A basic flaw in Partial Preterist interpretation

sovereigngrace said:

This restrainer is the Holy Spirit. This is speaking of the last preparation for battle before the climactic Coming of Christ.

Satan is bound, having only such power as God grants him. Whenever God is ready, he will remove the restrainer; that is, the Holy Spirit will be taken out of the way (2 Thessalonians 2:7). Then, says Paul, the lawless one will be given full power to deceive them that perish.

Click to expand...

Although I believe this to be true, I can't explain how the Holy Spirit can be taken out of the way while:

1) as God, the Holy Spirit is omnipresent; and especially that

2) the Holy Spirit dwells in believers who will remain on earth (not raptured before tribulations)?

Andrewn said:

Although I believe this to be true, I can't explain how the Holy Spirit can be taken out of the way

Click to expand...

That's because there is nothing to try and explain, since no one is even being taken out of the way in that verse. If one looks at the Greek in that verse, no one is being taken out of the way. If one ignores the Greek and sticks solely to the English transalation, one is naturally going to think someone is taken out of the way, thus ending up with all kinds of wild theories, such as the Holy Spirit being taken out of the way, etc.

2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken(ginomai) out of the way.


ginomai

a prolongation and middle voice form of a primary verb; to cause to be ("gen"-erate), i.e. (reflexively) to become (come into being), used with great latitude (literal, figurative, intensive, etc.):--arise, be assembled, be(-come, -fall, -have self), be brought (to pass), (be) come (to pass), continue, be divided, draw, be ended, fall, be finished, follow, be found, be fulfilled, + God forbid, grow, happen, have, be kept, be made, be married, be ordained to be, partake, pass, be performed, be published, require, seem, be showed, X soon as it was, sound, be taken, be turned, use, wax, will, would, be wrought.


I just did some Googling and found the following article that appears to agree with how I have been understanding this verse for ages, or that I agree with it, how ever one wants to look at it.

-----------------------------------

What we have heard for years is that something is removed or "taken out of the way," and that has been variously applied to the removal of a restrainer, such as the rapture of the Church before the tribulation, the Holy Spirit, and good government. Green's translation paints a totally different picture. I believe it is right because of the 709-1 ratio. What "until it comes out of the midst" means is that something comes to be, it becomes, or is birthed out of the midst of something else. In this case, the full-fledged apostasy would come on the scene out of the working of lawlessness, its secret goal. Notice the definitions for genomai. Its various shades of meaning point to something that comes into existence, begins to be, or receives being; something arises and so appears in history, coming upon the world stage, etc. The idea and implication of something being "taken away" or "being removed" is not present at all in this section of the verse. In fact, it depicts the opposite: it becomes and remains, i.e., until the Lord returns in the day of the Lord. If all this be true, then Michael could not be the restrainer.

So, Satan is working to bring forth a full-fledged apostasy until it is given birth, which in turn sets the scene for the man of sin, the Beast, to become, to come into existence, begin to be, receive being, arise and so appear in history, to come upon the world stage out of the apostasy. What Paul then tells us in verse 8 ("And then 'the Lawless One' will be revealed") flows out of verse 7. In 7, the apostasy is birthed and in verse 8, evolves to its full potential, the Antichrist is "revealed" as such and continues until the Lord, in the day of the Lord, returns and "slays" him:
Part 5: Nothing Is Removed In 2 Thessalonians 2:7

DavidPT said:

What we have heard for years is that something is removed or "taken out of the way," and that has been variously applied to the removal of a restrainer, such as the rapture of the Church before the tribulation, the Holy Spirit, and good government. Green's translation paints a totally different picture. I believe it is right because of the 709-1 ratio. What "until it comes out of the midst" means is that something comes to be, it becomes, or is birthed out of the midst of something else.

Click to expand...

Green's Literal Translation reads:

2Th 2:6 And now you know the thing holding back, for him to be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness already is working, only he is holding back now, until it comes out of the midst.

