Jump to content
IGNORED

Why so much disagreement on the start of THE DAY?


iamlamad

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  9
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  406
  • Content Per Day:  0.13
  • Reputation:   102
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/14/2015
  • Status:  Offline

40 minutes ago, Last Daze said:
  • For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.  2 Thessalonians 2:11-12

This passage directly contradicts the idea of a "great revival."  People who believe what is false do not become martyrs for the truth.  

2 Thess 2: 8--12, Is after the Church age. The Church, [Born again Christians] had already been raptured to heaven at that time.

2 Thess 2: 8--12 is the tribulation period, NOT the Church age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  9
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  406
  • Content Per Day:  0.13
  • Reputation:   102
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/14/2015
  • Status:  Offline

3 minutes ago, Steve Conley said:

Greetings to all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,

Alan, it appears you have joined the bandwagon of so many pre-tribbers who corrupt the Word of God. When you can't find a text that teaches a pre-trib rapture you wrest one to that purpose. No amount of torturing of the word apostasia will yield a physical departure. Like the secret rapture in the 19th century, this twisting of the text (apostasia= rapture) is new and therefore untrue. There is not a single instance in all of Koine Greek literature where apostasia is used in a sense other than a religious or political departure. Every historic teaching on the passage takes it as a religious departure. Paul is just repeating what Jesus taught when he said that many would be offended when violent persecution comes upon them for Christ's name sake and that many would be deceived by the false prophets and lying signs and wonders.

Mat 24:9  Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.
Mat 24:10  And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
Mat 24:11  And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

Mat 24:24  For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Just like Jesus, Paul taught that there would be a falling away (a departure from the faith) associated with the unprecedented persecution of the Beast that would precede the arrival and continuing presence (coming = parousia) of Christ on the day of the Lord.

Alan, your problem is that you have elevated a system of understanding above the Holy Scriptures themselves.

Concerning Matt 24 taking place in 75 AD, what are you smoking? Neither Matthew nor Mark records the portion of the Olivet Discourse which addresses the first question: "when shall these things be", that is, when shall the Temple be destroyed, not one stone being left upon another. Matthew 24 is all about the signs of the parousia of Christ (Matt 24:3). The first unique sign will be the abomination of desolation. The defiling of the temple by the Beast (AoD) will begin the unprecedented persecution (great tribulation). The unprecedented persecution of the elect and Israel will be shortened to save some of the elect alive upon the earth (Matt 24:22). The persecution will be over when the sun, moon, and stars go dark (Matt 24:29) and Christ in all His glory appears in the clouds with the mighty angels for all the world to see. He will then resurrect the dead in Christ, change those who are alive and remain, and catch us up together to be with Him in the clouds. All of that is found in Matt 24. All future. I thought they were only legalizing that stuff here in the States.

Concerning your assertion that the church is not found in Revelation after chapter 3. To be consistent you must believe that God has annihilated the church because there is no mention of the word church in heaven either. A little wisdom can show how foolish some arguments are. Arguments from silence are tenuous at best.

None are so blind as those who will not see.

Rev 12:11  And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

Praise Jesus

Jesus taught the pre-trib rapture, and He gave Paul the revelations about the pre-trib raptures. You should try reading the Bible.

You are quoting Matt 24, which Jesus is taking  about the Jews in the tribulation period. NOT The Church.

Please note, v 31, God sends the Angels to gather the Elect Jews. Whereas at the pre-trib rapture, Jesus comes for His people, Jn 14: 1--3.

1 Thess 4: 13--17. Two different events, as the Bible proves.

As for Matt 24: 15, That happened in AD 75, Whereas the tribulation period hasn't started yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  23
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  8,272
  • Content Per Day:  2.10
  • Reputation:   688
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  06/09/2013
  • Status:  Offline

10 hours ago, Steve Conley said:

Greetings in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,

Alan, your problem is that you go by your own opinions, instead of what the Bible says. All I have given you is the explicit statements of the Word of God. You confuse a system that you have adopted to explain the statements that you find in the Bible, with the text itself. If something doesn't fit into your system, even if it is a quotation from the Bible of explicit nature, you cry "you are making God a liar". Your understanding when it comes to the timing of the catching up of the saints is in conflict with the teaching of Christ, the prophets, and the apostles. Below are statements of truth concerning the timing of Christ's return and the events which surround it. I will gladly provide justification for any that you challenge.

