Pre-tribbers, what do you have

[wingnut-]

Wingnut

 

That was an excellent observation! 

Well done, the Lord has blessed you.

 

I appreciate your words of encouragement sister   God bless you.

[wingnut-]

Wow Wingnut - that was an awesome post! You are really teaching me a lot!

 

Thank you for the encouraging words tinky, God bless you. 

[wingnut-]

The Rapture is one event, and the Second Advent is one event, and we can see the distinguishing differences between these two events easily.

 

Please provide the scriptural support for this.

[S.T. Ranger]

The Rapture is one event, and the Second Advent is one event, and we can see the distinguishing differences between these two events easily.

 

Please provide the scriptural support for this.

Be glad to.

In the Rapture, the entire Church, both living and dead are raised:

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 King James Version (KJV)

16 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:

17 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.

In the Second Coming there is no mention of a resurrection:

Luke 17King James Version (KJV)

22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it.

23 And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them.

24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.

25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.

34 I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.

35 Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

36 Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

37 And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.

Matthew 25:31-33 King James Version (KJV)

31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

The only resurrection mention in correlation with the Return of Christ are the Tribulation Martyrs mentioned here:

Revelation 20:4-5 King James Version (KJV)

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

This clearly rules out this is the Rapture, which again, involves the entire Body of Christ at that time, both living and dead.

The reference to Luke 17 corresponds to this...

Revelation 19:17-21 King James Version (KJV)

17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;

18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.

19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

Notice the "remnant" in v.21: those in opposition to God will not enter into the Kingdom, they will be destroyed in the Sheep and Goat Judgment. Only those who have been born again will enter into this Kingdom, just as only those born again enter into the spiritual Kingdom already established in this Age. In the Rapture, it is Christ that collects the Church, and in His Return it is Angels that gather, that the bad might be cast out and that nothing that offends enter into the Kingdom. Keep in mind that for the First Century Jew, the teachings of Christ would have had a context of an earthly Kingdom ruled by the Son of David. Christ came only to the "Lost Sheep of Israel," according to His Word. The primary context would be of the earthly Kingdom, which even the Disciples of Christ asked about, amazingly, here...

Acts 1 King James Version (KJV)

3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

Christ does not deny a fulfillment of Kingdom prophecy, but states that time is not for them to know. An amazing question which shows their lack of understanding concerning the spiritual Kingdom which was being established at that time. What was necessary for these disciples was the revelation that would be provided to them once they were Baptized with the Holy Spirit...not many days hence.

And I will stop there, for now, as I am still having difficulty getting the functions to work. What exactly do I have to do to be able to utilize the functions (i.e., bold, italics, underlining, sizing, et cetera) when I am responding to a quote? When I hit the prompt above "B" these functions are not functional, and when I hit it again, they become functional, but when I highlight, the highlight disappears when I hit the function. What am I doing wrong here? Any help would be appreciated, as it slows things down to have to manually enter the code.

God bless.

[S.T. Ranger]

Still trying to figure out quote functions.

Edited December 22, 2014 by S.T. Ranger

[Enoch2021]

 

 

 

 

 

=========================================================================================================================

 

 

5 posts!!  It's was like walking through a Fallacy, self imploding logic museum.

 

1.  Again, you are still making this to mean that the Holy Spirit Himself is taken out of the world with the Church, when the Holy Spirit is Omnipresent.

2.  It is an impossibility that God should cease to be in the world.

 

 

 

2. This is a Strawman (Fallacy).  Nobody said this, and is a result of your "erroneous" Non-Sequitur (Fallacy)-----the premise doesn't agree with the conclusion in #1.

 

First of all, The Holy Spirit doesn't = Omnipresence.  mostly because they're two different Words.

Omnipresence is an Attribute of GOD......it's not GOD.   Man has Free Will but Freewill is not Man.  Man has Knowledge but Knowledge is not man.  Get the concept?

 

Second, The Holy Spirit was given and taken away in the OT Numerous Times: SEE: David

(Psalms 51:11) "Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me."  If the Holy Spirit couldn't be taken away i.e., "Not There" then this passage is nonsensical, because the Holy Spirit would still be there after he was taken away.... because he's Omnipresent (According to you).

