fixerupper

That's a complete contradiction. I'm the one saying Mathew 24 and 2 THes. 2 are the same. You actually say Jesus and Paul agree! "But only if the gathering after the trib is not the rapture." You can't see that you've just imposed you're pre-trib criteria into your interpretation? Jesus says the gathering happens after thr trib. Paul says it happens after an apostasy and the man of sin is revealed. EVERY DETAIL ISN'T GOING TO BE MENTIONED BY EVERY AUTHOR. There are no contradictions between Jesus' and Paul's words. You guys are ones who created them. WOW! That's senseless Lamad and you just can't see it. Let's see. "The gathering Jesus mentions gathers Christians from the farthest parts of heaven to the farthest parts of earth. Paul's rapture gathers only from the earth." The sad thing is that you're for real. You have the wrong definition of the day of the Lord. You guys had to change the meaning of it by saying it begins at the beginning of the tribulation period. You fabricated that because in 2 Thes. 2 the gathering, the parousia, and the day of Christ all happen together. I know. Pretirb is one very complicated thing. And Jesus and Paul made it so simple! And I've found in the years I've been doing this that the most simple and logical interpretation is usually the correct one. A child could read Mathew 24 and easily get it right. What about Jesus? Would he be wrong? He's the one who said the gathering of Christians happens after the tribulation! It doesn't take meditation to figure that out. Common sense is hardly required. A willingness to accept what you read IS! It does take plenty of fabrication to change Mathew 24. Like create two returns of Jesus, two raptures, a different meaning of God's elect and Day of the Lord, a different trumpet than the last trump, a removal of the holy spirit. You say the Rapture is not part of the Second Coming even saying the Mystery of God is not Christ and the Church. etc. etc. It's endless Lamad.

Maybe you should stop speculating you won't be here. Jesus and Paul say you WILL be here when the anti-Christ comes to power.

He didn't ask that. You dodged the question. If people are expecting a pre-trib rapture, a global dictator, a one world government and religion, you'll be waiting forever. God's Word is never wrong. Lamad's word is often wrong because he has accepted the most fabricated, contradictory, deceitful doctrine that has ever entered the church. Your deceitful brother Tommy will pay dearly for it too.

I do't know what it is with you Lamad but unless you're fabricating something from Hebrews 9:28, you've just debunked you're own theory. Looking for Christ is what we should all do. You've fabricated a "looking for a pre-trib rapture" out of it. Did you notice Lamad? Maybe you didn't read the passage and just took that one verse out of context... "For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation." Do I need to explain? You're telling me that, "if people are not looking for Him, they will not get to SEE him." You are looking for a rapture, that's the problem. Pre-tribers are obsessed with the thing!

That's the Perry Stone mentality of it, "if you don't believe in the pre-trib rapture you're not going in it." That's easily debunked since God is no respecter of persons esp. his elect. I think it's just foolish of you Lamad to infer that stuff.

You say that because the words of Jesus clearly debunk a pre-trib rapture, so you've created another rapture and another return of Christ to fix that contradiction! You guys even say the last trump isn't the seventh trump, and have even changed the meaning of "the day of the Lord!" Fabricating stuff like it's going out of style and you just don't care. Why? Because you guys would have to admit you're wrong and the words,"I was wrong" is seldom found in a Christian's vocabulary.

The world has always been unrepentative. To be saved from God's wrath has nothing to do with tribulational wrath, a pre-trib rapture, OR the tribulation. However, I can agree that part of the harvest that takes place in Revelation 14 is to remove God's elect before the vials are dispensed. The elect is removed to prevent the elect from the deadly effects of the vials. I do believe that from Revelation 11 on to the end there may be as little as 45-90 days left before the consumation of the age. You must have missed the context of a passage I quoted about God's wrath... John 3:35-36 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not (UN repented) the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. Romans 5:8-9 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, (UNrepented) Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. That's correct. But the argument with you guys is that you say that wrath is the tribulation period. The bible is clear that wrath is exercised by God at judgement time and is the difference between heaven and hell, NOT whether we go through the tribulation or not. I keep telling you that God's wrath is ONLY averted BY JESUS CHRIST THROUGH REPENTANCE. He made us a way of escape alright. It's too bad you guys confuse deliverance from a fiery hell with going through a tribulation period. What makes you think you are more privileged than Daniel, Job, or Noah? You're going to be here whether you like it or not. You live in a pipe dream instead of scriptural reality. NONE of us have a choice, we all go through tribulation. That's when God needs us most. Want to see the list of pre-trib fabrications and contradictions you've accepted? ICQ!