Compare this to the Evangelical Heritage Bible:

2Th 2:6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 In fact, the mystery of this lawlessness is already at work, but only until the one who is now holding him back moves out of the way.

All the translations and commentaries I checked, including Green's, have something (v. 6) or someone (v. 7) restraining this evil. Some commentaries say it could have been Seneca and his cousin Gallio. Other commentaries say it could be Roman law in general. I think @jgr upholds this view. But both you and @sovereigngrace uphold a futurist interpretation of this passage.

Your answer reminded me of the possibility of Archangel Michael being the restrainer. I had forgotten that interpretation. Michael and his army chained the satan. So why wouldn't he be the one standing in the way of evil?

The wisdom and insight of Church Fathers:

Tertullian (2nd-3rd Century)
ON THE RESURRECTION, CHAP. XXIV
For the mystery of iniquity doth already work; only he who now hinders must hinder, until he be taken out of the way." What obstacle is there but the Roman state, the falling away of which, by being scattered into ten kingdoms, shall introduce Antichrist upon (its own ruins)?
APOLOGY, CHAP. XXXII.
There is also another and a greater necessity for our offering prayer in behalf of the emperors, nay, for the complete stability of the empire, and for Roman interests in general. For we know that a mighty shock im (43) pending over the whole earth--in fact, the very end of all things threatening dreadful woes---is only retarded by the continued existence of the Roman empire.

John Chrysostom (c. 347-407)
Homilies on Second Thessalonians
HOMILY IV. 2 THESSALONIANS ii. 6--9.
"Only there is one that restraineth now, until he be taken out of the way," that is, when the Roman empire is taken out of the way...

Augustine of Hippo (345 - 430)
City of God, Book XX, Chapter 19
For what does he [Paul] mean by "For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now holdeth, let him hold until he be taken out of the way: and then shall the wicked be revealed?" [2 Thess 2] I frankly confess I do not know what he means. ... However, it is not absurd to believe that these words of the apostle, "Only he who now holdeth, let him hold until he be taken out of the way," refer to the Roman empire, as if it were said, "Only he who now reigneth, let him reign until he be taken out of the way." "And then shall the wicked be revealed:" no one doubts that this means Antichrist.

While not commenting directly upon the 2 Thessalonians 2 passage, Cyril of Jerusalem affirmed the historical consensus that antichrist would not appear until the Roman empire had disappeared:

Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 315-386)
Catechetical Lectures
LECTURE XV.
ON THE CLAUSE, AND SHALL COME IN GLORY TO JUDGE THE QUICK AND THE DEAD; OF WHOSE KINGDOM THERE SHALL BE NO END, DANIEL vii. 9--14.
12. But this aforesaid Antichrist is to come when the times of the Roman empire shall have been fulfilled...

The early church believed that the imperial Roman empire, under which the church was then living, was the restrainer which would eventually be "taken out of the way", and which was forestalling the emergence of the papal Roman empire, which Paul describes as the lawless one; and its eventual apostasy. Notice in the related verses in 2 Thess. 2 that Paul does not reveal the identity of the restrainer. If Paul had believed that the Holy Spirit or the Church was the restrainer, there would have been no reason for him not to explicitly name either one. But Paul did have a reason. John Chrysostom reveals it:

"Because if he meant to say the Spirit, he would not have spoken obscurely, but plainly, that even now the grace of the Spirit, that is the gifts, withhold him...But because he said this of the Roman empire, he naturally glanced at it, and speaks covertly and darkly. For he did not wish to bring upon himself superfluous enmities, and useless dangers. For if he had said that after a little while the Roman empire would be dissolved, they would immediately have even overwhelmed him, as a pestilent person, and all the faithful, as living and warring to this end."

Paul did not wish to jeopardize the Church by attracting the attention of the Roman authorities.

History subsequently confirmed the validity of Paul's inspired prescience.

sovereigngrace said:

This restrainer is the Holy Spirit. This is speaking of the last preparation for battle before the climactic Coming of Christ. Satan is bound, having only such power as God grants him. Whenever God is ready, he will remove the restrainer; that is, the Holy Spirit will be taken out of the way (2 Thessalonians 2:7).

