that I would reply, no, I don't remember ever writing that. You are mistaken. There are both OT and NT references to the "kings of the earth" or the "kings" being the high priests of the land of Israel. And I never said the high priests instituted the tax. But their agents did collect it for them to bring the funds to Jerusalem for the temple upkeep. The high priests as the "ruler of the people" were responsible to see that God's commands for this were carried out.

They collected it for the one who instituted it. If the high priests did not institute it, they are just agents of the one who instituted it. And, I started another post that lists every reference in the whole Bible where the words "kings of the earth" are found together. I read them all. All of them speak to actual kings of countries. And even the lexicon states that the understanding of the word in Matthew 17 is the sphere within which we live, the Earth. That is, kings of the earth is not speaking of a location, such as Israel. It is speaking of the earth.

No, the last days did not continue for some 2,000 years and counting.

Wow. Such finality in the face of scripture. Okay.

As soon as Jesus entered His earthly ministry, this was the "last days" when God was speaking unto humanity by His Son (Hebrews 1:2). Those "last days" had advanced into the "LAST HOUR" by the time 1 John was being written. That "LAST HOUR" has not been lingering for 2,000 years and counting. It ended back in the first century when the "end of all things is at hand", or was presently taking place back then. We are now in one of the "ages to come" which Paul wrote about.

The end would be the end. We wouldn't be here, because the end speaks of finality. I would post those passages, but you would just misinterpret those as well.

The words "AT HAND" God interpreted for us back in Ezekiel 12:21-28 as events being fulfilled in the same days as when He first gives a prophecy about them. For an "at hand" prophecy prediction, God not only speaks the word, but He also performs it "in your days" to the ones first hearing that prophecy. The "at hand" prophecy is NOT "prolonged" into "times that are far off". The passage about the "thousand years as one day" doesn't mean timespans are irrelevant to God

Yes, actually it does mean taht timespans are irrelevant to God. I mean, He already changed a week into seven years. They are irrelevant to God because He doesn't exist in time. He is an eternal being.

It means that a prophecy given a thousand years in advance is just as surely fulfilled by God as a prophecy given one day in advance. This verse is usually butchered in its interpretation.

As you butchered it here. Peter is saying that while they are hearing soon, God is not affected by time, and while it may be a while, God is not being slack in His promise. Peter is talking to people who may fall away if they keep hearing the scoffers saying, where is His coming, if Jesus doesn't come. Peter is saying, God has not forgotten. He isn't being slack. God has His purpose in tarrying. The salvation of the elect.

 

[EarlyActs]

It's clear. Jews first. What does that mean? Gentiles second. The fact that you ignore what the Holy Spirit said is telling. Again, it is one program with two parts, if you see redemption as a program. If you see redemption as a plan instead, then two programs. (Actually, I think covenenant theology and dispensationalism each say SEVEN. A little more than two.

Peter's purpose was for the salvation of the Jews. Peter did not have the vision from God yet. To Peter, the gospel was for the Jews. It wasn't until Cornelius that He saw the deeper purpose of God. And his thoughts were not verified until the Gentiles also spoke in tongues, showing that the Gentiles received the same spirit as the Jews.

What was taught in the past was that AD 70 and everything around it happened so as to scatter Christians who did not leave Jerusalem, out into the world. Jesus had commanded that they wait at Jerusalem only until the Holy Spirit came, and then to go out into the world.



This is a silly argument, which undermines both covenant theology and dispensationalism.

You cannot make a program or part out of the first-second thing. They did not have electronic media. But the launch through the refiners from Pentecost was fast enough. Gods plan was always including the Gentiles.

You don’t sound like you know what the’sebomai’ were—Likes term for Gentiles who feared God and came to synagogue. The issue was whether total Torah was necessary for salvation. Judaism said yes, Christians said Acts 15.

 

[EarlyActs]

It's clear. Jews first. What does that mean? Gentiles second. The fact that you ignore what the Holy Spirit said is telling. Again, it is one program with two parts, if you see redemption as a program. If you see redemption as a plan instead, then two programs. (Actually, I think covenenant theology and dispensationalism each say SEVEN. A little more than two.