 

Lets take a close look here and evaluate:  (2 Thessalonians 2:7) "For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way."

 

"he" and "taken out of the way" are somewhat ambiguous.  Let's use proper names (for illustration purposes only) hopefully you'll see it:

 

....only John Doe who now letteth will let, until John Doe be taken out of Mississippi.

 

Question:  If John Doe is taken out of Mississippi....is he still in Mississippi?    

Moreover, If the Holy Spirit is everywhere....why the need to be "taken out of the way"....according to you, he would still be there anyway? 

 

 

Then this...

 

He was "with the disciples at the time of this teaching, but Christ taught that when He was come, He (the Comforter, Holy Spirit) would be in them.

 

 

So the Holy Spirit was with the Disciples at the time of Jesus teaching, eh?

 

(John 16:7) " Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you."

 

How could The Comforter (The Holy Spirit) be with the disciples..... when Jesus just told them that He MUST go away FOR the Holy Spirit to come AND that Jesus will SEND The Holy Spirit personally? 

 

Where is The Holy Spirit @ the moment Jesus is speaking to the Disciples here in John 16?

 

 

Quite the logical boondoggle you got going here.

 

 

15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)

1.  ...and we know that he cannot do that as long as the Two Witnesses are alive...

Revelation 11 King James Version (KJV)

 

11 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.

2 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.

3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

 

2.  ...which indicates that the two forty-two month periods are not concurrent.

 

 

1.  Why?  Please show "Specifically" why The Two Witnesses and the Abomination of Desolation can't happen concurrently.  Please show why they are Mutually Exclusive?  Because you sure haven't provided anything here.

 

2.  What on Earth is this?

Are you saying the first half of Daniel's 70th Week is not "Concurrent" with the 2nd half of Daniels 70th Week?

Do you have the 2 Witnesses preaching when the ac makes the Covenant with The Many (Start of Daniel's 70th Week)??

 

 

You say that it is at this time that Antichrist makes the covenant, and I would agree with that, because the covenant Antichrist effects is broken at the mid-point of the Tribulation.

Now we consult Chapter 12:

 

 

Factually Incorrect.  And you Consult Matthew 24 to confirm.  There is no "Tribulation". The Covenant is Broken AND the abomination of desolation takes place in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week and Begins the "Great Tribulation"....

 

(Matthew 24:15-21) " When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)  {16}  Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:  {17}  Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:  {18}  Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.  {19}  And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!  {20}  But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:  {21}  For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."

 

"For then shall be great tribulation":  When? .... "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation..."  When does this Occur? In the midst of Daniels 70th Week....3.5 years after the ac makes a Covenant with the Many.

 

What is particularly confusing about this?

 

 

For the first half, we see the judgments begin to unfold, and while I believe that Antichrist begins his career at the start of this, we also have to follow the events as described in Revelation, which begin with the Seal Judgments, which are unleashed as these Seals are opened.

 

 

 

Begging The Question (Fallacy) ----assuming the very thing you're trying to prove. Who said the Seals begin the First Half of Daniels 70th Week?

The Seals look like the "beginning of sorrows" to me....

 

(Matthew 24:6-8) " And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.  {7}  For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.  {8}  All these are the beginning of sorrows."

 

The Four Horseman/ Seals:

 

1. The White Horse:  Went forth conquering, an to conquer.

2. The Red Horse:  to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword."

"Wars and Rumors of Wars" and "Nation shall Rise against Nation".

 

 

3. Black Horse:  "A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny.

"Famine".

 

4. Pale Horse: "Puke Green":  to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth."

"War", "Famine", "Pestilence"/Disease (Beasts of the Earth----Includes Microbes)

 

(Revelation 6:12) "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;"

"Earthquake"

 

Nowhere in Daniel (Or anywhere in Scripture) does it say that the first half of the Week contains these events.  Could they happen then, SURELY.  Is it reasonable to Assume they do?  I think so.....But that's just an Assumption. 

 

However and Moreover, that's not the Point; The Point is, you're trying to make these "Tribulation". You're Equivocating (Fallacy) with the word "Tribulation" and you can't support just "Tribulation" from Scripture.

 

Allow me to Illustrate your Equivocation Fallacy....

