Daniel 7 helps prove when Revelation 20:4 is meaning

[iamlamad]

Jesus is coming with the clouds, ie he is coming down from the clouds of heaven. The clouds do not continue to obscure him when he is revealed. It is not a "secret coming," as Pretribulationists claim. In both cases, Mat 24 and Rev 19, Jesus is *revealed,* and every eye will see him. He will light up the sky from East to West.

He will probably be surrounded by clouds of glory in both comings. However, when He comes pretrib FOR His church He does not continue on down to the ground. Rather, He will escort the church to heaven as John 14 tells us. It is the prefect Jewish wedding. The Bridegroom goes to prepare a home, and when the Father is satisfied, he tells the son to go and get his bride and bring her home to the home he has just prepared.

Again I agree that Revelation 19 can be compared to Matthew 24, for they both take place "after the tribulation of those days."

On the other hand, Paul tells us His coming for His Bride will be a coming just before wrath - and John tells us that God's wrath will begin just before the week begins - at the 6th seal in Rev. 6.

My axiom on Revelation: ANY theory that must rearrange John's God given chronology is immediately suspect and will certainly be proven wrong.

Pre-wrathers have always been confused on timing, as they try to force a time after the tribulation of those days with the timing of the 6th seal, which is before the tribulation. Trying to warp time to make a theory fit just doesn't work.

 

[iamlamad]

2 issues here. 1 is that these visions are, I believe, prolepses, reflecting future events as if they are happening presently, in front of us. For example, in Rev 1 we see Jesus coming with the clouds. This is a prolepsis, showing Jesus as if he is coming presently, in front of us, even though it is actually a prophecy of his future coming.

A number of visions and very many symbols are given to reflect the final apocalyptic event of Jesus' return. He doesn't return many times--these several visions are all saying the same thing adding details that are necessary.

So the Great Multitude from all nations in ch. 7 is a prolepsis, showing Christians being delivered at the 2nd Coming, in my opinion. Trying to put the narrative into a chronological progression is an exercise in futility. Revelation was not given that way. It was a single narrative providing a number of separate visions without a single chronological sequence.

The part about the temple I reject as OT imagery. There will be no NT temple built since Christ fulfilled the temple law for all time.

As to the Abomination of Desolation, I believe that is based on its identification with the Roman Army who destroyed the temple in 70 AD. This comes from Dan 9 and the Olivet Discourse. We simply have different interpretations of these things. Without them a lot of this is answered for me.

Having written several books critiquing Pre-wrath books, and Post-trib books, I find your post here somewhat humorous. Time and time again I find people approach Revelation with a theory - then find out it does not agree with Revelation as written, so they attempt to rearrange Revelation to fit. Pre-wrathers are notorious for doing this. That theory requires massive rearranging to fit.

I formed my theory from Revelation and written and find it fits all the other end time passages.

In other words, your idea of prolepsis is only an unproven theory. I think you will find it extremely difficult to prove Revelation is not written in the exact order these events will take place.

I think you will have an even more difficult time trying to find much about Paul's rapture in the Old Testament.

I find ONE place in Revelation that shows future events and that is the prophecy given by the 24 elders found in Rev. 11. It should be obvious to the readers that it is a prophecy of soon to come events. It is given at the midpoint and speaks of events that will happen after the week has finished.

I have often wondered how preterists can imagine as they do, when in the past God's prophecies have been SO accurate and right on that few of any would doubt them. Yet, they imagine that all the trumpet judgments happened some time in the past - they just don't know when or where.

In short, I disagree with your prolepsis theory.

 

[iamlamad]

A number of visions and very many symbols are given to reflect the final apocalyptic event of Jesus' return. He doesn't return many times--these several visions are all saying the same thing adding details that are necessary.

So the Great Multitude from all nations in ch. 7 is a prolepsis, showing Christians being delivered at the 2nd Coming, in my opinion. Trying to put the narrative into a chronological progression is an exercise in futility. Revelation was not given that way. It was a single narrative providing a number of separate visions without a single chronological sequence.

What will you do when you discover Revelation has impeccable chronology? John was so careful with his chronology, he had to break from his discussion of the seals to rearrange the setting before He wrote of the opening of the 7th seal that will officially begin the 70th week.

Then again, He broke from his discussion of the trumpets to mark SURE he wrote each event in the order they will come to pass. For example the trampling of the city will begin only days before the man of sin will enter the temple and abominate (I created this word for simplicity).
That is why Revelation 11: 1 and 2 are written before verses 14 and 15 that mark the midpoint.

Again, John wrote of the 1260 days of testifying before the 7th trumpet because they SHOW UP then, just before the man of sin will enter the temple.

Paul tells us the rapture of the church will take place just before wrath.
John places the start of God's wrath at the 6th seal in Revelation 6.
Then John wrote that he saw the just-raptured church in the very next chapter.

According to many people's theories, John SHOULD have seen that great crowd too large to number in chapter 19!

I am convinced, ANY theory that must rearrange Revelation to fit will be proven wrong.

without a single chronological sequence.

What about the seven seals numbered for sequence?
What about the seven trumpets numbered for sequence?
What about the seven vials numbered for sequence?
What about the three woes numbered for sequence?

If you only knew, the entire book is written in the very sequence the listed events will take place. The exception is when a prophecy is given or when John used a parenthesis.

An example is Rev. 11:4-13 written as a parenthesis.

 

[iamlamad]

The part about the temple I reject as OT imagery. There will be no NT temple built since Christ fulfilled the temple law for all time.

What are you going to do about the Millennial temple written in the last chapters of Ezekiel?

If you can quote the Pretrib Rapture in the Bible as *explicit teaching* then I will see it. But what you claim to "see" is simply not there. Pretrib Teaching has to be *read into* various texts. You have to believe, in advance, the allusion of a Pretrib Rapture.

In fact, many Pretrib Teachers have admitted this. They claim that Pretrib Teaching is a mystery revealed by Special Revelation to those with Faith. Nothing could be more dangerous than requiring subjective belief without explicit statements from the Holy Spirit!

Classic pre-tribbers, including the experts such as Thomas Ice, don't understand that the 70th week will not begin util the 7th seal. They imagine it begins with the first seal.

Again, they imagine the rapture is hidden in Revelation 4:1 when even a beginning reader would know that is not what is written. Is it any wonder then that they make silly statements that the pre-trib rapture is not explicitly stated?