We are told that we're appointed to tribulation and persecution. That no man should be moved by these afflictions; for yourselves know that we are appointed thereunto. For verily, when we were with you, we told you before that we should suffer tribulation; even as it came to pass, and ye know. So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure: [Which is] a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer: Seeing [it is] a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels. In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

I said, The verses you guys quote about God's Wrath all say it's averted by Christ through repentance, NOT a rapture. However, Christians are removed before His wrath comes in the vials, but that's at the end of triblation NOT before. You're response, Lamad doesn't believe God's wrath is averted by Christ through repentance. Lamad calls human reasoning by saying this is a removal from God's wrath by a rapture... For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ… God's wrath is attributed to salvation through Christ and nothing else. The wrath of God and the salvation of Christians is repeated throughout the New Testament. John 3:35-36 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. Romans 5:8-9 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. In the sixth seal, it's not an angel declaring God's wrath is come, it's not even John showing you. He's just recording what he hears and sees. It's 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." So it's not official. It's just that these 'significant people' are amazed at the intensity of celestial end earthly events mentioned previously. And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. 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; Where do people hide in caves and rocks? Afghanistan, Pakistan... 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? Even if God's wrath begins in Rev.6, that in no way changes the meaning of 1 Thes. 5:9... For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, Even if that is so, taking other verse about God's wrath out of context doesn't support a rapture is going to take them out from it. I also keep telling you that there are several examples in the bible where God didn't remove people from their troubles but help them through them. God didn't remove Noah and his family from the flood, He saved them through it. God didn't remove Daniel from the Lion's den, He save him through it. God didn't remove the three Hebrews from the fiery furnace, He save them through it. God didn't remove Job from his trials, He help him through them. No. It all happens at the same time in Revelation 14! The 'elect' is taken in Revelation 14. You know???? THERE ARE MANY MORE CHRISTIANS AROUND WHEN REVELATION 12 ROLLS AROUND THAN THERE ARE TODAY! I ALSO HAVE NO PROBLEM PROPHESYING THAT THERE'S NO RAPTURE BEFORE TRIBULATION TOO! THE TRIBULATION WILL TURN PEOPLE TO CHRIST! The tribulation period isn't the Day of the Lord, and the day of the Lord isn't 7 years long. I suppose you can't see the fabrication on that one OR the contradiction that triggered that fabrication. Would you like me to spoonfeed that one to you too? How about if I just say the reason why pre-tribbers claim the Day of the Lord begins when tribulation does is because there are verses that mention both the gathering and Day of the Lord happening together. That debunks pre-trib. We've always considered the Day of the Lord to be at the end of tribulation, but since the gathering occurs there too, pre-tribbers had to counter that contradiction and fabricate a 7 year Day of the Lord. Why not? They fabricated another rapture and another return of Christ ALL BECAUSE Jesus said the gathering would happen AFTER the tribulation! So why not accept the Word at face value instead of the fabrications? You can't see them? I'd like to see you back that statement up! Quote the passage please! Your theory is debunked by the 12 plus contradictions in pre-trib. If my theory is bogus then so are the human reasoning words of Jesus...no fabrications required! Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened,...And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven:...And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Not one resource I've ever looked at used the word departure to describe apostasy. Not Vines, Thayer's, or Strongs. So you've fallen for a pre-trib fab. Riiiiiight, AN INVISIBLE COMING! You wouldn't have to fabricate another coming of Christ and another rapture if you would accept that the coming of Christ AND THE GATHERING Jesus mentions in Mathew 24 comes AFTER the tribulation like the text says. It's saddening how many people have accepted these pre-trib fabrications. Now it is YOU who are reading into a scripture what is not there. There is a difference between apostasy and the Greek apostasia. The English apostasy is Applying BOTH definitions of apostasy is fine. It comes from a word meaning a 'divorce' to defect, and to abandon something. The only other place it's used is in Acts 21:21 where it's translated forsake Acts 21:21 is much easier to understand in the NIV. There were many Jews in the Church in Jerusalem who became believers who still kept the Judaic law and continued as Jews, but they did believe. That's pretty much what Acts 21:21 is about. Paul is accused of calling for an apostasy but stands his ground and convinces them that this is not an apostasy, OR a complete abandonment of the customs and tradition of Mosaic and Judaic law. The Jews were accusing Paul of "apostasy," or totally abandoning, Mosaic and Judaic traditions and law over to the New Covenant. He wasn't calling for a total abandonment, only a few things like sacrifices were forbidden. The Christian Jews were allowed to continue in many of their customs, traditions, and festivals. That means apostasy would NOT be a partial abandonment, but a complete abandonment of all Jewish customs and traditions. You keep coming up with the word 'departure' to prop up your pre-trib view. The word apostasy isn't defined as a departure. The word withholdeth is used twice in the text. One where Paul said that he had already told them what's withholding the man of sin before the day of the Lord comes. "Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time." The other to describe someone that withholds the condition of lawlessness until IT is taken out of the way. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. ...who now letteth [will let], until.... he be taken out of the way. 'Will let' isn't in the original text but is in many translations. I think the translators did this to make the verse make sense. So they added 'will let' because otherwise it makes no sense to them. The verse before Paul says, "For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth [will let], until he be taken out of the way. HE SAYS....And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. So the topic in the previous verse was the apostasy withholding the revelation of the man of sin IN HIS TIME. So I think it's a mistake to add "will let." It gives us a complete misunderstanding of what's said and incorrect time frame. This is the closest I can get to how verse 7 should read. "The mystery of lawlessness is already operating, but now during that time, the one presently detaining the man of sin does so until it (The apostasy) arises in your midst." The words "he be taken" should be "it be taken" and means...."IT comes into existence." Arise, Arose, Arouse, Raise, Rise, Rouse: "to become, to take place," is sometimes suitably translated "arise;" Every other religion views apostasy as abandoning their former political or religious affiliation and accepting another, or nothing at all. It's a revolt and rebellion and a total abandonment of your previous affiliation. Entire kingdoms have gone into apostasy when it's ruler or king called for one and it was always to change the "national religion." I believe it was Nero who called for an apostasy FROM Judaism TO Hellenism. A falling away doesn't have to always be evil. It's viewed that way because Christians don't have the correct understanding of it, because they don't have the correct definition of it. APOSTASY IS NOT A DEFECTION OF TRUTH. It's a revolt, rebellion, abandonment, and in 2 Thes. 2, it has nothing to do with the church or a defection from truth.