 

(Matthew 13:21) " Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended."

 

Is Jesus speaking to the first half of Daniel's 70th Week here?  The Whole Week? Do the 4 Horseman/Seals get released here?

 

 

(Romans 2:9) "Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;"

 

How about Paul here?  Will every soul that doeth evil receive a personal Daniel's 70th Week and 4 Horseman/Seals Judgement?

 

(Romans 5:3) "And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;"

 

This says "tribulations".  Is Paul referring to Many 70 Weeks of Daniel?  How many 4 Horseman and 6 Seals will we Glory in?

 

 

Equivocation (Fallacy): The same word is used with two different meanings.

 

 

PRO TIP: Fallacies are Fallacious

 

 

Semantics. "Tribulation" is certainly a proper designation for Daniel's Seventieth Week, just as "Rapture" is an acceptable term for the "Catching Away." Just as "Communion" is an acceptable term for Communion, and "Christmas" is an acceptable term to speak of the Lord's birth.

 

 

Nope not even close, it's called Equivocation and it's a Logical Fallacy (as I've already shown you). Then just Parrot the Fallacy and "erroneous" Assumption.  And your attempted force analogy with "Rapture", "Communion" and "Christmas" is Non-Sequitur (Fallacy) Cherry on Top.  btw, "Rapture" is referenced in the Latin Vulgate. 

 

Words, They Mean Things.

 

 

However, when we see that Antichrist, according to Daniel, is active in the first half, bringing about a covenant which allows for daily sacrifice, which is balanced with the fact that we cannot logically make the Antichrist's reign and the Two Witnesses' ministry run concurrent.

 

 

 

If the "ac" and the "Two Witnesses" ministry cannot "logically" run concurrently, then how does the beast (aka: ac) KILL the Two Witnesses??? ...

 

(Revelation 11:7) "And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them."

 

Define Logically....?

 

 

it is the Daniel, the Lord, Paul, and John's teaching that makes the first half of the Tribulation tribulation.

 

 

And....?  Go ahead post the Scriptures....?

 

 

You are creating false arguments.

 

 

And.....? Go ahead and provide the evidence of this; Otherwise, it remains a Baseless Assertion (Fallacy).

 

 

Actually, I never mentioned Ezekiel 38, so if you continue to create false arguments and then answering them I will have to refrain from engaging you in discussion and debate. Respond to what I have said, and do not include what you want me to have said.

 

 

Ahhh, here's the proof.  Well there Ranger, you didn't have to literally mention Ezekiel 38 ....your position is tied to Ezekiel 39, which by proxy brings  Ezekiel 38 With It!  Why...  You mentioned The Great Supper from Ezekiel 39 which is the culmination of Ezekiel 38-39 (The GOG/Magog Invasion/ WAR). 

 

ERGO....Your attempted Strawman Assertion ("false argument") is a Non-Sequitur Fallacy.

 

 

Enoch 2021.....

 

And can you please show anywhere in Ezekiel 38-39, These....

 

THE LAMB or The LION OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH?? Then: satan/ ac/ False Prophet/ Mark of the beast/ Martyrs/ 2 Witnesses.....Preaching, Killed, then Resurrected....rising to Heaven with everyone watching /Mystery Babylon/ Babylon Proper...being destroyed/ Tribulation Saints/ 144,00 Sealed/ 7 Churches/ 7 Seals/ 7 Trumpets/ 7 Bowls/ Locusts....tormenting men 5 Months/ Signs in sun, moon, stars, heaven/ Bottomless Pit/ Michael Casting satan out of Heaven with 1/3 of his angels/ 24 Elders/ 4 Living Creatures with six wings about them/ The Four Horseman/ Wormwood/ The 4 Angels loosed from the great river Euphrates/ Army of two hundred thousand thousand/ The Temple of GOD/ The Ark of HIS Testament/ Blasphemy against GOD/ Abomination of Desolation/ Deadly Head Wound...then Healed/ Image of the Beast that came to Life/ Mount Sion/ Flying Angel Preaching the Gospel/ Angels with Sharp Sickles/ Vine and Grapes/ Great Winepress/ Blood 1600 Furlongs up to Horses Bridles/ Grievous Sores upon Men/ sea as blood of a dead man and ALL sea-life Died/ Sun Scorching men with Fire/ Angel Standing on the Sun/ men gnawing their tongues in pain...No Repentance/ Frogs out of the mouth of dragon, people with the mark....cast into the Lake of Fire/ Marriage Supper/ Wife....arrayed in fine linen, white and clean/ White Horse/ Vesture dipped in Blood....written on the side: KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

 

Ranger.....