When John shows us the raptured church in heaven in chapter 7, then begins the tribulation in chapter 8, that is every explicitly PRE...7 always comes before 8 in counting.

However, John saw the church already in heaven in chapter 7, but did not see when they arrived. We find that out from Paul. He very clearly shows us the rapture will come just before wrath. Pre-wrathers have correctly pointed this out numerous times.

Next, John is very explicit in stating that God's wrath will begin with the 6th seal in chapter 6. Again 6 comes before 8 in counting. That is why millions of people are pretrib.

In other words, when the truth is known about where the rapture will take place on Revelation's timeline, (just before the 6th seal) and then where the tribulation begins (at the 7th seal) we can then know that the pretrib rapture IS explicitly written.

 

[rwb]

Now I am beginning to see where you are coming from, so to speak. You are making something symbolic when it was meant by God and by John to be taken literally.

The first proof of this is found in Daniel 7, when the last half of the 70th week is written to be time, times and half of time or 3 1/2 years.

How do you prove time, times and half of time equals 3 1/2 years?

Second, in Daniel 12, again he wrote of the last half of the week (a 7 year period of time) as time, times and half of time.

How do you prove the last half of the week is a period of seven years of time, times and half of time?

Daniel indicates the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end.

Daniel 12:4 (KJV) But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

Therefore, the time of the end is also for a time, times and an half, and all these things shall be finished.

Daniel 12:7 (KJV) And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

Again, the man clothed in linen repeats to Daniel the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end, and it shall be for a time, times and an half, when all these things shall be finished.

Daniel 12:9 (KJV) And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

Finally, Daniel is given a little more information about when this time, times and an half of time that comes at the time of the end. When do you believe Daniel's prophetic words regarding the time of the end came to pass or will come to pass?

Daniel 12:11-13 (KJV) And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.

Your nine so-called proofs of all of your speculations are not convincing because you have not shown you understand when the time of the end, as time, times and half or dividing of time begin or ends. Since the whole prophesy is dependent upon knowing when the time of the end, a time, times and half of time begins, we have to understand the timing of the end.

Count them up! That is NINE proofs we have that the last half of the 70th week is future to us and will be 1260 days, with some significant event taking place 30 days later (I believe that is when Jesus will return) and then another significant event 45 days after that. That could be the start of the Millennial Reign of Christ. It could be the dedication of the temple. God chose not to tell us.

How do you prove the last half of the 70th week is future to us, and will be 1260 days, and 30 days later when you believe Jesus will return, and another significant event 45 days after that??? Then you say that COULD BE the start of the millennial reign of Christ without a single proof from Scripture. You are sadly mistaken if you think anyone is convinced by something simply because you think these things could be!

Since 42 months equals 1260 days and equals 3 1/2 years, I think we have ample proof these numbers are meant to be taken literally. Then I have Jesus' words spoken directly to me that the five countdowns written in Revelation are all for the last half of the 70th week.

I don't care what you think! I would like to know what you can biblically prove!

Since I found the midpoint in chapter 11 of Revelation and the trumpets before that, it just makes sense that the first half of the week will be taken up with the first 6 trumpets.

More guess work! Sorry but not at all convincing!

 

[DavidPT]

David, I would love to give an answer to you, but in all honesty, I cannot figure out what exactly you're arguing??? Do you believe that unbelievers must receive the mark of the beast at an appointed time, and if they do not, they have not received it??? Are you arguing for chronological order of Revelation???

Roger, what I'm basically arguing is this, in regards to this 42 month reign of the beast. According to Revelation 16:2 the first vial is poured out on those that have the mark, and those that are worshiping his image. None of that is even possible until everything I submitted from Revelation 13 that I underlined in that post, is fulfilled first. Meaning there is no mark to take or not take, there is no image to worship or not worship, until one beast rises out of the sea, and another beast rises out of the earth. And that the first beast has one of it's heads with a deadly wound, and that it is healed.

Notice what the text says concerning the 2nd 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 13:14)

That is the same image they are worshiping per Revelation 16:2, thus the reason the first vial is poured out on them. Obviously, they are worshiping his image during the 42 month reign of the beast. If we have the 42 month reign spanning hundreds or thousand of years, it makes nonsense out of Revelation 16:2 since that verse requires that they are all alive at the same time. Because, how can the first vial get poured out numerous different times throughout hundreds or thousands of years? The first vial, like the other 6 vials, are one time only events.

Revelation 16:2 makes it crystal clear who the first vial is poured out on. Assuming the 42 months span hundreds or thousands of years, thus for hundreds and or thousands of years there are those that have the mark, there are those that are worshiping his image, so why didn't the first vial get poured out on any of them? What made them worthy of escaping this fate, but if anyone does this in the end of this age, the first vial gets poured out on them, thus they don't escape this fate?

The way to make all of this unnecessary nonsense go away, the 42 months are not spanning hundreds or thousands of years, they are instead involving an era of time in the end of this age prior to the 2nd coming, so that way everyone can be alive at the same time. That way no one is spared the vials of wrath if they are worshiping the beast during it's 42 month reign. What you are proposing about this 42 months has numerous ones being spared the vials of wrath, simply because they lived during an era when the vials of wrath are not poured out.

 

[rwb]

Roger, what I'm basically arguing is this, in regards to this 42 month reign of the beast. According to Revelation 16:2 the first vial is poured out on those that have the mark, and those that are worshiping his image. None of that is even possible until everything I submitted from Revelation 13 that I underlined in that post, is fulfilled first. Meaning there is no mark to take or not take, there is no image to worship or not worship, until one beast rises out of the sea, and another beast rises out of the earth. And that the first beast has one of it's heads with a deadly wound, and that it is healed.

Why do you believe man must receive the mark of the beast before they worship him or his image?

What about the forty-two months given in Rev 11? Is there more than one 42-month time period given to accomplish destruction? Or do you believe these are both depictions of the same time period?

Revelation 11:2 (KJV) But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

Revelation 13:3-7 (KJV) And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

 

[rwb]

The way to make all of this unnecessary nonsense go away, the 42 months are not spanning hundreds or thousands of years, they are instead involving an era of time in the end of this age prior to the 2nd coming, so that way everyone can be alive at the same time. That way no one is spared the vials of wrath if they are worshiping the beast during it's 42 month reign. What you are proposing about this 42 months has numerous ones being spared the vials of wrath, simply because they lived during an era when the vials of wrath are not poured out.