Click to expand...

sovereigngrace said:

The Holy Spirit is a restraint to man and society. John Calvin called this common grace. If God takes a step back at the end then it will be ugly. We are seeing that happening.

Click to expand...

jgr said:

The early church believed that the imperial Roman empire, under which the church was then living, was the restrainer which would eventually be "taken out of the way", and which was forestalling the emergence of the papal Roman empire, which Paul describes as the lawless one; and its eventual apostasy. Notice in the related verses in 2 Thess. 2 that Paul does not reveal the identity of the restrainer. If Paul had believed that the Holy Spirit or the Church was the restrainer, there would have been no reason for him not to explicitly name either one. But Paul did have a reason. John Chrysostom reveals it:

Click to expand...

John Chrysostom, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Augustine of Hippo lived after the Emperor Constantine the Great changed the attitude of the Roman Empire toward Christianity. It was natural that they would be optimistic about the Empire, almost equating it with the Church.

Tertullian was an earlier Church Father who wrote in Latin. Unlike many Church fathers, Tertullian was never recognized as a saint by the Eastern or Western catholic tradition churches. Several of his teachings on issues contradicted the doctrines of these traditions. Even if he truly wrote the words attributed to him, he would still remain in the minority. One has to remember that writings attributed to him show uncommon views on other subjects, e.g. Millennialism, condemnation of remarriage for widows, and fleeing from persecution.

So, the question is really about what Church Fathers thought before Constantine ended the fierce Roman persecution of Christians and declared tolerance for Christianity in 313 AD. What we find is that most of them viewed the restrainer as the Holy Spirit acting through the Church. Also, one has to remember that in the same chapter, 2Thess 2, the Apostle makes it clear that the coming of the lawless one follows a great apostasy. This sounds like a problem in the Church, rather than a problem in the Roman Empire.

The following article gives abundant quotations from Ignatius of Antioch, who wrote around AD 110, and others:

Bible Foregrounds 1: The "Restrainer" in 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7

claninja said:

As soon as we stop using scripture to interpret scripture, we can make it about anything we want, and we become the determiners for how biblical prophecy is fulfilled, instead of the Bible.

Click to expand...

The moment you stop doing that then, the better understanding you'll have, because you won't be using Preterism as your gauge for everything written. Like I said, the Hosea 10:8 event of those who hide when God rises up off His throne to shake this earth at the end, HAS NOT HAPPENED YET. That is the timing the Hosea 10:8 verse is pointing to.

Isa 2:19-21
19 And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of His majesty, when He ariseth to shake terribly the earth.
20 In that day a man shall cast his idols of silver, and his idols of gold, which they made each one for himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats;
21 To go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of His majesty, when He ariseth to shake terribly the earth.
KJV

Rev 6:14-17
14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
16 And said to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us, and hide us from the face of Him That sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
17 For the great day of His wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?"
KJV

Andrewn said:

Green's Literal Translation reads:

2Th 2:6 And now you know the thing holding back, for him to be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness already is working, only he is holding back now, until it comes out of the midst.

Compare this to the Evangelical Heritage Bible:

2Th 2:6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 In fact, the mystery of this lawlessness is already at work, but only until the one who is now holding him back moves out of the way.

All the translations and commentaries I checked, including Green's, have something (v. 6) or someone (v. 7) restraining this evil. Some commentaries say it could have been Seneca and his cousin Gallio. Other commentaries say it could be Roman law in general. I think @jgr upholds this view. But both you and @sovereigngrace uphold a futurist interpretation of this passage.

Your answer reminded me of the possibility of Archangel Michael being the restrainer. I had forgotten that interpretation. Michael and his army chained the satan. So why wouldn't he be the one standing in the way of evil?

Click to expand...