 

1.  Can you show me in Isaiah 53 that Christ is the Son of the Living God?

 

2.  Ridiculous argument, my friend, I am sorry you wasted your time posting all of this.

 

 

 

1. No, why would I?

 

2.  Why, didn't I add any logical fallacies so it would make sense to you?  Have you ever read Ezekiel 38-39? Did you know that Chapter 39 is speaking to the events of Chapter 38....

 

(Ezekiel 38:1-2) "And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,  {2} Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him,"

 

(Ezekiel 39:1) "Therefore, thou son of man, prophesy against Gog, and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal:"

 

See the connection??

 

Enoch 2021....We already discussed the "Tribulation" issue.

 

Ranger....Just because you post something that you think is true does not either make it true or...end the discussion. "I have spoken!" may work with some antagonists, my friend, but if you want to get into this in seriousness, be prepared and be expected to present a biblical support for what you are teaching.

 

 

That I know is True.  And I already posted Matthew 24:15 showing you.  Please post the Scriptures "Specifically" denoting Daniel's 70th Week (or any part of the week for that matter) as just "Tribulation"? The Burden of Proof is on YOU (Shift the Burden of Proof----Logical Fallacy). 

 

I can't disprove a negative (You Conjuring "Tribulation").  It's Tantamount to me saying "there are 3 Toed Gnomes behind the Crab Nebula throwing pixie dust in a Black Hole that's responsible for Dark Matter", then asking you to disprove it!  

[Enoch2021]

 

 

 

 

======================================================================================================================

 

Now let's get back to Revelation 12 and the identity of the 3 characters using the information established earlier in the discussion.

 

 

Re-stating the same (Refuted) Argument over again does not offer anymore Veracity than the Original.  SEE: "In Detail" Refutations in my last 3 posts to you.

 

 

 

You will not convince me that this is not meant to be insulting, I am familiar with this technique you are employing here, it is called--------- I don't like what you have to say, so you're stupid.  I can think of nothing more personal as far as an attack goes, it appears you know how I read and handle scripture down to techniques, and because I post a verse or two from pertinent material, you draw the wild and inaccurate conclusion that I am "pigeon-holing" one verse, or one word in said verse.  You know very little about me, outside of the fact that I don't agree Revelation is chronological, and we do not agree on how the end times will unfold.

 

 

Appeal to Emotion (Fallacy).

 

I've already shown in Excruciating detail where you made the Fallacious connection via "Quote Mining" Romans 11 and Zechariah 13 with "cut off".  Then I clearly illustrated the next time you employed the same technique with "Wilderness" from Rev 12 and Hosea Chapter 2, here:

 

 

There are no insults/colors/sadness/happiness/sour/saltiness et al associated with the breach.  It is what it is.

[S.T. Ranger]

 

 

 

=========================================================================================================================

 

 

5 posts!!  It's was like walking through a Fallacy, self imploding logic museum.

And judging by the cherry-picking, it is obvious you walked carefully, lol.

And by the way, the reason that it is in five posts is because I do not cherry-pick and the response was longer than one post will contain. This will be the case with this post as well.

1.  Again, you are still making this to mean that the Holy Spirit Himself is taken out of the world with the Church, when the Holy Spirit is Omnipresent.

2.  It is an impossibility that God should cease to be in the world.

 

 

2. This is a Strawman (Fallacy).

Actually, it is not:

1. The "he" is the Holy Spirit given to "The Church" (Forever). And "he" isn't going anywhere without "The Church".

2. "he" is taken out of the way; "Rapture".

3. "And Then" shall that Wicked (ac) be revealed.

Your statement here makes the mistake of failing to see that it is the restraint of the Holy Spirit which is removed...not the Holy Spirit Himself.

And this was addressed here:

1A. You say the "Rapture must take place before the Antichrist is revealed," and then give the Rapture and the taking out of the way of the Holy Spirit as the reasoning behind this. I would suggest to you that while the Church is taken out of the world, the Holy is not, He is taken "out of the way." That is a significant point we must remember when we look at this passage. Secondly, we would have to apply or impose spiritual understanding upon natural men for my point to be refuted. Third, when the Church is Raptured, while the Holy Spirit, Who is omnipresent, is not taken out of the world, the influence of the Holy Spirit through the Church ceases to be a restraining factor in this world. The Church is Raptured, and the impact we have had in this world ceases, which is coupled with both spiritual blindness to begin with, the deception of the Antichrist who has now free of the restraint once imposed, and...the great delusion God sends upon those that "received not the love of the truth." In chapter one of 2 Thessalonians we see a similar statement regarding those who "know not God and obey not the Gospel."

Again, not sure how this refutes my statement. You have the Holy Spirit being Raptured with the Church as though He is not still in the world, but confined to the Body of Christ.

So, we see that a charge of fallacy can only be levied...at you. lol

Now, you can settle this fairly easy by confirming that you believe the Holy Spirit is taken out of the World when the Rapture takes place, as well as explaining better what you meant here, if it was not to mean that the Holy Spirit is taken out of the world.

Nobody said this,

You did. SEE above quotes. lol

and is a result of your "erroneous" Non-Sequitur (Fallacy)-----

Maybe if you understood the terms you use you might use them less.

the premise doesn't agree with the conclusion in #1.

So you deny the omnipresence of God?

 

First of all, The Holy Spirit doesn't = Omnipresence.

I would agree, but, it is an immutable attribute, which, if it ceased being true, then God would cease to be God.

mostly because they're two different Words.

Great argument. Really. An argument that simply cannot be answered...with a straight face.

Omnipresence is an Attribute of GOD......it's not GOD.

So confirm that God is sometimes omnipresent and sometimes not, rather than wasting a lot of space trying to dig yourself out of the hole you are only making worse.

Confirm you are stating that the Holy Spirit is removed from the world when the Church is raptured.

And by the way, shorter posts are also given in the hope that a more detailed response will be offered.

Continued...

[S.T. Ranger]

Man has Free Will but Freewill is not Man.

Depends on what kind of "free will" you are talking about. If you mean free will in regards to salvation, that is an invalid and unbiblical doctrine espoused by those that have simply adopted a belief system which best corresponds to what they want to believe.

If you mean free will as in you get to decide what kind of shirt you wear today, or whether you will be obedient to the Lord's expectation of self-control, love, and representing Him in a worthy manner, then I would agree.

Your posting makes it clear that believers have that kind of free will.

 

Man has Knowledge but Knowledge is not man.

We're not talking about men, amigo, we are talking about the Holy Spirit and the meaning of the removal of restraint, Who the Restrainer is, and whether or not an Omnipresent God can become non-existent in the world because He is removed with the Church.

 

Get the concept?

That God is omnipresent so to say that the Holy Spirit is removed from the world so the Antichrist can be revealed is absurd?

Got it.

 

Second, The Holy Spirit was given and taken away in the OT Numerous Times:

No, Enoch, He wasn't.

You are confusing the Person of the Holy Spirit with His ministry.

Your proof-texts are at the same time humorous in light of the context of the discussion but they are also grievous, because you are doing nothing but seeking to...be right. And you have removed the possibility of being right on this issue.

 

SEE: David

(Psalms 51:11) "Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me." If the Holy Spirit couldn't be taken away i.e., "Not There" then this passage is nonsensical, because the Holy Spirit would still be there after he was taken away.... because he's Omnipresent

So the Holy Spirit's presence with David was essential to the Holy Spirit for remaining in the world.

Amazing.

 

(According to you).

Not just me:

John 14:16-17 King James Version (KJV)

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

The Lord is speaking about the Ministry of the Comforter which would begin after His Ascension, which begins at Pentecost and corresponds to the fulfillment of the promise of the Spirit, which would be eternal and internal, hence the distinction the Lord makes here.

This should not be confused with the previous ministry seen here...

Matthew 10 King James Version (KJV)

5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.

The Holy Spirit has always ministered in the world and empowered men for roles of Prophet, Priest, King, and in general ministry to His people.