  1. It is true that great tribulation is the persecution of the church (the elect) and Israel by the Beast, False Prophet and their followers; it is not God's tribulation upon those who had persecuted the Church and Israel.
  2.  
  3.  
  4. It is true that the Beast (man of sin) is revealed in the middle of the week after Michael, the restrainer, stands aside permitting his revelation through the dragon (Satan) giving him power.
  5.  
  6. It is true that the saints are given into the hand of the Beast until those who remain alive are rescued when Christ cuts short the great tribulation by His return.
  7.  
  8.  
  9.  
  10.  
  11. It is true that the return of Jesus Christ and therefore the day of the Lord, happens sometime after the sixth seal is opened.
  12.  
  13.  
  14. It is true that Jesus identifies this cosmic sign [Joel 2] and says it comes immediately after the great tribulation.
  15. It is true that Jesus says that His return in the clouds with glory and the holy angels follows the appearance of the cosmic sign.
  16. It is true that at that time there shall be a gathering to Christ of all the saved involving the first resurrection.
  17. It is true that the first stroke of God's wrath, upon the day of the Lord, comes after the seventh seal is opened, there is a half hour of silence in heaven, and the first trumpet is blown.
  18.  
  19.  
  20. It is true that the church, including the saints who experienced great tribulation, are seen in heaven before the throne of God having been resurrected and raptured in Rev 7:9-17.

Each of these statements is supported by the clear declarations of the Prophets, our Lord, and the Apostles. Each is easily defended.

There are many ways to demonstrate that the great tribulation starts in the middle of the week and the day of the Lord only begins after those believers who are alive and remain are raptured out at Christ's second coming. Find two below.

 

2) Paul says that the falling away (a notable departure from the faith) and the revelation of the man of sin in the temple must happen before the day of Christ can come.

The day of Christ from verse two and three below is further defined in verse one. It is the coming (parousia) of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together unto Him. It is Christ's singular second coming with emphasis upon His interaction with his Church. The day of the Lord is Christ's singular second coming with emphasis upon His interaction with the world. Both days begin at His singular second coming (parousia = His arrival and continuing presence).

2Th 2:1  Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2Th 2:2  That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
2Th 2:3  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;
2Th 2:4  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.

Before the wrath of God on the day of the Lord can begin, the revelation of the Beast and the apostasia must take place.

Praise be to Jesus Christ

I hope you won't mind, but I wish to challenge some of these statements.  But first, you did an awesome job writing all these! I deleted the ones I agreed with - kept the ones I disagree with.

1 above: Sorry, but your timing is off: the church is raptured out BEFORE the days of Great Tribulation. You agreed that the days of GT begin at the midpoint abomination.  Satan is cast down then and according to chapter 12, goes first after those that fled into the wilderness - but realizing they are supernaturally protected, turns and goes after the remnant of those who love Jesus: "remnant" because the previous rapture has already removed the Bride of Christ to heaven. 

4 above:  Sorry, but the theory that Michael "stands aside" is flaky. He does not stand aside at the midpoint: He arises to go to war with Satan and his cohorts.  The Hebrew word is "Amad" and the #1 translation is "to stand, remain, endure, take one's stand." If we compare Dan. 12:1 with Revelation, it is the very midpoint of the week - the same time Michael goes to war with Satan. 

Michael will always be on the side of God, carrying out God's plan.  God's plan is to utterly destroy the power of Israel, until they have NO HOPE LEFT and are forced to trust in God as their last hope. OF COURSE Michael will be standing aside then - for that is God's plan. 

6 above:  It is true "the saints" are to be overcome by the Beast: it is God's word. But "the church" will not be included - as their are raptured before the 70th week begins. 

11 Above:  Your timing is mixed up:  Paul has it straight: His coming first - the dead in Christ rise, second - the great earthquake, third,  is the start of the Day of the Lord and the start of His wrath. The Joel 2 sign is seen, the great earthquake as per Isaiah 2 takes place: they KNOW it is the start of the Day, and they are right.  Many people imagine "the DAY" equals "His coming" as seen in Rev. 19 as in the DAY will not start until after the days of great tribulation. That is not at all the intent of scripture: God's timing is, THE DAY and HIS WRATH starts at the 6th seal and continues on through the entire week. For example, He has wrath in the vials in chapter 16. 