What's interesting about this, 2 Thessalonians 2 connects with the 42 month reign of the beast in Revelation 13, and that all of this is fulfilled in the end of this age followed by the 2nd coming. That appears to be the position of both Premil and many of those that hold to Amil, yet both positions, though they are basically in agreement about the timing of these events, can't be the correct position, in regards to the timing of the thousand years.

Per Premil the chronology would be----2 Thessalonians 2/Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast---the 2nd coming---the thousand years---satan's little season.


Per Amil, such as SG holds, the chronology would be this---the thousand years---satan's little season/2 Thessalonians 2/Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast----the 2nd coming.


Though it does seem logical that 2 Thessalonians 2 is meaning satan's little season after the the thousand years, we know from Revelation 20:4 it can't actually mean that. That verse tells us the time of the beast and it's 42 month reign are already in the past and fulfilled before satan is ever loosed from the pit. And since 2 Thessalonians 2 is referring to some of the same events that occur during the 42 month reign of the beast, none of this can occur after the thousand years during satan's little season, that according to Revelation 20:4.


2 Thessalonians 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

Compare---the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders(2 Thessalonians 2:9)---with---For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect(Matthew 24:24)----And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon(Revelation 13:11)----And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men-----And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live(Revelation 13:13-14).


As can be seen from the chronology in Revelation 13, a beast has to rise out of the sea first, where one of it's heads has a deadly wound and is healed. Another beast has to rise out of the earth and eventually fulfill----saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live(Revelation 13:14)---before there can even be any martyrs in Revelation 20:4 for refusing to worship this very same beast. Obviously, these martyrs are martyred during the 42 month reign of the beast, then.

What all of this tells us, since 2 Thessalonians 2/Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast can't occur after the thousand years, that according to Revelation 20:4, positions such as SG hold can't possibly be correct, because there is zero way to place the 42 month reign of the beast during satan's little season after the thousand years when Revelation 20:4 is already placing it before satan's little season. Amils such as SG totally disregard these facts, thus insist their position is correct, regardless.

and I saw the souls of them----and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands

When did John see the souls of these that did not worship the beast in Revelation 13? Before satan's little season? Or during satan's little season? Perhaps that's a difficult question for some Amils? Let's make the question easier. Which comes first? The thousand years? Or satan's little season?

and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands(Revelation 20:4)---compare with----saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name(Revelation 13:14-17).

How can what I have underlined in Revelation 20:4 have not occurred because of and during what I have underlined in Revelation 13? How can the 42 month reign of the beast in Revelation 13 occur during satan's little season after the thousand years, when Revelation 20:4 is already placing it as having occurred before satan is ever loosed? How can positions such as SG hold, possibly be correct when they need, not only 2 Thessalonians 2 to occur after the thousand years, they also need the 42 month reign of the beast to occur after the thousand years? Yet Amils such as SG still insist the thousand years precede the 2nd coming, regardless that Revelation 13 and Revelation 20:4 prove otherwise. Amils need to straighten that mess out first, before they can boldly claim their position is the correct one. Claiming without proving is hardly the same thing.

Christian Gedge said:

OK, Satan's little season occurs AFTER the Millennium. But doesn't traditional Amil say that? Or, if not say it explicitly, does not traditional Amil mean that? Then, last of all, the 2nd advent?

Click to expand...

Growing up as a reformed Amil, I was always taught the 2nd coming could happen at any time, thus supporting that the traditional Amil position is that the 1,000 years is symbolic for the time period between the 1st and 2nd advent.

Traditional Amil is that the 2nd coming occurs when the millennium is completed, and therefore any insertion of an event after the millennium, that is not the 2nd coming, means one is not amil according to traditional modern standards.

sovereigngrace said:

The traditional Amil position, is that the millennium/Satan's little season is symbolic of the period between the 1st and 2nd advent of Christ. You should do your research first before speaking on their behalf.

Click to expand...

Right, traditional Amil conflates satan's little season with the millennium, despite revelation clearly stating that satan's little season occurs after the millennium.

revelation 20:3 And he threw him into the Abyss, shut it, and sealed it over him, so that he could not deceive the nations until the thousand years were complete. After that, he must be released for a brief period of time.

