douggg Posted May 30, 2016 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 40 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,143 Content Per Day: 0.47 Reputation: 220 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/18/2011 Status: Offline Author Share Posted May 30, 2016 (edited) 23 hours ago, BlindSeeker said: Quote Because for centuries most Protestants believed this “man of sin… son of perdition” Paul speaks of in the epistle refers to the position of the papacy, or the succession of popes of Roman Catholicism. What many believers nowadays are ignorant of is that this theology which is being widely taught and accepted by non-Catholics concerning the antichrist rebuilding the temple and becoming a world leader was originally taught by a French monk known as Adso of Montier-en-Der who died in 992 A.D. It is very confusing, rhe two sentences. Actually the first sentence is not a sentence. Here is my stab at a rewrite.... . For centuries, since the days of the reformation, most Protestants have believed the “man of sin… son of perdition” refers to the position of the papacy, or the succession of popes of Roman Catholicism. While other protestant and non-catholics who do not buy into the view that the papacy is the Antichrist, are probably not aware historically that back around 992 AD a Catholic Benedictine Monk wrote a book on the Antichrist being someone of Jewish descent of the tribe fo Dan would be the Antichrist, even back then. Adso also believed the Antichrist would not show until the Roman Empire of his day was no longer standing, which we know, in hindsight, it has faded away. Blindseeker, please don't take it the wrong way. I work on my own communications and writings skills in everything I write. I may not have rewritten those two sentences to convey what you intended - if not, I would suggest a rewrite of you own, because the two sentences are confusing as they are currently written. Edited May 31, 2016 by douggg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douggg Posted May 30, 2016 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 40 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,143 Content Per Day: 0.47 Reputation: 220 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/18/2011 Status: Offline Author Share Posted May 30, 2016 16 hours ago, BlindSeeker said: However Douggg, even though I stated “In this light, it should be easy to see why it was wisdom for Paul to be elusive and not to write in his Epistle to the Thessalonians that Rome was going to have to fall first in order to make way for this great apostasy and the son of perdition,” I do understand many people today have a very difficult time following a multipoint, developing line of thought to its conclusion. Which, just once more, is basically that had such Paul's epistle been intercepted and delivered into the hands of Romans with him clearly stating Rome (the empire) must fall before the rise of the man of sin/son of perdition," well, it would have been all over for Paul. For he would have been charged with treason and therefore killed for preaching and conspiring the fall of Rome (the empire)... There is no evidence in the bible that Paul preached on Daniel 7 or Daniel 2 to anyone, including to the Thessalonians, about the fall of the Roman Empire. What there is evidence of is that Paul preached to the Thessalonians about the rapture of the church. And also about the church being the body of Christ in 1Corinthians. It is too far fetched to think that the Roman Empire is the "he" in 2Thessalonians2:7, imo. And the ancient Roman Empire faded away around 400 AD, and still the man of sin has not arrived nor committed the act of claiming to be God, by going into the temple, sitting, showing himself as such. Regarding what we view as Paul's vagueness, in verse 7 especially; to the Thessalonians would have not been vague to them if Paul had already spoken to them at length about the church being the body of Christ previously, like he spoke to the Corinthians, and the mystery of iniquity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghtan Posted May 31, 2016 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 422 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 216 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/21/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted May 31, 2016 13 hours ago, douggg said: I think I would look at 1Corinthians12:12-27. Paul wrote that letter. 12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. 27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular. Don't those verses show that Paul equates the church with the body of Christ and not Christ himself? The "for" at the start of verse 13 connects it directly to the end of verse 12 and the message is something like: "Likewise in Christ we are baptised in one spirit into one body." The church is still being equated with the body. Since Paul consistently refers to the church as the body of Christ and not Christ himself, and body is neuter in Greek, he would have used a neuter form for "the one who now holds it back" in 2 Thess 2:7 if he were thinking of the church. Indeed, it was in a neuter form in verse 6 yet Paul deliberately changed it to a masculine form in verse 7. Therefore, he probably meant someone or something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OakWood Posted May 31, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 867 Topics Per Day: 0.24 Content Count: 7,331 Content Per Day: 2.00 Reputation: 2,860 Days Won: 31 Joined: 