David's prayer was uttered in a time of distress, yet we are told here...

1 Samuel 16:13King James Version (KJV)

13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah.

...that the Holy Spirit never left David. While this was not the eternal indwelling promised in the New Covenant, it is the ministry which is still performed by the Holy Spirit which we normally would call the "filling" of the Spirit, which is distinguished from the indwelling that takes place at the time of new birth.

 

Lets take a close look here and evaluate:

Excellent idea.

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

"he" and "taken out of the way" are somewhat ambiguous.

Only if being ambiguous helps support your view.

Nothing difficult in the statement.

Let's use proper names (for illustration purposes only) hopefully you'll see it:

....only John Doe who now letteth will let, until John Doe be taken out of Mississippi.

Let's correct this erroneous analogy:

....only John Doe who now letteth will let, until John Doe be taken out of the way.

That is how it should read if it is going to equate to the statement of Paul. Not out of Mississippi, but out of the way.

Question: If John Doe is taken out of Mississippi....is he still in Mississippi?

New question now that the analogy is corrected: Is John's location relevant to the statement?

The answer is no, the fallacy is yours.

Moreover, If the Holy Spirit is everywhere....why the need to be "taken out of the way"

He isn't, lol. This is why cherry-picking is hazardous to your posts.

And this has already been addressed...

1A. You say the "Rapture must take place before the Antichrist is revealed," and then give the Rapture and the taking out of the way of the Holy Spirit as the reasoning behind this. I would suggest to you that while the Church is taken out of the world, the Holy is not, He is taken "out of the way." That is a significant point we must remember when we look at this passage.

....according to you, he would still be there anyway?

Not just according to me: how do you think men will be saved in the Tribulation?

Free will? Will they, as natural men...understand the spiritual things of God? Will they effect their own new birth? Will they not be indwelt by the Spirit of God?

But you can settle this easily: simply state clearly that you believe that the Spirit of God will not be found in the Tribulation.

And for the second time, the word Tribulation is used, as it is by most people, as a general term for the Seventieth Week. But I will deal with your comments on that shortly.

Continued...

[Enoch2021]

 

 

 

 

 

================================================================================================================

 

Thanks for the FREE Expositional Commentary of Parts of Hosea.  

 

If you want to make quick work of summarily refuting your position IN TOTO, Skip down to " ***** " in which you basically did it for me.

 

 

Hosea 1:11 The people of Judah and the people of Israel will come together; they will appoint one leader and will come up out of the land, for great will be the day of Jezreel.

 

Really?  That is the final verse of chapter 1, it is only 11 verses long, you missed this detail in your details.

 

 

And......?  What did I miss?

 

Who is Hosea Prophesying to..... The House of Israel (Northern Kingdom) or the House of Judah (Southern Kingdom) in the Whole Book?  Then Specifically, in the FIRST 2 CHAPTERS?

 

 

Other critical details that you failed to notice.

 

Hosea 1:4 Then the Lord said to Hosea, “Call him Jezreel, because I will soon punish the house of Jehu for the massacre at Jezreel, and I will put an end to the kingdom of Israel. 5 In that day I will break Israel’s bow in the Valley of Jezreel.”

 

Hosea's first son, Jezreel.  The name represents a historical incident from II Kings 9-10.  Hosea lived to see this prophecy fulfilled, II Kings 15:8-12.  For a historical perspective of the time Hosea lived, see II Kings 14:23-17:41.  The name Jezreel has a double meaning, it means both to "scatter", and to "sow".  This is illustrated in chapter 2:11 (to scatter), and in verse 22 (to sow).  All three of these names are curses that turn to blessings.

 

 

This is a Red Herring (Of which 99% of your entire post is, as I will show) (Fallacy) ----- is a seemingly plausible, though ultimately irrelevant, diversionary tactic.  A red herring might be intentionally used, such as in mystery fiction or as part of a rhetorical strategy (e.g. in politics), or it could be inadvertently used during argumentation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring

 

And yes thanks, "Lo" means "No/Not".....(Hosea 1:8-9) "¶ Now when she had weaned Lo–ruhamah, she conceived, and bare a son.  {9} Then said God, Call his name Lo–ammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God."

