Is the Falling Away a false teaching ?

[Guest Robert]

10 minutes ago, brakelite said:

That would be nice, but no where in scripture is such a thing suggested. Those in expectation of being taken off the planet before the global reign of Antichrist, will throughout his reign not only not recognize him, but accept his mark. I say "his", as a figure of speech. The beast is not an individual man. All beasts in prophetic scripture are political powers...in this case, a union of church and state...aka Vatican. Not only has this power been here for centuries, along with 10 others grew out of the 4th beast of Rome as a little horn, uprooted three of the other ten, ruled for 1260 years and then recovered, speaks blasphemies, persecutes the saints, changed times and laws, but also sits in the temple of God (the church) believing himself to be God by forgiving sin and "creating his Creator"! And you think all this evidence insufficient to indict him as the only true Antichrist? What more could you want?

That's assuming the Church will be here for the Tribulation (which it will not be) and assuming the Holy Spirit would depart from the Church (which Scripture never indicates, but Scripture indicates that the restrainer will be removed from the Earth).  So, either 1) the Lord is a liar and removes the Holy Spirit from the Church (keep in mind that we are told "I will never leave you nor forsake you" in Scripture, and the Holy Spirit is also God along with Jesus Christ and the Father), leaving the Church to rot in the Tribulation, or 2) When the Holy Spirit goes, we go with Him.

As for "pinning the tail on the AC", that has always been a fool's game and this is why: when the one we nominate turns out to not  be the AC, we end up looking like complete morons to the rest of the world, and it gives unbelievers even more ammo to use in mocking the Lord and the Gospel.

[brakelite]

1 hour ago, RobertS said:

That's assuming the Church will be here for the Tribulation (which it will not be) and assuming the Holy Spirit would depart from the Church (which Scripture never indicates, but Scripture indicates that the restrainer will be removed from the Earth).  So, either 1) the Lord is a liar and removes the Holy Spirit from the Church (keep in mind that we are told "I will never leave you nor forsake you" in Scripture, and the Holy Spirit is also God along with Jesus Christ and the Father), leaving the Church to rot in the Tribulation, or 2) When the Holy Spirit goes, we go with Him.

 

First, how can anyone "assume" that the church won't be here during the tribulation when the scripture gives no indication of its disappearance until the actual second coming? Second, it is another assumption on your part that that the "restrainer" so called is the Holy Spirit. And finally, why would the church "rot" during the tribulation when God's promises to His people are to protect them in any circumstance?

1 hour ago, RobertS said:

 

As for "pinning the tail on the AC", that has always been a fool's game and this is why: when the one we nominate turns out to not  be the AC, we end up looking like complete morons to the rest of the world, and it gives unbelievers even more ammo to use in mocking the Lord and the Gospel.

There is so much information in scripture that clearly identifies the true Antichrist that for a Bible believing Christian to ignore, or teach contrary to it, or even as you say claim it be a "fool's game", is gross negligence. The Antichrist is described in many ways, and under several different symbols, revealing when put together, a very complete picture. God has done this for a purpose. That purpose is that we may clearly identify the Antichrist, to know of a surety his character and goals, and so be aware and prepare ourselves that we may understand truth, and not be deceived. I wonder what side people are on when they teach doctrines and beliefs that contradict or ignore these truths. It makes me wonder if they know who the Bible is referring to, and are deliberately undermining it. Just as the Jesuits invented futurism, preterism, and the rapture theory all of which are clever ploys that hide the Vatican from being identified as Antichrist, so I wonder at times if certain people on forums who consistently defend these theories despite clear contradictory teachings from scripture, are themselves Jesuits.

I will proclaim loud and clear till the day I die who and what I believe is Antichrist. I am doing so on another thread "The characteristics of the Little horn". I could not care less if someone thinks I am a fool. All the reformers taught the same. I also am a Protestant. As far as I am concerned, the protest is NOT over. So I am in very good company.

[seeking the lost]

10 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

Like I have ALREADY STATED, people will depart from the faith, that is the SUBJECT in 1 Timothy, isn't it ? GIVING HEED TO SEDUCING SPIRITS and DOCTRINES OF DEVILS...............This is the Subject. Now show me ANYWHERE in 2 Thessalonians 2 where the Subject is about people turning from the Faith.........Hold on, I will paste it............