David, let me say it another way. Saying the beast has forty two months and the Church has 1260 days is saying time is equally divided between Satan for destroying and the Church for building during this time, times and half or dividing of time. It is not an exact amount of time but symbolic time that is no more and no less than the amount of time given the Church for building the Kingdom of heaven. The times are equally divided and as opportunities present themselves throughout this Messianic age these symbolic times will be used either by the forces for good or the forces for evil. Satan will not be able to argue that his time was too short, even though he complains that it is. (Rev 12:12)

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I will agree, it generally refers to a departing...in one place it was used as a departing from Moses. The word apostasia does not specify what is being departed from. That is why in the other passage, Moses was added. In the King James, they were falling away, but did not say what they were falling away from. Here is how apostasia was translated before the KJV.

Let no ma deceave you by eny meanes for the lorde commeth not excepte ther come a departynge fyrst and that that synfnll man be opened ye sonne of perdicion.” (Tyndale Translation, 1534)

Let no man disceaue you by eny meanes. For the LORDE commeth not, excepte the departynge come first, and that Man of Synne be opened, even the sonne of perdicion. (Coverdale Bible, 1535)

Let no man deceaue you by any meanes, for the Lorde shall not come excepte there come a departinge fyrst, & that that synfull man be opened, the sonne of perdicion. (Cranmer Great Bible, 1539)

Let no man deceyue you by any meanes, for the Lord commeth not, except there come a departyng first, and that, that sinful man be opened, the sonne of perdicyon] (Matthew’s Bible 1549)

Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for [that day shall not come,] except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, [euen] the son of perdition. (Beza Bible, 1565)

Let no man deceiue you by any meanes for that day shal not come, except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition. (Geneva Bible, 1575)

Since in verse 3b, the man of sin is revealed, and since verses 6-8 tell us HOW he will be revealed, then the only solution is that somewhere in 3a the restrainer has been taken out of th away.

I can find no other possibility of anything taken out of the way or having departed in 3a other than in the word apostasia.

That leaves only TWO possibilities: either enough people "fall away" (let's suppose they fall away from God) that the Holy Spirit will not have enough people left to work through to restrain or hold back the revealing, OR the sudden departing of the church will take place as in the rapture.

I can easily see people after the rapture, searching the scriptures to find out what just happened, and saying: AHA! That is what Paul was meaning by apostasia! Remember, it is THE apostasia. What Paul must have had in mind is something NO ONE COULD MISS.

If Paul really meant a falling away from God, how would anyone know when enough had fallen away to mean THE falling away? The only way I could see this fit would be if there was a massive falling away in ONE DAY or one week. Only then would it be significant. Also what I find, when people are falling away here in the US and in Europe, MORE people are coming to the Lord in Africa and China, so the church is growing, not shrinking.

In short, I see a very good reason to consider Paul's use of Apostasia as the departing of the church. We will have to ask Him when we get there!

Paul was clearly referring to a mass departure (apostasia) from the faith and not a departure of the church. That fits the context of what Paul wrote about in 2 Thess 2. He also wrote about a departure from the faith elsewhere (1 Tim 4:1-3, 2 Tim 4:3-4).

For one thing, Paul indicated that the departure had to occur first before the day of "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him". So, if he was talking about the departure of the church then that would mean he was saying the departure of the church has to occur first before...the departure of the church. Huh? No, there is no way that is what he was saying.

Again, the context of what he wrote about in 2 Thess 2 relates to increasing deception and wickedness and that lines up with the concept of a mass falling away from the faith.

2 Thess 2:7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.

So, while "the secret power of lawlessness" was "already at work" back then, it was being held back or restrained to an extent. It would no longer be restrained at some point in the future. At that point, it makes sense that a mass falling away from the faith would take place.

Notice what Paul wrote here:

2 Thess 2:9 The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, 10 and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 12 and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

He was referring to a future time that would "be in accordance with how Satan works" that would involve "all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie". The idea of a mass falling away from the faith lines up with what this text is talking about because it's talking about a time when wickedness would be at an increased level.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

First, Paul was the only NT writer that received a revelation about the rapture. Therefore, we should obtain most of our information about the rapture from Paul. Paul told us the catching up of those who are alive and in Christ was a MYSTERY until it was revealed to Him. That tells me again that we are not going to find any other scriptures in the NT about the catching up of the church anywhere else but in Paul's letters. However, there are other scriptures that can be applied to the church, such as John 14.

Paul had a lot to say about wrath.

1 Thessalonians 1:10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

This tells us that God's wrath will come in the future, but the church will be delivered from it.

1 Thessalonians 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

This tells us, while others have appointments with His wrath, the church will not. Further, Paul wrote this in his classic rapture passage, telling us that the time of God's wrath is somehow connected to the rapture. While we get "salvation" they get "sudden destruction." There can be little doubt that this sudden destruction is connected with God's wrath. All this tells me that God's wrath will begin as soon as the church age ends.

So, here is a description of the wrath that we are not appointed to:

1 Thessalonians 5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. 3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

So, a little bit after he wrote the above passage Paul indicated that we are not appointed to God's wrath (1 Thess 5:9) which we can see will bring "sudden destruction" from which "they shall not escape". You seem to think that this wrath will drag on for several years. Is that correct? Well, Peter wrote about it, too, but with more detail.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

So, now we can see that the wrath and destruction that Paul wrote about that will come down suddenly and unexpectedly (as a thief in the night) on unbelievers involves the burning up of the earth "and the works that are therein". No wonder Paul said "they shall not escape". How long do you suppose this burning up of the earth will take? Doesn't seem to me that it should take very long since it will be the Lord doing it. But, you somehow have that wrath going on for years, right? How does that make sense in light of what Paul and Peter taught about it?

 

[iamlamad]

How do you prove time, times and half of time equals 3 1/2 years?

Daniel wrote in 12:1, " there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time." That parallels what Jesus said about the days of great tribulation. Jesus said they would begin in the last half of the Week. There, we can be sure that Daniel 12 is about the last half of the week. But the 1290 days and the 1335 days is another clue that the last half will be 1260 days or time, (one year) times (two years) and a half of time or 1/2 year.

Then when John wrote this same time period (time, times and half of time) in revelation and it parallels 42 months and 1260 days, that is enough proof that Daniel's meaning is 3 1/2 years. One final proof, if we divide 7, 360 day years, by 2, we get 1260 days or 3 1/2 years.

How do you prove the last half of the week is a period of seven years of time, times and half of time?
Daniel indicates the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end.