Peter's purpose was for the salvation of the Jews. Peter did not have the vision from God yet. To Peter, the gospel was for the Jews. It wasn't until Cornelius that He saw the deeper purpose of God. And his thoughts were not verified until the Gentiles also spoke in tongues, showing that the Gentiles received the same spirit as the Jews.

What was taught in the past was that AD 70 and everything around it happened so as to scatter Christians who did not leave Jerusalem, out into the world. Jesus had commanded that they wait at Jerusalem only until the Holy Spirit came, and then to go out into the world.



This is a silly argument, which undermines both covenant theology and dispensationalism.

There were Gentiles on Pentecost who did, because there were ‘sebomai’ God-fearing there. There are no black and white categories.

 

[EarlyActs]

It's clear. Jews first. What does that mean? Gentiles second. The fact that you ignore what the Holy Spirit said is telling. Again, it is one program with two parts, if you see redemption as a program. If you see redemption as a plan instead, then two programs. (Actually, I think covenenant theology and dispensationalism each say SEVEN. A little more than two.

Peter's purpose was for the salvation of the Jews. Peter did not have the vision from God yet. To Peter, the gospel was for the Jews. It wasn't until Cornelius that He saw the deeper purpose of God. And his thoughts were not verified until the Gentiles also spoke in tongues, showing that the Gentiles received the same spirit as the Jews.

What was taught in the past was that AD 70 and everything around it happened so as to scatter Christians who did not leave Jerusalem, out into the world. Jesus had commanded that they wait at Jerusalem only until the Holy Spirit came, and then to go out into the world.



This is a silly argument, which undermines both covenant theology and dispensationalism.

You can’t make missionaries out of people who have no background, so to get off to an effective start ‘to the ends of the earth’ you had to start with Jews. But if a Gentiles was advanced in study like Apollos , they could start earlier. There are no black and white boxes of these things.

 

[EarlyActs]

It's clear. Jews first. What does that mean? Gentiles second. The fact that you ignore what the Holy Spirit said is telling. Again, it is one program with two parts, if you see redemption as a program. If you see redemption as a plan instead, then two programs. (Actually, I think covenenant theology and dispensationalism each say SEVEN. A little more than two.

Peter's purpose was for the salvation of the Jews. Peter did not have the vision from God yet. To Peter, the gospel was for the Jews. It wasn't until Cornelius that He saw the deeper purpose of God. And his thoughts were not verified until the Gentiles also spoke in tongues, showing that the Gentiles received the same spirit as the Jews.

What was taught in the past was that AD 70 and everything around it happened so as to scatter Christians who did not leave Jerusalem, out into the world. Jesus had commanded that they wait at Jerusalem only until the Holy Spirit came, and then to go out into the world.



This is a silly argument, which undermines both covenant theology and dispensationalism.

You don’t understand the spread, the miracle of it. Apostles were spread much further by the Spirit before 70. Paul already said the whole world was reached in 2 passages, Col 1 and I Tim 3.

The evacuation of believers had little mission impact. They went to one town! You don’t know the early history very well. Makes it tiresome. You are too invested in one idea and poorly at that.

 

[EarlyActs]

It's clear. Jews first. What does that mean? Gentiles second. The fact that you ignore what the Holy Spirit said is telling. Again, it is one program with two parts, if you see redemption as a program. If you see redemption as a plan instead, then two programs. (Actually, I think covenenant theology and dispensationalism each say SEVEN. A little more than two.

Peter's purpose was for the salvation of the Jews. Peter did not have the vision from God yet. To Peter, the gospel was for the Jews. It wasn't until Cornelius that He saw the deeper purpose of God. And his thoughts were not verified until the Gentiles also spoke in tongues, showing that the Gentiles received the same spirit as the Jews.

What was taught in the past was that AD 70 and everything around it happened so as to scatter Christians who did not leave Jerusalem, out into the world. Jesus had commanded that they wait at Jerusalem only until the Holy Spirit came, and then to go out into the world.



This is a silly argument, which undermines both covenant theology and dispensationalism.