Revelation 20:7 When the thousand years are complete, Satan will be released from his prison,

sovereigngrace said:

Satan's little season occurs after the thousand years and before the second coming.

Click to expand...

This isn't the traditional Amil position if you are inserting satan's little season between the completion of the millennium and the 2nd coming.

According to revelation 12, Satan's little season occurs when he is cast out of heaven:

Revelation 12:12-17 Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them!
But woe to the earth and the sea; with great fury the devil has come down to you,
knowing he has only a short time.” And when the dragon saw that he had been thrown to the earth, he pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child. But the woman was given two wings of a great eagle to fly from the presence of the serpent to her place in the wilderness, where she was nourished for a time, and times, and half a time. Then from the mouth of the serpent spewed water like a river to overtake the woman and sweep her away in the torrent. But the earth helped the woman and opened its mouth to swallow up the river that had poured from the dragon’s mouth. And the dragon was enraged at the woman, and went to make war with the rest of her children, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus.

Jesus confirms satan is cast out at his ascension, and satan is coming at his ascension.

John 12:31 Now judgment is upon this world; now the prince of this world will be cast out.

John 14:30 I will not speak with you much longer, for the prince of this world is coming, and he has no claim on Me.

Davy said:

The moment you stop doing that then, the better understanding you'll have, because you won't be using Preterism as your gauge for everything written. Like I said, the Hosea 10:8 event of those who hide when God rises up off His throne to shake this earth at the end, HAS NOT HAPPENED YET. That is the timing the Hosea 10:8 verse is pointing to.

Isa 2:19-21
19 And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of His majesty, when He ariseth to shake terribly the earth.
20 In that day a man shall cast his idols of silver, and his idols of gold, which they made each one for himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats;
21 To go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of His majesty, when He ariseth to shake terribly the earth.
KJV

Rev 6:14-17
14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
16 And said to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us, and hide us from the face of Him That sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
17 For the great day of His wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?"
KJV

Click to expand...

Can you provide non apocalyptic and symbolic scripture to support that your interpretation is correct?


Otherwise, I'll stick with Jesus' application.

Luke 23:28-30 But Jesus turned to them and said, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for Me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. Look, the days are coming when people will say, ‘Blessed are the barren women, the wombs that never bore, and breasts that never nursed.’ At that time ‘they will say to the mountains, “Fall on us!”
and to the hills, “Cover us!”’c

sovereigngrace said:

I don't agree with this opinion.

The early fathers had their different views on this, like every other subject, and every other generation. Most generations think that they are the last generation, and the enemy that they are facing is ultimately the beast, or the antichrist. In this case, they are futurists, looking forward, and speculating. That is all we are looking at.

Augustine of Hippo actually prefaced the commenced you quoted in the City of God, Book XX, Chapter 19 by:

"I frankly confess I do not know what he means. I will nevertheless mention such conjectures as I have heard or read."

He then repeats John Chrysostom's argument:

"Some think that the Apostle Paul referred to the Roman empire, and that he was unwilling to use language more explicit, lest he should incur the calumnious charge of wishing ill to the empire which it was hoped would be eternal; so that in saying, For the mystery of iniquity does already work, he alluded to Nero, whose deeds already seemed to be as the deeds of Antichrist. And hence some suppose that he shall rise again and be Antichrist. Others, again, suppose that he is not even dead, but that he was concealed that he might be supposed to have been killed, and that he now lives in concealment in the vigor of that same age which he had reached when he was believed to have perished, and will live until he is revealed in his own time and restored to his kingdom. But I wonder that men can be so audacious in their conjectures. However, it is not absurd to believe that these words of the apostle, Only he who now holds, let him hold until he be taken out of the way, refer to the Roman empire, as if it were said, Only he who now reigns, let him reign until he be taken out of the way. And then shall the wicked be revealed: no one doubts that this means Antichrist. But others think that the words, You know what withholds, and The mystery of iniquity works, refer only to the wicked and the hypocrites who are in the Church, until they reach a number so great as to furnish Antichrist with a great people, and that this is the mystery of iniquity, because it seems hidden; also that the apostle is exhorting the faithful tenaciously to hold the faith they hold when he says, Only he who now holds, let him hold until he be taken out of the way, that is, until the mystery of iniquity which now is hidden departs from the Church. For they suppose that it is to this same mystery John alludes when in his epistle he says, Little children, it is the last time: and as you have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us. As therefore there went out from the Church many heretics, whom John calls many antichrists, at that time prior to the end, and which John calls the last time, so in the end they shall go out who do not belong to Christ, but to that last Antichrist, and then he shall be revealed."

So, you cannot advance Augustine of Hippo in support of your belief.

Click to expand...

He obviously agreed with Chrysostom, otherwise would not have concluded by reciting him and adding his own assenting commentary.

A clear majority of ECFs and ECSs agreed that the Roman empire was the restrainer.

If the Holy Spirit or the Church was the restrainer, why did Paul refrain from naming either one explicitly?

Chrysostom provides the rational explanation.

Andrewn said:

John Chrysostom, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Augustine of Hippo lived after the Emperor Constantine the Great changed the attitude of the Roman Empire toward Christianity. It was natural that they would be optimistic about the Empire, almost equating it with the Church.

Click to expand...

To a man, had these lived to the time of the Reformation, I'm confident that they would have, along with all Reformers, recognized the apostate papacy as the man of sin described by Paul.

Andrewn said:

What we find is that most of them viewed the restrainer as the Holy Spirit acting through the Church.

Click to expand...

You'll need more quotes than you've provided.

Andrewn said:

Also, one has to remember that in the same chapter, 2Thess 2, the Apostle makes it clear that the coming of the lawless one follows a great apostasy. This sounds like a problem in the Church, rather than a problem in the Roman Empire.

Click to expand...

It was a problem in the Church. The temple to which Paul refers in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is a Greek "naos" temple, which Paul uses exclusively in his epistles when describing the spiritual temple of the believer, collectively, the Church. The apostate papacy usurped and arrogated spiritual authority therein.

Andrewn said:

The following article gives abundant quotations from Ignatius of Antioch, who wrote around AD 110, and others:

Bible Foregrounds 1: The "Restrainer" in 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7

Click to expand...

The quote of Ignatius in your link is from his commentary on Ephesians, not Thessalonians. Nor is there any other ECF/ECS commentary in your link specifically addressing 2 Thessalonians 2.

claninja said:

This isn't the traditional Amil position if you are inserting satan's little season between the completion of the millennium and the 2nd coming.

According to revelation 12, Satan's little season occurs when he is cast out of heaven:

Revelation 12:12-17 Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them!
But woe to the earth and the sea; with great fury the devil has come down to you,
knowing he has only a short time.” And when the dragon saw that he had been thrown to the earth, he pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child. But the woman was given two wings of a great eagle to fly from the presence of the serpent to her place in the wilderness, where she was nourished for a time, and times, and half a time. Then from the mouth of the serpent spewed water like a river to overtake the woman and sweep her away in the torrent. But the earth helped the woman and opened its mouth to swallow up the river that had poured from the dragon’s mouth. And the dragon was enraged at the woman, and went to make war with the rest of her children, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus.

Jesus confirms satan is cast out at his ascension, and satan is coming at his ascension.

John 12:31 Now judgment is upon this world; now the prince of this world will be cast out.

John 14:30 I will not speak with you much longer, for the prince of this world is coming, and he has no claim on Me.

Click to expand...

And speaking of Revelation 12. That chapter obviously has the entire NT church era in view, IOW at least the past 2000 years, the same 2000 years Amils are claiming is meaning the thousand years in Revelation 20. Where can this 2000 year binding of satan be found in Revelation 12? I don't see a hint of it anywhere in the text. There is not a single place in all of that chapter depicting a satan that is bound and locked up in a pit.