Daniel 12:4 (KJV) But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

Therefore, the time of the end is also for a time, times and an half, and all these things shall be finished.

Daniel 12:7 (KJV) And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

Again, the man clothed in linen repeats to Daniel the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end, and it shall be for a time, times and an half, when all these things shall be finished.

Daniel 12:9 (KJV) And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

Finally, Daniel is given a little more information about when this time, times and an half of time that comes at the time of the end. When do you believe Daniel's prophetic words regarding the time of the end came to pass or will come to pass?

Daniel 12:11-13 (KJV) And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.

Your nine so-called proofs of all of your speculations are not convincing because you have not shown you understand when the time of the end, as time, times and half or dividing of time begin or ends. Since the whole prophesy is dependent upon knowing when the time of the end, a time, times and half of time begins, we have to understand the timing of the end.

When the OT might have a verse or two about some event, Revelation may have a chapter. Therefore it makes good sense to form our doctrine from the most complete treatus on a subject. We can pinpoint the midpoint of the week by the five mentions of the 3 1/2 year period of time, two in chapter 11, two in chapter 12, and one in chapter 13. Each of these are countdowns from the midpoint to the end of the week. If you are depending on a verse that spells out word for what Daniel's meaning of time, times and half of time, you will not find it. Apparently, God wants us to use some common sense.

I know what John tells us: that the Day of the Lord will start first, as time changes from the church age to the Day of the Lord. Then a few days later (at the 7th seal) the 70th week will begin. The Week will end at the 7th vial.

In short, the Jewish age will END with the 7 year period of Jacob's trouble or the 70th week.

How do you prove the last half of the 70th week is future to us, and will be 1260 days, and 30 days later when you believe Jesus will return, and another significant event 45 days after that??? Then you say that COULD BE the start of the millennial reign of Christ without a single proof from Scripture. You are sadly mistaken if you think anyone is convinced by something simply because you think these things could be!

How can anyone prove it is NOT future to us? I will try to answer: when we read of events that there is NOTHING in History that sounds like what is written, that is a great clue that it is future. I find NONE of the 7 trumpet judgments have taken place. That is a good clue to me that they are future. If the trumpets have not taken place, we can be sure the 70th week has not yet begun.

If we suddenly find ourselves flying up into the air, that is a very GOOD clue that the rapture is taking place. A few years ago there were some that were SURE the 70th week had begun. Yet, I knew it had not, because the church was still here.

I don't care what you think! I would like to know what you can biblically prove!
More guess work! Sorry but not at all convincing!

One way you can be SURE, is if Jesus speaks to you - gives you revelation knowledge. You can help that to happen by meditating on a scripture or a passage. Go to sleep thinking about it - wake up thinking about it. Ask God about it day after day. Be relentless. Words of Knowledge are for every believer. Next, pray much in the Spirit. That is a revelation gift. The more someone prays in the Spirit the more revelations of scripture he will receive.

Years ago I was troubled about Mark 16: the signs of a believer. I began bugging God about. Day after day, I would bring it up, telling God I did not understand: I was a believer but never saw these signs in my life. I don't think I missed a day of bugging God about it for 6 months. But one day I said, "God..." and that is as far as I got. He spoke to me: I heard His voice and His words. He explained why I did not see those signs in my life.

This was a very valuable lesson for me: I learned how to get revelation knowledge from heaven. God has said, if you lack wisdom, just ask. He gives liberally! Up until then, I did not know how to ask.

Finally, you may not believe what I have written. However, can you prove it wrong by scripture rightly divided and correctly understood?

 

[iamlamad]

So, here is a description of the wrath that we are not appointed to:

1 Thessalonians 5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. 3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

So, a little bit after he wrote the above passage Paul indicated that we are not appointed to God's wrath (1 Thess 5:9) which we can see will bring "sudden destruction" from which "they shall not escape". You seem to think that this wrath will drag on for several years. Is that correct? Well, Peter wrote about it, too, but with more detail.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

So, now we can see that the wrath and destruction that Paul wrote about that will come down suddenly and unexpectedly (as a thief in the night) on unbelievers involves the burning up of the earth "and the works that are therein". No wonder Paul said "they shall not escape". How long do you suppose this burning up of the earth will take? Doesn't seem to me that it should take very long since it will be the Lord doing it. But, you somehow have that wrath going on for years, right? How does that make sense in light of what Paul and Peter taught about it?

No, no and definitely NO! You are ignoring TIME.

The day of the Lord is going to last a long time probably around 1007 years. Peter wrote what will happen SOMETHING during those many years. Paul wrote what will happen at the first start of the Day of the Lord.

What exactly IS or will be the "sudden destruction" that will begin one instant after the Dead in Christ rise? Did you notice in Matthew 27 that when the elders of the OT were raised, it caused an earthquake? Did you notice that when the Two witnesses will be raised, again there will be a corresponding earthquake? Why? I cannot prove this with scripture, but neither can anyone prove against it. I believe, when God pulls the DUST that once formed the dead saints bodies together, it is going to cause a worldwide earthquake, because the dead in Christ will be found the world around.

Paul's "sudden destruction" is going to be a worldwide earthquake caused when Christ raises the dead in Christ. While those who are alive and in Christ get salvation (get raptured) and get to live together with Him, those living in darkness will experience the world's first world wide earthquake. No one can "escape" for the ground will be shaking everywhere. This does not tell us the ground will melt at this time. It CANNOT for people are still alive to go into the holes and caves of the mountains and cry to be buried. This will match the 6th seal. People are still around at the 7th seal, and during the 7 trumpets.

Yes, for years: God's wrath will begin just before the 70th week, so the entire week will come with wrath, then without a doubt, Jesus will have wrath when He comes to Armageddon. That is at least seven years of God's wrath as He systematically destroys the world and the sinners in the world.

Finally, the NEW heaven and earth will not show up until AFTER the white throne judgment.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I also agree that Paul does not use apostasy as a falling away from the Church, because people have been falling away from the beginning.

But, Paul is talking about a time when that would happen more frequently. He talks about it in conjunction with a future time when wickedness and deception would be increased.

2 Thess 2:7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.

Notice here that "the secret power of lawlessness" was "already at work" back then and, yet, is was still held back to a degree. What has held back lawlessness to an extent for the past almost 2,000 years? The preaching of the gospel through the power of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit's influence has held it back. But, we know of a future time, written about in Revelation 20:7-9, that we call "Satan's little season", when he will not be restrained any longer and that will result in increased wickedness and a mass falling away from the faith.