I hope it does undermine them both, they are human-made. In traditional logic , quantity always matters. If some Jews believe at any time, then there is no cessation of Gods work with them. That is 2-programism and not in the NT. Paul continued to try to reach Jews for 30 years after being rejected. Hardly black and white thinking. Early Luther believed they could be great evangelists . But they kept being told by others to attach to the land, temple, old covenant. Huge mistake. And 2 programs again!

I have shown this attachment is not possible in their own prophecy in Amos9, Hos 10, Isaiah 61, Mal 3 (the coming glory of Christ the new temple) etc.

The main igniter of N European Jews resettling their land was a 19th cent novelist who lived in a threesome, was a renegade evangelical. G Elliot. She did not envision bringing them together with Christians in the Gospel like Romans does. You might even say her agenda was to get them out of London. Novel: DANIEL DERONDA, also made into a mini series.

Even the evangelical Lord Shaftesbury did not see a Romans-like harmony together , but thought the mission to the Jews was to help them move to Israel , surrounded by hostiles. That’s still the vision of “Christian “ missions now.

The work of Christians is to produce teachers of justification by Christs righteousness and fellowship in that. Not to move a previous lineage of people around in to harms way. How did so many people forget this and forget what Islam is about?

One topic per post please not 4 in one like above.

 

[EarlyActs]

The focus on Israel always was a lesser focus than that of the whole of mankind. Paul worked to show that the Abraham- to-Christ segment was not a fluke from all mankind, but prep for an effective mission to all mankind.

 

[3 Resurrections]

I forgot that you aren't trinitarian.

I never said I did not believe in the Trinity. Please don't put words in my mouth. And how does this really add to the original topic in any case? The "rapture" was never going to remove the Christian gospel influence of living believers with the indwelling Spirit from this world for those who hadn't died yet. It was only to remove the resurrected believers from this planet. Nobody gets off this planet without passing through the one-time required physical death process. There is no translation-type of change for the believers that is ever promised to us so that we do not pass through physical death. This is a figment of people's imaginations and a pipe dream.

Wow. Such finality in the face of scripture. Okay.

It is a finality based on scripture. Those "last days" came to an end back in the first century with "the power of the holy people" being shattered, as Daniel and the Song of Moses both predicted. We today after that first-century ending point are here on the timeline in one of those "ages that are coming" which Paul referenced in Ephesians 2:7.

Yes, actually it does mean taht timespans are irrelevant to God. I mean, He already changed a week into seven years. They are irrelevant to God because He doesn't exist in time. He is an eternal being.

Of course God is an eternal being. But when He chooses to communicate with His creation, He speaks in terms relevant to their status as creatures existing in time that they can understand and count. This is one way He proves His power and deity to us - that He can predict events in advance, whether a millennium in advance or a day in advance, according to 2 Peter 3:8. God boasts of His ability to do this in Isaiah 46:9-10. When God said a prophecy was "AT HAND" He meant that the generation He was giving that prophecy to would experience that prophecy in their own days - not in days "prolonged" into "times that are far off". Ezekiel 12:21-28 is pretty clear on this.

This abbreviated time until Christ's first-century return was emphasized in Hebrews 10:37 which said, "For yet a little while, and He that shall come will come, and will not tarry." The Greek for this phrase "a little while" is very unusual. It is "mikron, hoson, hoson", or "a little time, how little, how little" until Christ's coming. Hebrews was written around AD 64, which left very little time until Christ's AD 70 return.

 

[EarlyActs]

please show why "Thess-chatology" passages must be distant future from their 1st cent. times: I Th 2,4,5 and 2 Th 1,2

 

[TMSO]

There were Gentiles on Pentecost who did, because there were ‘sebomai’ God-fearing there. There are no black and white categories.

"5 And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. 6 And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were confused, because everyone heard them speak in his own language. 7 Then they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, “Look, are not all these who speak Galileans? 8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own [c]language in which we were born? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites, those dwelling in Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya adjoining Cyrene, visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, 11 Cretans and [d]Arabs—we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.” 12 So they were all amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, “Whatever could this mean?”"

Jews. The only mention of anyone different is proselytes, and it doesn't say whether they are Gentiles or not. Once could always ASSUME it means Gentiles. And you made me look up sebomai: to revere, to worship.