04/09/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/28/1964 Share Posted May 31, 2016 On 28/05/2016 at 10:14 PM, post said: how do you get that? Because that is what the Bible implies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OakWood Posted May 31, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 867 Topics Per Day: 0.24 Content Count: 7,331 Content Per Day: 2.00 Reputation: 2,860 Days Won: 31 Joined: 04/09/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/28/1964 Share Posted May 31, 2016 On 26/05/2016 at 11:45 PM, angels4u said: We have a thread going about the restrainer The holy Spirit who lives in the Christians when they get raptured. The Holy Spirit does not leave the Earth because if he did, then there would be no converts during the Tribulation. The Bible clearly states that people will be beheaded during the Tribulation and that those who are beheaded will afterwards live with Christ for a thousand years. Why will people who haven't received the Holy Spirit live with Christ for a thousand years, or is Christ now in the business of allowing non-believers into his kingdom? So the Holy Spirit is not the restrainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douggg Posted May 31, 2016 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 40 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,143 Content Per Day: 0.47 Reputation: 220 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/18/2011 Status: Offline Author Share Posted May 31, 2016 (edited) 3 hours ago, ghtan said: Don't those verses show that Paul equates the church with the body of Christ and not Christ himself? The "for" at the start of verse 13 connects it directly to the end of verse 12 and the message is something like: "Likewise in Christ we are baptised in one spirit into one body." The church is still being equated with the body. Since Paul consistently refers to the church as the body of Christ and not Christ himself, and body is neuter in Greek, he would have used a neuter form for "the one who now holds it back" in 2 Thess 2:7 if he were thinking of the church. Indeed, it was in a neuter form in verse 6 yet Paul deliberately changed it to a masculine form in verse 7. Therefore, he probably meant someone or something else. In verse 6, it is neuter form because it is talking about a concept - the "what" in the KJV. The "what" is not the church - but the concept that the church will be raptured before the man of sin goes into the temple, sits, claiming to be God In verse 7, the he is Jesus. he who letteth - allows - the mystery of iniquity to work in the world. Until he Jesus (his mystical body on earth) be taken out of the way (rapture). Then the man of sin - in his time - will go into the temple, sit, claiming to be God.... as that person reveals himself to be the man of sin. The verse 7 is just confirming verse 6, recognizing that the mystery of iniquity was already at work in their day - which is some people were falling away from believing that Jesus is the messiah, denying the Father and Son. The falling away by some will continue, until the day the church is raptured out of the world. 6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 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 says "in his time" in verse 6, because the man of sin has no control over when he is born in history. And all of the other end times bible prophecies, and world conditions, have to be fulfilled, and in place - before the person commits the act. Israel has to be a nation again; and a temple in place; and Gog/Magog have taken place; and the Jews and world saying "peace and safety", and more. So the person cannot just show up anytime in history - to do his act of claiming to be God - triggering the Day of Christ, the great tribulation here on earth. He can only do the claim of being God, sitting in the temple - "in his time". Which Jesus has control over everything - all power in heaven and in the earth has been given to him. I should note that the Day of Christ for believers, while the great tribulation is going on here on the earth, is in heaven, after the raptured has taken place, and our lives reviewed by Jesus for what we have done for the cause of Christ, and crowns given. Edited May 31, 2016 by douggg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douggg Posted May 31, 2016 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 40 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,143 Content Per Day: 0.47 Reputation: 220 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/18/2011 Status: Offline Author Share Posted May 31, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, OakWood said: The Holy Spirit does not leave the Earth because if he did, then there would be no converts during the Tribulation. The Bible clearly states that people will be beheaded during the Tribulation and that those who are beheaded will afterwards live with Christ for a thousand years. Why will people who haven't received the Holy Spirit live with Christ for a thousand years, or is Christ now in the business of allowing non-believers into his kingdom? So the Holy Spirit is not the restrainer. Exactly. Michael is not either. There is no restrainer, although the greek word is for restrains, withholds. In the nuance of the verse, letteth and let is a fit because that verse is talking about the mystery of inquity being at work. If there was a "restrainer", he failed at restraining because the mystery of iniquity was already at work. The mystery of iniquity has to do with some people in the church