Paul talked about a future time period ("the latter times") when many would fall away from the faith here as well:

1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

Obviously, some were departing the faith already back then, so he must have been speaking in a different context than that here since he talked about something that would happen in the future. It only makes sense that he was talking about it happening more than how much it was happening back then.

Jesus also spoke of a future time period of increased wickedness when many would fall away from the faith.

Matthew 24:10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

So, yes, wickedness has been around for a long time already. Some people have been falling away for a long time already. But, scripture teaches about a time when these things would happen more frequently and I believe that is the context of what Paul was talking about in 2 Thess 2 when he wrote about a departure/falling away (Greek: apostasia).

 

[Spiritual Jew]

No, no and definitely NO! You are ignoring TIME.

I'm not ignoring anything. Are you able to have an adult discussion without resorting to these unnecessary insults?

The day of the Lord is going to last a long time probably around 1007 years.

How do you come to this conclusion? That is not indicated anywhere in scripture.

Peter wrote what will happen SOMETHING during those many years. Paul wrote what will happen at the first start of the Day of the Lord.

What basis is there for concluding that the destruction Paul wrote about in conjunction with the day of the Lord coming as a thief in the night is different than the destruction Peter wrote about in conjunction with the day of the Lord coming as a thief in the night? None that I can see.

What exactly IS or will be the "sudden destruction" that will begin one instant after the Dead in Christ rise?

Just read 2 Peter 3:10-12 and you can see that. Peter was not writing about different destruction occurring on the day of the Lord than Paul wrote about. Only doctrinal bias could lead someone to claim that.

Did you notice in Matthew 27 that when the elders of the OT were raised, it caused an earthquake?

So? What does that have to do with what we're talking about?

Did you notice that when the Two witnesses will be raised, again there will be a corresponding earthquake? Why? I cannot prove this with scripture, but neither can anyone prove against it. I believe, when God pulls the DUST that once formed the dead saints bodies together, it is going to cause a worldwide earthquake, because the dead in Christ will be found the world around.

I don't take all of Revelation 11 literally like you do. Paul and Peter wrote very straightforwardly about the destruction that will occur on the day of the Lord, which is the day Christ returns. Revelation describes the destruction in symbolic ways. Such as in Revelation 19 where it talks about Jesus slaying people with a sword that's in His mouth, which is not what will happen literally. And it talks about Him treading the winepress of God's wrath at that time. But, He's not going to literally tread a literal winepress. We can get the literal descriptions of the destruction from other scripture besides Revelation.

Paul's "sudden destruction" is going to be a worldwide earthquake caused when Christ raises the dead in Christ. While those who are alive and in Christ get salvation (get raptured) and get to live together with Him, those living in darkness will experience the world's first world wide earthquake. No one can "escape" for the ground will be shaking everywhere. This does not tell us the ground will melt at this time. It CANNOT for people are still alive to go into the holes and caves of the mountains and cry to be buried. This will match the 6th seal. People are still around at the 7th seal, and during the 7 trumpets.

How many days of the Lord are there going to be that come as a thief in the night? Just one, right? So, there's no basis whatsoever for claiming that the destruction referenced in 1 Thess 5:2-3 that will come as a thief in the night is somehow not the same destruction in 2 Peter 3:10-12 that will come as a thief in the night.

Yes, for years: God's wrath will begin just before the 70th week, so the entire week will come with wrath, then without a doubt, Jesus will have wrath when He comes to Armageddon. That is at least seven years of God's wrath as He systematically destroys the world and the sinners in the world.

This completely contradicts what Paul and Peter taught. Unless you think the global destruction they described from which no one can escape would inexplicably drag on for seven years. That clearly doesn't make sense. When God has use fire to destroy things in the past, such as Sodom and Gomorrah, it did not take long at all.

Finally, the NEW heaven and earth will not show up until AFTER the white throne judgment.

Yes, most of us believe that.

 

[iamlamad]

Paul was clearly referring to a mass departure (apostasia) from the faith and not a departure of the church. That fits the context of what Paul wrote about in 2 Thess 2. He also wrote about a departure from the faith elsewhere (1 Tim 4:1-3, 2 Tim 4:3-4).

I doubt that very much. First, it would have to be a very sudden departing, like 90% of church goers suddenly quit—something very obvious and easily recognized so people could say, "ah! This is what Paul was talking about. I don't believe that is going to happen. When some fall away more come in. the church is growing world wide, not shrinking.

Next, because in verse 3b, the man of sin is revealed, then whatever Paul meant had to be the same thing he was talking about in 65-8: the restraining force being taken out of the way. Then, Paul also wrote that "Now you know what is restraining..." I believe Paul wrote those words because He JUST TOLD US who was restraining but did it in a veiled way.
If it is the Holy Spirit working through the church to restrain the man of sin and prevent his revealing before the proper time, if ENOUGH people departed from the faith, one could guess that the Holy Spirit would not have enough of His church left to work through to restrain. However, I think the departing of the church is a far better explaination: sudden, a moment after the rapture, the Holy Spirit will have NO ONE whom He can work through to restrain the revealing. So after the rapture, then the man of sin will be revealed. This satisfies Paul's "now you know..." and it satisfies His theme of the gathering.

Just so you know, Strong's concordance shows us that this compound word can certainly mean a part of a whole group suddenly removed spatially to another location and it happen so fast the world seems stationary.

For one thing, Paul indicated that the departure had to occur first before the day of "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him". So, if he was talking about the departure of the church then that would mean he was saying the departure of the church has to occur first before...the departure of the church. Huh? No, there is no way that is what he was saying.

Again, the context of what he wrote about in 2 Thess 2 relates to increasing deception and wickedness and that lines up with the concept of a mass falling away from the faith.

I disagree, the departing comes before the revealing. When someone sees the revealing, they can then know that the Day has started (previously) and they are in it.

You should ignore "that day shall not come" from verse 3, because Paul did not write those words: they are added in almost every translation. Worse yet, they are WRONG. They come from Verse 2, but from a poor reading of verse two. "AT hand" is not a truthful translation due to the tense of the Greek verb. It should be rendered as "present." the Amp. version shows us this.

No, the church will not have to depart before the church departs. That is silly. Stick with what is written! The church must depart before the man of sin will be revealed, because the Holy Spirit is using the church to restrain or hold back the revealing. The basis of Paul's argument is simple: by the time the man of sin is revealed, the DAY will have already started and will be present.