I said, Babylon is Babylon, it's not the whole world. Lets see, humanist worshippers, Atheist, scientist, evolutionist, the green movement,... HOW IN THE WORLD DO YOU COME UP WITH THIS STUFF? Oh, I remember, your mentors. You said, Don't expect me to accept your distorted way of thinking. Why don't you just grow up and show me how you come up with this stuff? How do you arrive at that conclusion? I know what you believe IS ALSO BELIEVED by others who have fallen for it! It's not a new theory! All I ask of you is to show me how you come up with this HUMANISM end-time religion of yours? Where's the scriptural evidence found in end-time prophecy? If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen, and you grow up, and give me scriptural EVIDENCE big guy!

No doubt Wuest put his pre-trib slant to it. And what a bad interpretation! I'm glad I burned his three books, Word Studies in the Greek New Testament. That's as fabricated an interpretation I've ever seen and an outright preversion of the word! It's NOT a departure of the church that's preventing him from being disclosed, it's an APOSTASY that must come first! And you talk about 'spoonfeeding.' 2 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, The 'parousia and the gathering'! All in one verse AND NOT 7 years apart! 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; Wuest is way off the mark by saying that the phrase, "for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed," indicates a that the departure of the church and the saints being assembled together to the Lord is preventing the anti-Christ being disclosed. That's a flagrant fabrication AND PERVERSION because the text is absoltely clear that what's WITHHOLDING' the man of sin is an APOSTASY NOT a rapture. READ IT AT FACE VALUE! According to Wuest, the word AND... Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, ...would mean the parousia or coming of the Lord is also withholding him! OH! I forgot! He puts a seven year space between the two. That means one thing, he doesn't know or disregards the definition of the word AND. Apostasia is a noun and an event! The noun 'apostasia' is used twice in the NT. Here in 2 Thes. 2 and in Acts 21:21. Now let me show you just how bad Mr. Wuest interpretation is... "for that day shall not come," What day? ......................................... The coming of Christ and our gathering. EXCEPT.................................................... Means UNLESS. It also denies something, whether it's an object or an opinion. In this verse, it denies everything other than the Lord's return and the gathering. The coming of Christ and our gathering doesn't happen UNLESS/UNTIL........ .....there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, How difficult is that? An apostasy and revelation of the man of sin come FIRST, AND THEN the Lord's return and gathering occur! Paul is simply saying that a 'falling away' and revelation of the 'man of sin' come FIRST OR BEFORE the coming of the Lord and the gathering! It's plain and simple but pre-tribbers have to change this because the true meaning of the text clearly debunks pre-trib. According to Mr. Wuest, he is saying that... "the departure of the Church, the saints being assembled together to the Lord] is preventing his being disclosed [as to his true identity]" Wuest IS INTERPRETING THE PORTION,..."THAT DAY SHALL NOT COME" AS... THE COMING AND GATHERING CANNOT COME UNTIL THERE'S A GATHERING. THAT'S A PERVERSION OF SCRIPTURE FABRICATED TO FIT PRE-TRIB AND THE MAN DOESN'T CARE HOW FOOLISH IT IS. Pre-tribbers pervert the words of Jesus in Mathew 24, and they pervert the words of Paul in 2 Thes. 2.

That's what pre-trib is, one big fabricated guess!

I'm going to tell you AGAIN... You would if you're mentors hadn't misled you and misinterpreted Revelation 3:10.... Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.

The verses God's Wrath are found in are simple to understand. You have taken the pre-trib fabrication method to misunderstand them, I use the face value method. And I keep telling you that the verses you guys quote about God's Wrath all say it's averted by Christ through repentance, NOT a rapture. However, Christians are removed before His wrath comes in the vials, but that's at the end of triblation NOT before.

Maybe you should pay attention to the context of the passage instead of paying attention to your pre-trib mentors. 9 For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God; 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 passage is about the Thessalonians who turned from idol worship to Christ. The wrath Jesus delivers them from is the wrath that is averted by Christ through repentance.

Maybe you would if you guys wouldn't mistranslate this verse... Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.

Learn something big guy, it's common sense! Read the passage again and pay attention! The word WITHHOLD (restrain) is used TWICE. In verse 3 Paul says... 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; In verse 4 he says... Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. In verse 5 he says... Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? Withholdeth is used once In verse 6 he says... And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. Paul is saying that he already told them WHAT WITHHOLDETH! So they already knew! That is an APOSTASY! The word, "letteth" is the word 'withholdeth' and is also used here in verse 7... For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. That verse is the one in contention.

You guys really need to red the text again. An apostasy is what's holding him back. The question is who or what restrains IT in verse 7.

That's not what Paul is saying. Paul is saying is that an APOSTASY is holding him back. Nothing in the text say anything about ALLOWING. That was added!

Statue of Daniel 2? Why would governments 1,000 plus years old be part of an end-time vision. It's counterproductive to good hermeneutics that some elements of an end-time vision be historical. Atheist worship nobody, scientist just do their job, the green movement...worship mankind??? Are you saying that's the religion of the beast? I lost count how many things you're missing, and I don't believe you. Burning the harlot wth fire isn't ALL false religions. It's the religion of Islam, either Iran or Mecca gets nuked. Babylon is Babylon, it's not the whole world. Lets see, humanist worshippers, Atheist, scientist, evolutionist, the green movement,... HOW IN THE WORLD DO YOU COME UP WITH THIS STUFF? Oh, I remember, your mentors.

Revelation man, You're way off. Maybe you should have noticed what Paul said, Spoon feeding, seems to be a common thing around here. Look at the simple progression of the passage... V. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, (Prousia) except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; V.4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. BEFORE Paul says... V. 7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. It's either poor exegesis or outright fabrication to say the "church" withholdeth." The grammar of the text shows that after Paul tells them that the parousia would NOT come 'unless' there comes FIRST an 'apostasy' AND the man of sin revealed, and then describes the man of sin in verse 4, HE GOES ON TO SAY, " Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time." TO SAY THE CHURCH OR HOLY SPIRIT IS WHAT'S WITHHOLDETH THE MAN OF SIN IS PURE FABRICATION.

You mean one who "lets?" "Lets" doesn't mean allow. The "one-DOWN-HAVING" or 'one who lets,' doesn't mean 'allow.' The KJV translators could have translated this better. Thayer says, "that which hinders anti-Christ from making his appearance. "will let" isn't in the interlinear and shouldn't be in the KJV text. letteth... o hold back, detain, retain from going away to restrain, hinder (the course or progress of) that which hinders, Antichrist from making his appearance to check a ship's headway i.e. to hold or head the ship to hold fast, keep secure, keep firm possession of to get possession of, take to possess

Yep! I can see how that's going to happen. Only in a pipe dream. I know that's what you think burning the harlot with fire is. Burning the harlot is either Iran or Mecca getting nuked.

That's plausible. Some people say this restrainer is Michael the Archangel who fights the battles in spiritual realms. So it is plausible the restrainer is a spiritual force labeled "IT" and Michael labeled (one) or HE That idea has been around for a while. Michael and his hoards fight Lucifer and his hoards in the spirit realms. CLOSE-KEEP ALREADY IS-IN-ACTING OF THE UN-LAWness ONLY THE one-DOWN-HAVING at-PRESENT TILL OUT OF-MIDst it MAY-BE-BECOMING. I haven't made my mind up on this one yet.