14 Above:  You are mistaken, not recognizing that the cosmic signs will be seen TWICE: first with a red moon, as the sign for the DAY of the Lord, as shown in Joel 2, and then again over 7 years later as the sign for His coming to war, where the moon will be invisible, as seen in Joel 3 and in Matthew 24.  It is truth: the bible shows TWO MORE COMINGS of our Lord. Trying to force all coming scriptures into ONE coming distorts the scriptures and is not the Author's intent. It causes destruction to John's God Given chronology. Always remember, any theory that must rearrange John's God given chronology will be proven wrong.  He will come next hidden in the clouds, NOT SEEN by those on the earth FOR His bride. This coming will trigger THE DAY. He will come the 3rd time as shown in Rev. 19 to WAR. That coming will be seen by all. 

15 Above: If you are talking about the sign of NO sun and NO moon visible, I will agree. His coming in POWER to WAR will be after the days of GT.

16 Above: Sorry, but the gathering as shown in Matthew 24 is NOT Paul's rapture. Paul's rapture will happen before the start of the week, and will gather from earth. This gathering in Matthew 24 will come AFTER the entire week has finished, as shown by Revelation: the week ends in chapter 16, but His coming is in chapter 19, some UNKNOWN time after the days of GT end. It is very likely that this gathering of the elect as seen in Matthew 24 will be God gathering all the Jews and Hebrews back to Israel - as He has promised.  There is no mention of a resurrection - simply because all those gathered will have already received their resurrection bodies. Remember, the resurrection for the Jews and Hebrews who are not a part of the church will be "on the last day" meaning the day of the 7th vial that ends the week. 

17 Above:  I think it starts with the earthquake at the 6th seal. I would like to hear why you put it at the 7th. 

20 Above: Sorry, but again your timing is terrible, simply because you refuse to agree with John's timing.  The great crowd, too large to number, is the raptured church, but WILL NOT included those who are in the days of Great Tribulation which will be over 3 1/2 years FUTURE to when John saw this great crowd in heaven.  If you wish to see those who were beheaded, look in chapter 15. 

the day of the Lord only begins after those believers who are alive and remain are raptured out at Christ's second coming.  This is true, but to make sure the readers understand, it is at the 6th seal and before any part of the 70th week. Jesus comes to the clouds and the church is raised up - and then THE DAY begins. Readers, this is NOT His coming as shown in Rev. 19. Paul's rapture comes a moment before the earthquake at the 6th seal, which starts God's wrath, but the 70th week does not begin until the 7th seal. The rapture threefore comes pretrib AND prewrath.

Paul says that the falling away (a notable departure from the faith) and the revelation of the man of sin in the temple must happen before the day of Christ can come. This is not really true either. What Paul said was, the "apostasia" must come first. But when we study this passage, we find that the "apostasia" is what is "taken out of the way" so that the man of sin can be revealed. In other words, it is the restrainer being removed.  It is not a 'falling away," it is a catching away or the "gathering" which is Paul's theme for this passage.  For proof of this, notice that in verse 3b, the man of sin IS revealed. This is in perfect agreement with Paul and John who show the rapture comes before the DAY and before the week. 

Some translations have it as "the day of the Lord." Since that is what Paul used in his first letter, I suspect it is the better choice.  Always remember, the "day of the Lord" is NOT synonymous with "His coming." The truth is, His coming PRECEDES the day of the Lord.  They were under GREAT persecution, and either heard or read that THE DAY ( imagine great wrath and persecution, not rapture) had already started and they were IN the DAY. It seemed to fit because of the severe persecution. They were greatly upset because they were SURE Paul had told them in person and in his first letter that they would be raptured out BEFORE the DAY. 

Paul's argument then was to show them that the day had NOT started and they were NOT in it. HOW? Paul shows them how to recognize when the real DAY has come: When anyone sees the man of sin enter the temple and declare he is GOD, then they will KNOW the DAY has come and they are in it.  However, Paul tells us that there is a restrainer preventing the man of sin from entering the temple before his time. That restrainer must be taken out of the way FIRST - and then the man of sin will be free to enter the temple. Paul even wrote, "and now you know [who the restrainer is]. How can we know? Because it is hidden in the word "apostasia." It is the church departing as it is caught up to be with the Lord. 