2 Thess 2:7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.

So, while "the secret power of lawlessness" was "already at work" back then, it was being held back or restrained to an extent. It would no longer be restrained at some point in the future. At that point, it makes sense that a mass falling away from the faith would take place.

Yes, it [lawlessness] will not longer be restrained when the church has been taken out of the way. The truth is, we are in the devil's way while we are here. You seem to have it backward. It is the departing that will ALLOW the revealing.
[/QUOTE]
We are LIVING now when wickedness is increasing, and I am expecting a new awakening or revival to sweep across our land!

 

[Spiritual Jew]

If it is the Holy Spirit working through the church to restrain the man of sin and prevent his revealing before the proper time, if ENOUGH people departed from the faith, one could guess that the Holy Spirit would not have enough of His church left to work through to restrain.

Yes, that's what I believe Paul is talking about.

However, I think the departing of the church is a far better explaination: sudden, a moment after the rapture, the Holy Spirit will have NO ONE whom He can work through to restrain the revealing. So after the rapture, then the man of sin will be revealed. This satisfies Paul's "now you know..." and it satisfies His theme of the gathering.

Again, as I said, if it's talking about the departure of the church then that would mean Paul was saying that the departure of the church had to occur first before the departure of the church, which obviously does not make sense. He very clearly indicated that the departure had to occur before the day that Jesus comes and we're gathered to Him.

Just so you know, Strong's concordance shows us that this compound word can certainly mean a part of a whole group suddenly removed spatially to another location and it happen so fast the world seems stationary.

I fully understand that the Greek word, like most Greek words, has more than one definition. However, the only other time the Greek word apostasia is used in scripture it has to do with people falling away from the teachings of the law of Moses. That's something worth taking into consideration here.

I disagree, the departing comes before the revealing. When someone sees the revealing, they can then know that the Day has started (previously) and they are in it.

The timing of the departure in relation to the revealing has nothing to do with the point I'm making. What Paul indicated is that BOTH the departure AND the revealing of the man of sin had to occur first BEFORE Christ's coming and out being gathered to Him.

2 Thess 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

This couldn't be more clear. The falling away has to occur before we are gathered to Christ at His second coming. It's not a good look for you to deny something so obvious.

You should ignore "that day shall not come" from verse 3, because Paul did not write those words: they are added in almost every translation. Worse yet, they are WRONG.

I'm not just going to take your word for this. Where are you getting this from? And how do you think it should read instead?

They come from Verse 2, but from a poor reading of verse two. "AT hand" is not a truthful translation due to the tense of the Greek verb. It should be rendered as "present." the Amp. version shows us this.

Ah, so you trust the Amplified version. Okay then, let's see what the Amplified version shows Paul as saying.

2 Thess 2:1 (AMP) Now in regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to meet Him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to be quickly unsettled or alarmed either by a [so-called prophetic revelation of a] spirit or a message or a letter [alleged to be] from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has [already] come. 3 Let no one in any way deceive or entrap you, for that day will not come unless the apostasy comes first [that is, the great rebellion, the abandonment of the faith by professed Christians], and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction [the Antichrist, the one who is destined to be destroyed],

Where are you seeing the word "present" here? Anyway, look at this. The Amplified version calls the departure "the great rebellion, the abandonment of the faith by professed Christians". So, if you're going to rely on the Amp. version for saying "at hand" should say "present" instead, then why not accept how the Amp. version translates the meaning of the apostasia as well?

No, the church will not have to depart before the church departs. That is silly. Stick with what is written! The church must depart before the man of sin will be revealed, because the Holy Spirit is using the church to restrain or hold back the revealing. The basis of Paul's argument is simple: by the time the man of sin is revealed, the DAY will have already started and will be present.

Yes, it [lawlessness] will not longer be restrained when the church has been taken out of the way.

That isn't what Paul said.

The truth is, we are in the devil's way while we are here. You seem to have it backward. It is the departing that will ALLOW the revealing.

A mass falling away from the faith is what will reveal the true beliefs of some people. They will be exposed as essentially believing they are God because they will have decided they don't need God and don't want to serve God.

We are LIVING now when wickedness is increasing, and I am expecting a new awakening or revival to sweep across our land!

If that happens, great. I hope it does. But, you do understand that scripture teaches that there will be a time period of increased wickedness just before the end of the age when Christ returns, right? Jesus Himself talked about it here:

Matthew 24:10 And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and hall hate one another. 11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. 12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. 13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

I believe in 2nd Thess 2 Paul was writing about the same thing Jesus talked about here.

 

[rwb]

Daniel wrote in 12:1, " there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time." That parallels what Jesus said about the days of great tribulation. Jesus said they would begin in the last half of the Week. There, we can be sure that Daniel 12 is about the last half of the week. But the 1290 days and the 1335 days is another clue that the last half will be 1260 days or time, (one year) times (two years) and a half of time or 1/2 year.

Daniel 12 is prophesy of the time we have been living in since Christ, the promised Messiah has come. Yes, I agree the time of trouble is indeed "great tribulation" that accompanies the preaching of the Gospel unto all the earth during this Messianic age.

Where does Jesus say "great tribulation" will begin in the last half of the week? I don't find that in Scripture. Again, you offer no Scripture to prove what you allege! Why? Could it be because there are no verses to prove what you think might be?

Then when John wrote this same time period (time, times and half of time) in revelation and it parallels 42 months and 1260 days, that is enough proof that Daniel's meaning is 3 1/2 years. One final proof, if we divide 7, 360 day years, by 2, we get 1260 days or 3 1/2 years.

Again, I agree. When John writes of time, times and a half of time it is the same time period symbolized 42 months and 1260 days. These symbolic times are the whole Messianic age we are currently living in and have been living in since the advent of Christ. That in no way is proof that Daniel means 3 1/2 years. That is what you assume without verification from Scripture. Where does Scripture give you authority to arbitrarily divide 7? For that matter where do you find this 7 that you think is to be divided?

Why do I argue the symbolic times cover the whole Messianic age? Because the time the prophets foretell the Messiah would come are "these last days". And the Revelation is prophesy of all that comes to pass during this Messianic age. Pentecost is the beginning for fulfillment of the prophecies that foretell the Lord would come in what they call the Day of the Lord. That is this Messianic age of the Gospel being sent unto all the world.