falling away. John spoke about it in 1John2:19. And it is in Hebrews 6:4-6 Quote 4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, 5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, 6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. That falling away by some will continue until the day the church is raptured. After the church has been raptured, it is not here on here to fall away from. Edited May 31, 2016 by douggg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghtan Posted May 31, 2016 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 422 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 216 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/21/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted May 31, 2016 1 hour ago, douggg said: 6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. It says "in his time" in verse 6, because the man of sin has no control over when he is born in history. And all of the other end times bible prophecies, and world conditions, have to be fulfilled, and in place - before the person commits the act. Israel has to be a nation again; and a temple in place; and Gog/Magog have taken place; and the Jews and world saying "peace and safety", and more. So the person cannot just show up anytime in history - to do his act of claiming to be God - triggering the Day of Christ, the great tribulation here on earth. He can only do the claim of being God, sitting in the temple - "in his time". Which Jesus has control over everything - all power in heaven and in the earth has been given to him. In your own words (see bold), it is Jesus who controls when the lawless one can come; if you are right, the gender of “what” (literally it reads "that which withholds") in verse 6 should be masculine because Jesus is masculine in Greek. Instead, "that which withholds" is neuter in Greek and that is why the KJV translates it as "what." Your suggestion that Paul branches off to talk about a concept sounds like an attempt to get round this grammatical difficulty. I think readers will see through that. A more common view is that "that which withholds" is the Holy Spirit because spirit is neuter in Greek, hence verse 6. And in a few passages - this is admittedly debated - the masculine is also used of the Holy Spirit in recognition of him as a person in the Trinity. This then explains the switch to masculine in verse 7. It is by no means a consensus view but it has far less difficulty, esp grammatical, than the one you propose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douggg Posted May 31, 2016 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 40 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,143 Content Per Day: 0.47 Reputation: 220 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/18/2011 Status: Offline Author Share Posted May 31, 2016 44 minutes ago, ghtan said: In your own words (see bold), it is Jesus who controls when the lawless one can come; if you are right, the gender of “what” (literally it reads "that which withholds") in verse 6 should be masculine because Jesus is masculine in Greek. Somehow, there seems to be some miscommunication between us. Verse 6 "that which withholds" is a concept that the church will be raptured before the man of sin is revealed. So it is not masculine gender in Verse 6. You took my statement that Jesus controls everything at the end of my post out of context. I was referring to that the man of sin cannot appear on the scene anytime he wants in history - that he needs to be restrained. He can only appear in a certain time of history - called "in his time" - when all of the other end times prophecy have been fulfilled or in the process of being fulfilled. All of those prophecies are dependent on Jesus's control of all the world events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douggg Posted May 31, 2016 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 40 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,143 Content Per Day: 0.47 Reputation: 220 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/18/2011 Status: Offline Author Share Posted May 31, 2016 52 minutes ago, ghtan said: A more common view is that "that which withholds" is the Holy Spirit because spirit is neuter in Greek, hence verse 6. And in a few passages - this is admittedly debated - the masculine is also used of the Holy Spirit in recognition of him as a person in the Trinity. This then explains the switch to masculine in verse 7. It is by no means a consensus view but it has far less difficulty, esp grammatical, than the one you propose. Sure that is a common view. But it is wrong. The Holy Spirit is referred to as "He" in the new testament. The Holy Spirit must be in the world for persons to be saved, receive Jesus, during the great tribulation. The fundamental problem I see in understanding verse 7, is that translations other than the KJV use the term restrains - which people when reading that verse - assume there is a "restrainer". And that notion gets embedded in their head. So people look for a fit as who is the "restrainer". The two most popular responses is Michael, and the Holy Spirit. But it is actually Jesus who is allowing (letteth) the mystery of iniquity to take place, as people were leaving Christianity. All the way until the church, the body of Christ, is taken out of the world. Grammatically speaking, my interpretation of verse 6 and 7 is same as that of the greek gender wise. In verse 6 - neuter In verse 7 - masculine I\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts