2 Thessalonians 2:6-7

[OldCoot]

24 minutes ago, Diaste said:

That you seem so sincere in your conclusions truly grieves me. 

That it grieves you may say more about your perspective than mine. 

[Amazing Horse]

You don't have to be genius to realise that antichrist could not take over the world when Holy Spirit believers are on earth , because of 1 John 4:4

Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

 

So in 2 Thess 2 :6-9 First Holy Spirit must be taken out  before antichrist come ,  it's called Mystery if Iniquity .

If 2 Thess 2 is not speaking about Holy Spirit but antichrist , then Satan could never reveal antichrist , and Jesus could never come , and we would never be with Lord . Pretty bad logic whoever makes this assumption.

 

[Retrobyter]

On 9/11/2017 at 1:17 AM, OldCoot said:

I never said that those in the body of Christ are not saints.  But saints in the church are not the only saints.  Deuteronomy, Job, 1 Samuel, 2 Chronicles, and dozens of passages in Psalms all mention the saints of the most high, and none of those are eschatological passages.  Saints are qadosh or holy ones.  Believers in the church are likewise called holy.  But the holy ones in the OT were not in the church.  Doesn't make them less or more holy.  God is the one who makes people holy.  Same with those in the church.  They are no less holy or more so.  The church is just a different entity that came about at Shavuot/Pentacost and will be removed. 

I don't believe in a hierarchy  of saints.  Just separate but equal categories.  Abraham was declared righteous but he never was in the Church. And we are told in various passages in the NT that we must have the faith of Abraham to be saved.  The same faith is what is required for God to declare us justified.  Not what category we are in.  The church doesn't save anyone.  A faith like Abraham's does.

Likewise, if the church is removed Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, or Pre-wrath, any that come to faith in God after that will still be saints.  Just in that case, they will not be OT saints, or church saints.  They would be the tribulation saints.  But it is the same faith that is required by God who declares them holy.

And what of those who come to faith in the Millennial kingdom?  Would it not also be on the basis of having the same faith?   

And Yeshua is the sacrifice for them all.  Remember, the first mention of a redeemer was clear back in the garden of Eden after Adam and Eve sinned.  Yeshua wasn't an after thought or a different direction God took.  Yeshua was the solution to the problem of mankind's sin all along.

So simple. I guess that might be why it is so hard for some to grasp. We are all fallen creatures and just seem compelled to complicate things.

Shalom, OldCoot.

First, let me say that I'm agreeing with you here. This is merely an addition to what you've said.

It's important that one first defines his or her terms. Only if one is on the "same page" with others do we truly communicate. Often, people do not define their terms well even in their own minds; so, they are misunderstood when they try to say something to others.

The word I'm thinking about is "SAINT." Often, people make the mistake of equating this word with "a righteous person," because the word "saint" and "righteousness" are often associated together in the contexts of Scripture, but the two thoughts are not synonymous.

A "saint" is "one who is set apart;" that is, he or she is "considered special" or "considered important." God has "singled that person (or thing) out." The Hebrew word "qodesh" means...

OT:6944 qodesh (ko'-desh); from OT:6942; a sacred place or thing; rarely abstract, sanctity:
KJV - consecrated (thing), dedicated (thing), hallowed (thing), holiness, (X most) holy (X day, portion, thing), saint, sanctuary

OT:6942 qaadash (kaw-dash'); a primitive root; to be (causatively, make, pronounce or observe as) clean (ceremonially or morally):
KJV - appoint, bid, consecrate, dedicate, defile, hallow, (be, keep) holy (-er, place), keep, prepare, proclaim, purify, sanctify (-ied oneself,),  wholly.

Qodesh is the noun form, and qaadash is the verb and the root word of the family. Other related words are...

 

OT:6943 Qedesh (keh'-desh); from OT:6942; a sanctum; Kedesh, the name of four places in Palestine:
KJV - Kedesh.

OT:6945 qaadeesh (kaw-dashe'); from OT:6942; a (quasi) sacred person, i.e. (technically) a (male) devotee (by prostitution) to licentious idolatry:
KJV - sodomite, unclean.

OT:6946 Qaadeesh (kaw-dashe'); the same as OT:6945; sanctuary; Kadesh, a place in the Desert:
KJV - Kadesh. Compare OT:6947.

qadosh. See OT:6918.

OT:6918 qaadowsh (kaw-doshe'); or qadosh (kaw-doshe'); from OT:6942; sacred (ceremonially or morally); (as noun) God (by eminence), an angel, a saint, a sanctuary:
KJV - holy (One), saint.

OT:6947 Qaadeesh Barneea` (kaw-dashe' bar-nay'-ghah); from the same as OT:6946 and an otherwise unused word (apparently compounded of a correspondent to OT:1251 and a derivative of OT:5128) meaning desert of a fugitive; Kadesh of (the) Wilderness of Wandering; Kadesh-Barnea, a place in the Desert:
KJV - Kadesh-barnea.

OT:6948 qedeeshaah (ked-ay-shaw'); feminine of OT:6945; a female devotee (i.e. prostitute):
KJV - harlot, whore.

(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

Therefore, as one can see from how this term was negatively used for OT:6945 and OT:6948, it most mattered WHO was considering you "special" or "important," and for WHAT purpose! As you can see, these usages of the term were NOT for "righteous" people! Also, while the vowel sounds in Hebrew are extremely important, THEY WERE NOT WRITTEN IN THE ORIGINAL TEXT! We have the vowel pointing now, but that wasn't introduced into the Hebrew language until the second half of the first millennium A.D. by the Masorites.

Quote

 

In Hebrew orthography, niqqud or nikkud (Hebrew: נִקּוּד, Modern nikud, Tiberian niqqûḏ; "dotting, pointing" or Hebrew: נְקֻדּוֹת, Modern nekudot, Tiberian nəquddôṯ; "dots") is a system of diacritical signs used to represent vowels or distinguish between alternative pronunciations of letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Several such diacritical systems were developed in the Early Middle Ages. The most widespread system, and the only one still used to a significant degree today, was created by the Masoretes of Tiberias in the second half of the first millennium AD in the Land of Israel (see Masoretic Text, Tiberian Hebrew). Text written with niqqud is called ktiv menuqad.

Niqqud marks are small compared to consonants, so they can be added without retranscribing texts whose writers did not anticipate them.

In modern Israeli orthography niqqud is seldom used, except in specialised texts such as dictionaries, poetry, or texts for children or for new immigrants. For purposes of disambiguation, a system of spelling without niqqud, known in Hebrew as ktiv maleh (כתיב מלא‎, literally "full spelling") has developed. This was formally standardised in the Rules for Spelling without Niqqud (כללי הכתיב חסר הניקוד‎) enacted by the Academy of the Hebrew Language in 1996,[2] and were updated in 2017.[3]

 

This is from Wikipedia's article on Niqqud.

The Greek translations of this word are found in the word "hagios" and words that are related.

NT:37 hagiazoo (hag-ee-ad'-zo); from NT:40; to make holy, i.e. (ceremonially) purify or consecrate; (mentally) to venerate:
KJV - hallow, be holy, sanctify.

NT:38 hagiasmos (hag-ee-as-mos'); from NT:37; properly, purification, i.e. (the state) purity; concretely (by Hebraism) a purifier:
KJV - holiness, sanctification.

NT:39 hagion (hag'-ee-on); neuter of NT:40; a sacred thing (i.e. spot):
KJV - holiest (of all), holy place, sanctuary.

NT:40 hagios (hag'-ee-os); from hagos (an awful [in the sense of inspiring awe] thing) [compare NT:53, OT:2282]; sacred (physically, pure, morally blameless or religious, ceremonially, consecrated):
KJV - (most) holy (one, thing), saint.

NT:41 hagiotees (hag-ee-ot'-ace); from NT:40; sanctity (i.e. properly, the state):
KJV - holiness.

NT:42 hagioosunee (hag-ee-o-soo'-nay); from NT:40; sacredness (i.e. properly, the quality):
KJV - holiness.

(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

We're also told to compare NT:40 to NT:53 and OT:2282:

NT:53 hagnos (hag-nos'); from the same as NT:40; properly, clean, i.e. (figuratively) innocent, modest, perfect (mature):
KJV - chaste, clean, pure.

OT:2282 chag (khag); or chaag (khawg); from OT:2287; a festival, or a victim (sacrifice) therefor:
KJV - (solemn) feast (day), sacrifice, solemnity.

(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

So, we might say that "saint" = "holy (one)" = "sanctified (one)" = "(one who is) set apart," and "to be sanctified" = "to be set apart."

However, it is also true that it does NOT mean "to be righteous" or even "to be considered to be righteous!"

So, we have TWO dimensions revealed here: a "treated special" vs. "ignored as insignificant" dimension, and a "declared righteous" vs. "unrighteous" dimension. Like two axes in a mathematical graph, the one does not affect the other.

[Retrobyter]

On 9/17/2017 at 11:13 AM, Amazing Horse said:

You don't have to be genius to realise that antichrist could not take over the world when Holy Spirit believers are on earth , because of 1 John 4:4

Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

 

So in 2 Thess 2 :6-9 First Holy Spirit must be taken out  before antichrist come ,  it's called Mystery if Iniquity .

If 2 Thess 2 is not speaking about Holy Spirit but antichrist , then Satan could never reveal antichrist , and Jesus could never come , and we would never be with Lord . Pretty bad logic whoever makes this assumption.

 

Shalom, Amazing Horse.

There's a problem in what you've said: "First Holy Spirit must be taken out  before antichrist come." If the Holy Spirit is the Infinite God who is also OMNIPRESENT, how can this be possible?

[Daniel 11:36]

The Lord's holy spirit will be operating during the coming tribulation, but will allow for the "anti-christ" to function

[Retrobyter]

11 hours ago, Daniel 11:36 said:

The Lord's holy spirit will be operating during the coming tribulation, but will allow for the "anti-christ" to function

Shabbat shalom, Daniel 11:36.

Well, that doesn't make sense. Then obviously the Holy Spirit is not what will be "taken out of the way." So, what IS the passage of Scripture talking about, if not the Holy Spirit?

[Daniel 11:36]

"Well, that doesn't make sense. Then obviously the Holy Spirit is not what will be "taken out of the way." So, what IS the passage of Scripture talking about, if not the Holy Spirit?"

 

The Lord's holy spirit will be present during the coming tribulation period .... but to the degree necessary for Satan and his minions to operate

 

[Retrobyter]

4 hours ago, Daniel 11:36 said:

"Well, that doesn't make sense. Then obviously the Holy Spirit is not what will be "taken out of the way." So, what IS the passage of Scripture talking about, if not the Holy Spirit?"

 

The Lord's holy spirit will be present during the coming tribulation period .... but to the degree necessary for Satan and his minions to operate

 

Shalom, Daniel 11:36.

Sorry? You didn't answer the question. Since the Holy Spirit is NOT what is taken "out of the way," then what IS?

[Daniel 11:36]

Let's not go on with this discussion .... the Lord is totally present during the tribulation as He is now, but just structured for His own purposes

You tend to confuse things with your long unnecessary diatribe and your scriptural appendages 

[Diaste]

On 9/17/2017 at 7:34 AM, OldCoot said:

That it grieves you may say more about your perspective than mine. 

I fully agree with the above.