This was definitely black and white. Jews and proselytes. In other words, Judaism, or you weren't there. God's law allowed for foreigners to become Jews.

 

[TMSO]

You can’t make missionaries out of people who have no background, so to get off to an effective start ‘to the ends of the earth’ you had to start with Jews. But if a Gentiles was advanced in study like Apollos , they could start earlier. There are no black and white boxes of these things.

The great commission was to the disciples. The apostles. We follow it, but there was no one there to hear it but for the apostles.

 

[TMSO]

You don’t understand the spread, the miracle of it. Apostles were spread much further by the Spirit before 70. Paul already said the whole world was reached in 2 passages, Col 1 and I Tim 3.

He was speaking of the world they knew. Jesus was literally speaking about the whole world hearing the gospel before He returns.

The evacuation of believers had little mission impact. They went to one town! You don’t know the early history very well. Makes it tiresome. You are too invested in one idea and poorly at that.

One of the apostles made his way towards England. That doesn't sound like one town. (I forget who it was.)

 

[TMSO]

I never said I did not believe in the Trinity. Please don't put words in my mouth. And how does this really add to the original topic in any case?

You were the one who said the Holy Spirit isn't a person. I was just pointing that out.

The "rapture" was never going to remove the Christian gospel influence of living believers with the indwelling Spirit from this world for those who hadn't died yet. It was only to remove the resurrected believers from this planet.

No believers have been resurrected yet. That doesn't happen until another time. Why do I say that? Because everyone else left autmatically faces the second death. Don't you want a chance not to.

Nobody gets off this planet without passing through the one-time required physical death process. There is no translation-type of change for the believers that is ever promised to us so that we do not pass through physical death. This is a figment of people's imaginations and a pipe dream.

Well, that proves a lack of knowledge. TWO people left the planet without passing through death, and some say three. Enoch and Elijah. That is why I believe they will be the two witnesses in Revelation. It is then they will die. Thus the scripture is fulfilled. Your belief leaves two people who never die.

It is a finality based on scripture. Those "last days" came to an end back in the first century with "the power of the holy people" being shattered, as Daniel and the Song of Moses both predicted. We today after that first-century ending point are here on the timeline in one of those "ages that are coming" which Paul referenced in Ephesians 2:7.

LAST days. If they were the last days, how did we end up with a over 750000 more days? The age that is to come is after this world passes away. We are still in this age.

Of course God is an eternal being. But when He chooses to communicate with His creation, He speaks in terms relevant to their status as creatures existing in time that they can understand and count. This is one way He proves His power and deity to us - that He can predict events in advance, whether a millennium in advance or a day in advance, according to 2 Peter 3:8.

God isn't PREDICTING anything. He is telling us what He will do. What He isn't telling us in this case is... when. That is not what Peter is saying. While to us a day is a big deal, to God it carries as little notice as a thousand years. That is what Peter is saying. If God wants to wait for a thousand years, to Him it will be as though He waited a day. If He waited a day, it would be as though He waitied a thousand years. That is how little note time has to God.

God boasts of His ability to do this in Isaiah 46:9-10. When God said a prophecy was "AT HAND" He meant that the generation He was giving that prophecy to would experience that prophecy in their own days - not in days "prolonged" into "times that are far off". Ezekiel 12:21-28 is pretty clear on this.

Except that we are not told anything about the end, because not even Jesus knows. We don't know when this comes to pass. It will just happen. And when it is all over, as scripture says, the world and all the elements, the whole of creation, will melt with fervent heat. The last days truly are the last. When it is all over, everything is supposed to be as it was before Adam fell. I look around me, and it isn't.

This abbreviated time until Christ's first-century return was emphasized in Hebrews 10:37 which said, "For yet a little while, and He that shall come will come, and will not tarry." The Greek for this phrase "a little while" is very unusual. It is "mikron, hoson, hoson", or "a little time, how little, how little" until Christ's coming. Hebrews was written around AD 64, which left very little time until Christ's AD 70 return.

If it is like soon, soon can last thousands of years if you don't know when it is going to happen. The guy who knows just keeps telling you "soon" until it happens. Why? They want you anticipating the event every moment of your existence.