 

And thanks, yes... already knew Jezreel means "scatter" and "sow".  

 

Do yo have some kind of a point in relation to my argument?

 

 

 

Hosea 1:6 Gomer conceived again and gave birth to a daughter. Then the Lord said to Hosea, “Call her Lo-Ruhamah (which means “not loved”), for I will no longer show love to Israel, that I should at all forgive them.

 

Hosea's daughter, pay close attention to the meaning of her name, not loved.

 

Hosea 1:8 After she had weaned Lo-Ruhamah, Gomer had another son. 9 Then the Lord said, “Call him Lo-Ammi (which means “not my people”), for you are not my people, and I am not your God.

 

Hosea's second son, pay close attention to the meaning of his name, not my people.

 

Note the increasing nature of God's displeasure denoted by their names, first comes punishment, then a loss of love, finally total divorce.  Now I've already pointed you to the passages that include Jezreel, how about the other two?

Hosea 2 “Say of your brothers, ‘My people,’ and of your sisters, ‘My loved one.’

Hosea 2:23 I will plant her for myself in the land;

    I will show my love to the one I called ‘Not my loved one.’

I will say to those called ‘Not my people,’ ‘You are my people’;

    and they will say, ‘You are my God.’”

 

The chapter begins and ends around them.  This entire chapter is based around Hosea's personal life, and how God related to Israel.  Why does Hosea use the language he used?  Simple, his calling was the northern kingdom, this is what he related to.  From his perspective, adultery was the root cause of Israel's issues.

 

 

Here's another Red Herring (Fallacy).  But since you posted it let's have a look....

 

"From his perspective, adultery was the root cause of Israel's issues."  "Spiritual Adultery" or "Spiritual Fornication".  Fornication is used throughout Scripture, depending on context, to speak of the Physical Act and Idol Worship.  In this specific case, God deliberately set up this "Type" with Hosea and Gomer juxtaposed with Himself and the House of Israel (Northern Kingdom).

 

Moreover, can you please tell me what on Earth does this have to do with my argument?

 

 

At the same time, Amos was also prophesying in the northern kingdom.  He concentrated mostly on law and justice, with an emphasis on the poor.  Combining what these two prophets were addressing, together they address Israel's problems.

 

 

Another Red Herring (Fallacy).  Thanks for stating the "Northern Kingdom"...exactly my point.

 

What does Amos have to do with any point whatsoever with my argument?

 

 

 

Chapter 3 is also very short, 5 verses in fact, so I will just post the entire thing.

 

Hosea 3 The Lord said to me, “Go, show your love to your wife again, though she is loved by another man and is an adulteress. Love her as the Lord loves the Israelites, though they turn to other gods and love the sacred raisin cakes.”

2 So I bought her for fifteen shekels of silver and about a homer and a lethek of barley. 3 Then I told her, “You are to live with me many days; you must not be a prostitute or be intimate with any man, and I will behave the same way toward you.”

4 For the Israelites will live many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred stones, without ephod or household gods. 5 Afterward the Israelites will return and seek the Lord their God and David their king. They will come trembling to the Lord and to his blessings in the last days.

 

 

Do you still say Hosea is only addressing the northern kingdom?

 

 

Strawman (Fallacy).

 

What I'm saying is Hosea is addressing the "Northern Kingdom" in the first 2 Chapters !  Where our Argument is, Sir.  Also, he is mainly addressing the Northern Kingdom (House of Israel) in the Entire Book because that was his mission.

 

Please list the Prophets "assigned" to the "Southern Kingdom".....?  

 

Just because the "Southern Kingdom" (House of Judah) is peppered throughout the book of Hosea, doesn't give a wisp of Veracity to your position Whatsoever.  The Southern Kingdom (House of Judah) has a completely different Destiny that occurred about 100 years AFTER the Assyrians more or less wiped out the Northern Kingdom.  When will the Northern Kingdom be brought back into the Fold.....in the Millennium!

 

 

These are not speaking to the same event.

 

Fine, if you really want to travel down this rabbit hole, please show me the scriptural support you have for this claim.

 

 

I already did, Right Here:  

 

I'm certainly not writing it again.