Acts 2:17 (KJV) And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

2 Timothy 3:1 (KJV) This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

Hebrews 1:2 (KJV) Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

2 Peter 3:3 (KJV) Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

Since John is writing of all that shall come to pass in the last days, or this Gospel age, or Messianic age, called The Day of the Lord, all the symbolic times in the Revelation will be fulfilled within this time. Because this time according to John (Rev 20) is symbolized a thousand years, and when the seventh angel begins to sound (Rev 10) this symbolic time shall be no more than all that is written will be finished.

When the OT might have a verse or two about some event, Revelation may have a chapter. Therefore it makes good sense to form our doctrine from the most complete treatus on a subject. We can pinpoint the midpoint of the week by the five mentions of the 3 1/2 year period of time, two in chapter 11, two in chapter 12, and one in chapter 13. Each of these are countdowns from the midpoint to the end of the week. If you are depending on a verse that spells out word for what Daniel's meaning of time, times and half of time, you will not find it. Apparently, God wants us to use some common sense.

I don't find mention of 3 1/2 year periods of time anywhere in Scripture. I only see you assuming 42 months and 1260 days must be. That is not how I would define common sense. In fact, sorry but I would call it nonsense!

I know what John tells us: that the Day of the Lord will start first, as time changes from the church age to the Day of the Lord. Then a few days later (at the 7th seal) the 70th week will begin. The Week will end at the 7th vial.

I agree the Day of the Lord began with the advent of Christ and covers the entire Gospel or as you call it "church age". But the rest is nothing more than speculation with no verification from the Word of God. He who alleges must prove!

In short, the Jewish age will END with the 7 year period of Jacob's trouble or the 70th week.

The Jewish age ended when Messiah came to earth a man, but it was not made known until Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed. Again, you offer more speculation???

How can anyone prove it is NOT future to us? I will try to answer: when we read of events that there is NOTHING in History that sounds like what is written, that is a great clue that it is future. I find NONE of the 7 trumpet judgments have taken place. That is a good clue to me that they are future. If the trumpets have not taken place, we can be sure the 70th week has not yet begun.

If we suddenly find ourselves flying up into the air, that is a very GOOD clue that the rapture is taking place. A few years ago there were some that were SURE the 70th week had begun. Yet, I knew it had not, because the church was still here.

One way you can be SURE, is if Jesus speaks to you - gives you revelation knowledge. You can help that to happen by meditating on a scripture or a passage. Go to sleep thinking about it - wake up thinking about it. Ask God about it day after day. Be relentless. Words of Knowledge are for every believer. Next, pray much in the Spirit. That is a revelation gift. The more someone prays in the Spirit the more revelations of scripture he will receive.

Years ago I was troubled about Mark 16: the signs of a believer. I began bugging God about. Day after day, I would bring it up, telling God I did not understand: I was a believer but never saw these signs in my life. I don't think I missed a day of bugging God about it for 6 months. But one day I said, "God..." and that is as far as I got. He spoke to me: I heard His voice and His words. He explained why I did not see those signs in my life.

This was a very valuable lesson for me: I learned how to get revelation knowledge from heaven. God has said, if you lack wisdom, just ask. He gives liberally! Up until then, I did not know how to ask.

Finally, you may not believe what I have written. However, can you prove it wrong by scripture rightly divided and correctly understood?

I don't mean to be harsh iamlamad, but I have to wonder where you have come to these conclusions because this doctrine you are promoting is not biblical. If it were you should be able to prove it from the Bible and not be making these unproven assumptions.

 

[rwb]

Yes, that's what I believe Paul is talking about.

Again, as I said, if it's talking about the departure of the church then that would mean Paul was saying that the departure of the church had to occur first before the departure of the church, which obviously does not make sense. He very clearly indicated that the departure had to occur before the day that Jesus comes and we're gathered to Him.

I fully understand that the Greek word, like most Greek words, has more than one definition. However, the only other time the Greek word apostasia is used in scripture it has to do with people falling away from the teachings of the law of Moses. That's something worth taking into consideration here.

The timing of the departure in relation to the revealing has nothing to do with the point I'm making. What Paul indicated is that BOTH the departure AND the revealing of the man of sin had to occur first BEFORE Christ's coming and out being gathered to Him.

2 Thess 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

This couldn't be more clear. The falling away has to occur before we are gathered to Christ at His second coming. It's not a good look for you to deny something so obvious.

I'm not just going to take your word for this. Where are you getting this from? And how do you think it should read instead?

Ah, so you trust the Amplified version. Okay then, let's see what the Amplified version shows Paul as saying.

2 Thess 2:1 (AMP) Now in regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to meet Him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to be quickly unsettled or alarmed either by a [so-called prophetic revelation of a] spirit or a message or a letter [alleged to be] from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has [already] come. 3 Let no one in any way deceive or entrap you, for that day will not come unless the apostasy comes first [that is, the great rebellion, the abandonment of the faith by professed Christians], and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction [the Antichrist, the one who is destined to be destroyed],

Where are you seeing the word "present" here? Anyway, look at this. The Amplified version calls the departure "the great rebellion, the abandonment of the faith by professed Christians". So, if you're going to rely on the Amp. version for saying "at hand" should say "present" instead, then why not accept how the Amp. version translates the meaning of the apostasia as well?

No, the church will not have to depart before the church departs. That is silly. Stick with what is written! The church must depart before the man of sin will be revealed, because the Holy Spirit is using the church to restrain or hold back the revealing. The basis of Paul's argument is simple: by the time the man of sin is revealed, the DAY will have already started and will be present.

That isn't what Paul said.

A mass falling away from the faith is what will reveal the true beliefs of some people. They will be exposed as essentially believing they are God because they will have decided they don't need God and don't want to serve God.

If that happens, great. I hope it does. But, you do understand that scripture teaches that there will be a time period of increased wickedness just before the end of the age when Christ returns, right? Jesus Himself talked about it here:

Matthew 24:10 And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and hall hate one another. 11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. 12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. 13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

I believe in 2nd Thess 2 Paul was writing about the same thing Jesus talked about here.

Greeting SJ, you and I are usually fairly close in how we've come to understand Scripture. Both being Amil of course is the main reason. But with the falling away Paul mentions I too have come to understand it is a picture of the Church being caught up to meet the Lord in the air (rapture).

It wasn't until I began to search other translations that I began to understand why I could not accept falling away from faith being biblical.