They look the same to me and indicate the same thing.  What part of "we will not precede them" is it that you do not understand?  There is no early out.  The tares are taken out first then wheat gathered.  Looking forward to being left behind. 

[Ezra]

On 9/15/2016 at 11:04 PM, Revelation Man said:

It is that the word means Departing not Falling Away.

In practical terms there is no difference.  If men depart from the true Gospel or Bible truth, they in fact fall away from the truth and sink into lies. No point playing semantics here.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

15 hours ago, brakelite said:

the Antichrist... has been here for a long time, and has himself deceived everyone into believing he is yet to come. That was the whole crux of my post.

On the other hand, he is a man, who is limited to the normal lifespan of a man.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

14 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

The Church does not go through the Tribulation.

I disagree.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

12 hours ago, Ezra said:

The Tribulation and the Great Tribulation are for the unbelieving and the ungodly.

Or are they a test to separate wise virgins from foolish virgins and bring the number of fifth Seal martyrs towards their final number?

We shall see, and perhaps in our lifetimes.

[brakelite]

8 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

On the other hand, he is a man, who is limited to the normal lifespan of a man.

The Antichrist is revealed to us through scripture in several different ways. In Daniel 2 he is the mixture of iron and clay. In Daniel 7 he is the little horn. In 2 Thess the man of sin and son of perdition, and in Revelation 13 the first beast, among others. The beasts of Daniel 7 were all representative of empires, even though they prophecy referenced an individual king.  Nebuchadnezzar was the representative of the entire empire, so also with the ‘man of sin’, and 'son of perdition'. Below is an excerpt from a sermon by the renowned preacher and writer Puritan Thomas Manton in the 17th century. Charles Spurgeon testified to Mantons works as being “a mighty mountain of sound theology”

But because he is called the man of sin, here it cometh fitly to be inquired whether Antichrist be an individual person? for ‘that man of sin’ would seem to be some single person. No; he is put for a society and succession of men, that make up the head of the apostate state. As one lion figured the whole kingdom of the Babylonians, and one bear the kingdom of the Medes and Persians, and one leopard the kingdom of the Grecians, Dan. 7, — and there the fourth beast is the fourth kingdom, — so one person that succession of men that head the revolters from Christ. So Dan. 8, a goat figured a succession of kings; so the Assyrian, Isa. 10:5, several kings in that empire; so Isa. 14:9, the king of Babylon, meaning not one but many. So this man of sin doth not note a single man, but a succession of men, a body politic or corporate, under one opposite head to the kingdom of Christ: so the ‘man of God’ is put for all faithful ministers, 2 Tim. 3:17; so ‘honour the king,’ I Peter 2:17, series regum. So o arciereus, Heb. 9:25, ‘The high priest every year entereth into the holy place;’ meaning not one, but the succession of the order; and in reason it must needs be so here. Because Antichrist, from his beginning to his end, from his rise and revelation, till his ruin and destruction, will take up such a long track of time, as cannot fall within the age of any one man, even from the time of the apostles till the end of the world. Antichrist is the head of the apostasy; for here the apostasy and the revelation of the man of sin are tied together; now the mysterious apostasy could not be perfected in a short time.

In this sermon, Manton, like many reformers before him, was applying the prophecy of 2 Thess. concerning the man of sin directly to the papal system. To accept the teaching that the Antichrist is an individual man, is to fall under the same delusion or deception that the Jesuits invented to divert the accusations of the reformers away from the Papal power. The futurist paradigm completely hides the true Antichrist from the Bible scholar. It does away with nearly 2000 years of church history, nearly 2000 years of political and church persecution, nearly 2000 years of apostasy, and nearly 2000 years of courage of martyrs and Christians who against all odds, cleaved to Christ despite the Roman despotism. All cleverly invented as part and parcel with the counter reformation. Because Protestants no longer believe what the reformers all agreed on, the identity of the RCC system as the Antichrist, Protestants now see no reason not to return to Mother, thus they trample on the blood of their forbears, and like their mother, become harlots in apostatizing from truth.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

20 minutes ago, brakelite said:

To accept the teaching that the Antichrist is an individual man, is to fall under the same delusion or deception that the Jesuits invented to divert the accusations of the reformers away from the Papal power. The futurist paradigm completely hides the true Antichrist from the Bible scholar. 

Ah!  So what you are railing against is not a simple concept found in the Bible, but a whole matter of interpretation!  Futurism is your great satan.