 

 

And more from Hosea regarding your suggestion this prophecy was only for the northern kingdom.

Hosea 5:5 Israel’s arrogance testifies against them;

    the Israelites, even Ephraim, stumble in their sin;

    Judah also stumbles with them.

Hosea 5:10 Judah’s leaders are like those

    who move boundary stones.

I will pour out my wrath on them

    like a flood of water.

11 Ephraim is oppressed,

    trampled in judgment,

    intent on pursuing idols.

12 I am like a moth to Ephraim,

    like rot to the people of Judah.

 

 

 

 

1.  Who is Ephraim?  The northern kingdom. 

 

2.  Who is Judah?  The southern kingdom. 

 

3.  At any rate, I think I have clearly illustrated my point using scripture as to whom Hosea is addressing. 

 

4. You may want to reconsider rushing through Hosea, it appears you are overlooking the important details and arriving at the wrong conclusions.

 

 

Red Herring (Fallacy) and a Strawman (Fallacy)

 

What Chapter are these passages from?

 

Where is our Argument? ........ Chapters 1-2.

 

1.  Thanks, I was aware.  Did you know the Holy Spirit was using Ephraim as a Synechdoche (Figure of Speech)---- where a part speaks to the whole?

2.  Thanks, I was aware.

 

3.  All you have clearly illustrated is a propensity to construct Red Herring (Fallacies) and Strawman (Fallacies) as I have clearly demonstrated.

 

4. "Rushing Through"?? Who said I was "rushing through"?  How do you know that, Special Mind Powers?

 

 

(Hosea 2:18) "And in that day will I make a covenant for them with the beasts of the field, and with the fowls of heaven, and with the creeping things of the ground: and I will break the bow and the sword and the battle out of the earth, and will make them to lie down safely."

 

This passage is speaking about eternity, this is the New Jerusalem.  When will the bow, sword, and battle be broken out of the earth?  Not before that final battle, I assure you.  

 

 

*****

 

Yes, it surely could be. And it matters not to my position whether it's the Millennium that this happens or Post Millennium (New Jerusalem) as long as it's not in the vicinity of the Second Coming i.e., Revelation 12-19.  It sure blows a massive hole in your position, However.

 

Because it's the SAME DAY as your reference here is speaking to....

 

(Hosea 2:14-18) "¶ Therefore, behold, I will allure her, and bring her into the wilderness, and speak comfortably unto her.  {15} And I will give her her vineyards from thence, and the valley of Achor for a door of hope: and she shall sing there, as in the days of her youth, and as in the day when she came up out of the land of Egypt.  {16} And it shall be at that day, saith the LORD, that thou shalt call me Ishi; and shalt call me no more Baali.  {17} For I will take away the names of Baalim out of her mouth, and they shall no more be remembered by their name.  {18} And in that day will I make a covenant for them with the beasts of the field, and with the fowls of heaven, and with the creeping things of the ground: and I will break the bow and the sword and the battle out of the earth, and will make them to lie down safely."

 

This collapses your Entire Position IN TOTO.

 

Thanks for proving my point  

 

 

 

The millenium is not what you imagine, the millenium is this:

 

Matthew 24:36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

 

 

What on Earth is this?   This is Concerning The Second Coming (Revelation 19) KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.....

 

(Matthew 24:36-37) "¶  But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.  {37}  But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."

 

It's speaking to this...

 

(1 Thessalonians 5:2) "For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night."

 

The Millennium happens AFTER the day of the LORD.

 

Does HE come back as a thief in the Millennium, or is HE already there?

 

And it's not speaking to Revelation 18 and the "fall of Babylon" either.

 

 

In Revelation chapter 18, it is called the Fall of Babylon, follow the clues in the chapter, look for the mentioning of this day and hour.

 

You already know how this is possible, this verse is familiar I am certain, but pay close attention to the exact verbiage Peter uses.

 

II Peter 3:8  But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

 

 

Where are you getting "this" from?

 

(2 Peter 3:8) "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

 

"as a" and " as " are Similes, it's a Rhetorical Device (Figure of Speech).  He's not say anything Literal here.....He's Illustrating GOD'S Timelessness.

 

Can you please show me where this passage speaks to the "Fall of Babylon" ??