Does Isa 11:1-5; 10; 2 Thess 2:7; mean a "Jesse" crucifixion?

[SabbatarrianSundayer]

Does Isa 11:1-5; 10; 2 Thess 2:7; mean a "Jesse" crucifixion?

 

[Hoping2]

Does Isa 11:1-5; 10; 2 Thess 2:7; mean a "Jesse" crucifixion?

Never heard of it.
The son of the son of the son...etc.,
Jesus was the last Son, and was crucified on our behalf.

 

[SabbatarrianSundayer]

Never heard of it.
The sin of the son of the son...etc.,
Jesus was the last Son, and was crucified on our behalf.

Of course you never heard of it; till now.

 

[Hoping2]

Of course you never heard of it; till now.

Unless you can elaborate on why you see it as anything important, I will just consider it more distraction from meaningful things.

 

[BobRyan]

Does Isa 11:1-5; 10; 2 Thess 2:7; mean a "Jesse" crucifixion?

2 Thess 2:7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.

That firs part is about the antichrist "For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work;"

The second part is about the work of the Holy Spirit - the One that restrains evil being taken out of the way at some future point - just as in Gen 6 God said "My Spirit will not always strive with man"

 

[RandyPNW]

My view of the "Restrainer" is not popular in a number of places, but it was early in Church history. I believe he refers to the Roman political leader in whatever time Antichrist is prevented from appearing. Daniel saw the Roman Empire as the 4th and last Kingdom with significance in this regard.

The 4th Kingdom became European Society, once it had been Christianized. But Daniel said that until this Society broke up into at least 10 kingdoms Antichrist could not gather these parts together to form a new, modern European Empire, patterned after the old Roman Empire.

So it has been European leadership that has prevented the rise of Antichrist up until the present day. But we're getting close to the day where European leadership actually welcomes in Antichristianity as a new imperial leadership.

I know that since Disipensationalism has become accepted in the US the Restrainer has been popularly viewed as the "Holy Spirit." But I see nothing in the text itself that calls for that.

In fact, Paul seems to make reference, privately, to something he had told the Thessalonians earlier. And it likely had to do with pinning the "Antichrist" label on the Romans--something he would not publicly reveal in a letter.

But you decide....

 

[ViaCrucis]

Searching "Jesse crucifixion" on Google only gets me links to the OP's Youtube channel and to this thread.

So could someone translate this thread into English.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RandyPNW]

Searching "Jesse crucifixion" on Google only gets me links to the OP's Youtube channel and to this thread.

So could someone translate this thread into English.

-CryptoLutheran

It was poorlly written, but if I'm to guesss the poster is wondering if Christ's Crucifixion is what restrains the coming of the Antichrist. Once this Christian Witness is taken "out of the way," then the Antichrist can come, or will feel welcome. Just a guess, mind you...

I say this because it is popular, among Dispensationalists and among some others, to believe that the Holy Spirit is the One who is keeping the coming of Antichrist at bay. It isn't a far reach, then, to believe that it is the testimony of the Holy Spirit to the crucifixion of Christ that is keeping the Antichrist from coming.

As I said above, my own belief joins the majority of Church Fathers in believing that Roman government, as long as it maintains a political unity, and later, a Christian unity, the Antichrist will not come. And this is because Dan 7 portrays the Antichrist as beginning his power by consolidating fragments from the original Roman Empire into a new empire.

In order to consolidate a broken Empire, the Empire's unity must 1st be broken up. Then Antichrist will feel free to rise, and assume power over a fallen Christian Empire, placing worship of himself in its place.

 

[Dan Perez]

My view of the "Restrainer" is not popular in a number of places, but it was early in Church history. I believe he refers to the Roman political leader in whatever time Antichrist is prevented from appearing. Daniel saw the Roman Empire as the 4th and last Kingdom with significance in this regard.

The 4th Kingdom became European Society, once it had been Christianized. But Daniel said that until this Society broke up into at least 10 kingdoms Antichrist could not gather these parts together to form a new, modern European Empire, patterned after the old Roman Empire.

So it has been European leadership that has prevented the rise of Antichrist up until the present day. But we're getting close to the day where European leadership actually welcomes in Antichristianity as a new imperial leadership.

I know that since Disipensationalism has become accepted in the US the Restrainer has been popularly viewed as the "Holy Spirit." But I see nothing in the text itself that calls for that.

In fact, Paul seems to make reference, privately, to something he had told the Thessalonians earlier. And it likely had to do with pinning the "Antichrist" label on the Romans--something he would not publicly reveal in a letter.

But you decide....

One teacher I know says , either the HOLY SPIRIT or the BODY of CHRIST is complete or a combination of both .

dan p