2 Thessalonians 2:3 (KJV) Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

2 Thessalonians 2:3 (GB) Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition,
2 Thessalonians 2:3 (WEB) Let no one deceive you in any way. For it will not be, unless the departure comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of destruction,

I believe the Bible teaches eternal security. So those who are endowed with faith it is a fruit of the Spirit in us. How could it be possible to apostatize from faith, since we possess the Spirit, and Christ has promised the life we receive when we live and believe Him is eternal?

Galatians 5:22 (KJV) But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

I too have come to understand the departing (falling away) is speaking of the believers being caught up to meet the Lord in the air. The Church through the Gospel restrains sin. Because when the Gospel is preached and unsaved man hears, repents and believes he/she is no longer condemned by sin. Therefore, sin is certainly being restrained. The time will come when the Church, therefore the Gospel will be taken out of the way, because the Kingdom will be complete, and the last (seventh) trumpet will begin to sound. That will be the second coming of Christ. Then the man of sin will be revealed and destroyed, and the heavens and earth also destroyed by fire.

I agree that Paul does not use apostasy as a falling away from the Church, because people have been falling away from the beginning. Even John writes of this happening of those who depart from believers because they did not belong. It is the departing of the Church from this earth that make it abundantly clear that the Lord has come again.

1 John 2:19 (KJV) 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: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

Jude 19 (KJV) These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.

What I believe Paul is saying is that before the man of sin is revealed the Church will depart from this earth to be gathered with the Lord in the air. Then with His coming the Lord will reveal the wicked and consume them with the spirit of his mouth and shall destroy them with the brightness of his coming.

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 (KJV) For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

2 Peter 3:10 (KJV) But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Greeting SJ, you and I are usually fairly close in how we've come to understand Scripture. Both being Amil of course is the main reason.

Yep, I'm fully aware of that. And I appreciate that we agree on a lot of things because of that. But, that doesn't mean we agree on everything, of course. But, what I'm not concerned about with you is you resorting to childish insults just because we disagree on this one thing. I appreciate that.

But with the falling away Paul mentions I too have come to understand it is a picture of the Church being caught up to meet the Lord in the air (rapture).

It wasn't until I began to search other translations that I began to understand why I could not accept falling away from faith being biblical.

2 Thessalonians 2:3 (KJV) Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

2 Thessalonians 2:3 (GB) Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition,
2 Thessalonians 2:3 (WEB) Let no one deceive you in any way. For it will not be, unless the departure comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of destruction,

Please consider this. Do you agree that when Paul talked about a departing coming first before something, he was talking about it happening before "the coming of Christ and our being gathered to Him"? If you agree, then what you are saying here is that our departing and being gathered to Him will occur before...our departing and being gathered to Him. Can you see how this does not make sense?

I believe the Bible teaches eternal security. So those who are endowed with faith it is a fruit of the Spirit in us. How could it be possible to apostatize from faith, since we possess the Spirit, and Christ has promised the life we receive when we live and believe Him is eternal?

Okay, I guess we disagree on more than I thought. But, I don't want to turn this thread into a OSAS vs. NOSAS debate. So, all I'll say here is that the concept of apostazing from faith is taught in scripture. Paul himself taught it in other places in scripture, such as here:

1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

I think this is very clear. So, knowing that Paul taught elsewhere that some would depart from the faith "in the latter times", why couldn't that be what he was talking about in 2 Thess 2:3 as well?

And, we know that some were departing from the faith already back then, so he clearly wasn't talking generally there. He was talking about a time when it would happen more often. That has to be the case, otherwise his statement would be completely pointless. But, it's clear that he was differentiating between the future "latter times" and what was happening in his time.

I agree that Paul does not use apostasy as a falling away from the Church, because people have been falling away from the beginning.

I addressed this already. Did you miss that? I talked about how the context shows an increase in wickedness during a future time, so the context is not people falling away in general, but of more people falling away than normal because of the increase in wickedness during that time when wickedness is not restrained.

 

[rwb]

Please consider this. Do you agree that when Paul talked about a departing coming first before something, he was talking about it happening before "the coming of Christ and our being gathered to Him"? If you agree, then what you are saying here is that our departing and being gathered to Him will occur before...our departing and being gathered to Him. Can you see how this does not make sense?

I appreciate your congenial manner in these discussions also. Since we are not clones, we can disagree without being disagreeable.

I believe the topic Paul addresses in vs 1 "by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him". The Church will gather together with the Lord when the Church departs out of this world to meet the Lord in the air. And at that time lawless mankind will be revealed and destroyed by His coming, and this world will also be destroyed by fire. Paul says since the Church has not yet departed it is clear that Christ has not yet come, though some were apparently saying He had.

Okay, I guess we disagree on more than I thought. But, I don't want to turn this thread into a OSAS vs. NOSAS debate. So, all I'll say here is that the concept of apostazing from faith is taught in scripture. Paul himself taught it in other places in scripture, such as here:

1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

I think this is very clear. So, knowing that Paul taught elsewhere that some would depart from the faith "in the latter times", why couldn't that be what he was talking about in 2 Thess 2:3 as well?

And, we know that some were departing from the faith already back then, so he clearly wasn't talking generally there. He was talking about a time when it would happen more often. That has to be the case, otherwise his statement would be completely pointless. But, it's clear that he was differentiating between the future "latter times" and what was happening in his time.

I don't believe Paul is saying that men who possess the Holy Spirit will depart from the faith. If he is, we need to explain this contradiction, because I firmly believe that Scripture gives us great assurance of eternal salvation. So what does Paul mean when he speaks of some in latter times departing from the faith?

These men cannot possess the Spirit and the fruit of faith that comes from Him. I believe departing from "the" faith here is to "giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron". IOW they were being led by seducing spirits and doctrines of devils, because they were liars, and hypocrites, with seared consciences. It is in this ungodly doctrine that they had fallen away from the words (Gospel) of saving faith and good doctrine. It wasn't that they possessed saving faith and then fall away to condemnation. It cannot be!

1 Timothy 4:1-6 (KJV) Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.

If these who fall away had possessed the Spirit of truth they would not have fallen away from faith that saves, faith that gives all glory to God.

John 16:13-14 (KJV) Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

I addressed this already. Did you miss that? I talked about how the context shows an increase in wickedness during a future time, so the context is not people falling away in general, but of more people falling away than normal because of the increase in wickedness during that time when wickedness is not restrained.

Paul seems to be saying the evidence will be so clearly revealed that there will be no mistake when the Church is gathered together with the Lord in the air, it will be apparent to all the world the final day of this age has come.