Well, my friend, I know no Jesuits, and I take a plain, literal reading of the Word.  
This very manner of interpretation is not wrong!  It is but one of four different ways people can approach end-time prophecy.

So just because I have a different perspective than you, does not mean I am wrong.  Nor does it make you wrong.

But what I will rail about are those who are on a mission to discount a whole class of eschatology because it is not to their way of thinking.

So accuse all you like, but I think you're way off with your condemnations of the literal, futuristic rendering of end-time prophecy.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

The Anti-Christ

            The only time the word “antichrist” is used in the Bible is in John’s writings.  This however, does not completely describe the anti-Christ anticipated here in a literal rendering of prophecy as one who is set up as a talking image of himself in front of the Curtain within a rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem at the midpoint of the one ‘seven.’  While John points to “antichrist” as a coming figure, he goes onto say that anyone who opposes Christ is by definition “anti” - Christ.  Furthermore, any system which promises salvation apart from God, whether it be technology, Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, science, environmentalism, or evolution is “anti” - Christ.  On top of that, the John writes that there is a spirit of anti-Christ which permeates the world; the “world” being juxtaposed opposite what Christ is and represents.  

So while John is the only one who writes explicitly about “antichrist,” to be so ultra-literal as to myopically focus only on what he has to say about the anti-Christ loses sight of what other prophetic writing in Scripture says about the desolator, little horn, man of lawlessness or any other title that which points to the ruler who will come who sets himself up in the Temple claiming to be God. That person, as told by Jesus in Matthew 24:15, Paul in 2Th 2:4, and John in Revelation 13:14, is a person and he is the same person John says will ultimately come: the anti-Christ.  To have a complete view of the “ruler who will come” means incorporating all the myriad ways Scripture describes this seminal figure.  It is only through the various descriptions of him that a true picture of his being can emerge.

    Prophecy gives an indication on the rise of the Antichrist.  The manner in which this terrible ruler comes to power is revealed through two separate descriptions in Daniel from chapters eight and eleven where near term prophecy acts as a dual focus giving a model for the end time ruler.  The pivot point revolves around Antiochus IV Epiphanes.   This interpretation for dual focus also has an interesting bit of supporting evidence in Paul’s letters.  The rise of the little horn reveals more information through a careful word study in the Hebrew on how he rises to prominence in Daniel chapter seven.  These two parts show how the Antichrist rises out of the ruling council of the terrible beast to lead the terrible beast of a nation.

Taken together with the context of second century Israel which had devolved into Hellenistic practices, the latter part of Daniel chapter eight presents a world situation divorced from God.  The passage continues with the last of 8:23; “a stern-faced king, a master of intrigue, will arise,” This is completely inline with Paul’s account in Thessalonians, which Paul has the rebellion occurring immediately before the emergence of the Antichrist where he is revealed.  The verse in Daniel has an equally juxtaposed word to describe this Antichrist figure: arise.  Arise comes from ‘amad meaning stand, remain, endure.  In theological usage, it is used extensively for standing before God.  While sitting is the purview of God, and subjects before Him stand, the stand this character doomed for destruction makes is in defiance.  In another sense of the language, the devastation he causes also completes the turning away from God. 

    ^{DA 8:24}He will become very strong, but not by his own power. He will cause astounding devastation and will succeed in whatever he does. He will destroy the mighty men and the holy people. ²⁵He will cause deceit to prosper, and he will consider himself superior. When they feel secure, he will destroy many and take his stand against the Prince of princes. Yet he will be destroyed, but not by human power.

When this individual comes to power, verse 24 describes what he will accomplish: He will have success with astounding devastation and destroy both the mighty and the Holy people.  Conversely as the Holy people are destroyed deceit or alternately, treachery –TWOT p.849 will increase.  As the condition ripens, because of the use of b^e for when they feel secure, (and they has been added in the translation) introduces a temporal clause –TWOT p.87, to the point that that occurs, at a point when destruction comes to the mighty and holy and deceit prospers; two additional actions come forward, he will destroy many and take his stand, which here is the same word ‘amad translated before as arise. The second action means he will stand in opposition against the Prince of Princes, a reference to God, or more specifically, the King of Kings of the New Testament: Jesus.  This sense of stand as in opposition is not unlike the mistranslation of gabar in Daniel 9:27.  In opposition to God, gabar can mean to stand in opposition to God by the strength of one’s self.