Before the wrath of God on the day of the Lord can begin, the revelation of the Beast and the apostasia must take place.  This is absolutely not true! It is misunderstanding the scriptures. John shows us the proper order: A great earthquake (6th seal) is the start of THE DAY and HIS WRATH. Yet, the revelation of the beast will not come for another 3 1/2 years! the 6th seal comes BEFORE the week. 

Always remember, the 70th week is what is written INSIDE the book! It cannot be opened and read, and the events then take place, until ALL SEVEN of the seals are opened! What you suggest is simply impossible. You are trying to open the book before all seals are opened. It cannot happen and will not happen. The revealing will take place at the MIDPOINT of the week. That is what is written INSIDE the book. It cannot happen until the 7th seal is opened and the first 6 trumpets have sounded.  

"Apostasia" first - the departing of the church [before the 6th seal] - THEN the man of sin revealed [at the midpoint of the week.] This is God's order as shown by Paul and John. 

As you said, all praise to our Lord Jesus Christ!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  23
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  8,272
  • Content Per Day:  2.10
  • Reputation:   688
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  06/09/2013
  • Status:  Offline

6 minutes ago, Alan Hales said:

Jesus taught the pre-trib rapture, and He gave Paul the revelations about the pre-trib raptures. You should try reading the Bible.

You are quoting Matt 24, which Jesus is taking  about the Jews in the tribulation period. NOT The Church.

Please note, v 31, God sends the Angels to gather the Elect Jews. Whereas at the pre-trib rapture, Jesus comes for His people, Jn 14: 1--3.

1 Thess 4: 13--17. Two different events, as the Bible proves.

As for Matt 24: 15, That happened in AD 75, Whereas the tribulation period hasn't started yet.

Jesus did hint of the rapture in John 14. I agreed with you -right up to your last sentence.  Matthew 24:15 is the abomination that will divide the 70th week. Something might have happened in AD 75, but that is not what Jesus was speaking of. 

I believe God, knowing the future, had Matthew and Luke write of the 70th week events in a manner that would save many people in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. 

Edited by iamlamad
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  5
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  401
  • Content Per Day:  0.18
  • Reputation:   226
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  02/19/2018
  • Status:  Offline

2 minutes ago, Alan Hales said:

2 Thess 2: 8--12, Is after the Church age. The Church, [Born again Christians] had already been raptured to heaven at that time.

2 Thess 2: 8--12 is the tribulation period, NOT the Church age.

Greetings to all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,

Alan, spouting your system is not Biblical proof of anything. Your system has to go through many complicated contortions to maintain an escapist deception that will ultimately leave multitudes unprepared for the unprecedented persecution that will come upon the church prior to Christ's return.

Last Daze is exactly right, the period of intensified persecution that comes before Christ appears to catch us away, will be characterized by a falling away, a departure from the faith. Those who built their house upon the sand will see it fall when unprecedented persecution comes upon their stony hearts (Matt 13:20-21) and the lying signs and wonders will deceive those who are Christian in name only. They will end up following the beast. The only revival of that period will be the third of Israel which will have been made ready to receive their Messiah through the fire of affliction. "And so all Israel shall be saved". (Rom 11:26)

Praise the Lamb who was slain from the foundation of the world

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  23
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  8,272
  • Content Per Day:  2.10
  • Reputation:   688
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  06/09/2013
  • Status:  Offline

35 minutes ago, Steve Conley said:

Greetings to all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,

Alan, it appears you have joined the bandwagon of so many pre-tribbers who corrupt the Word of God. When you can't find a text that teaches a pre-trib rapture you wrest one to that purpose. No amount of torturing of the word apostasia will yield a physical departure. Like the secret rapture in the 19th century, this twisting of the text (apostasia= rapture) is new and therefore untrue. There is not a single instance in all of Koine Greek literature where apostasia is used in a sense other than a religious or political departure. Every historic teaching on the passage takes it as a religious departure. Paul is just repeating what Jesus taught when he said that many would be offended when violent persecution comes upon them for Christ's name sake and that many would be deceived by the false prophets and lying signs and wonders.

...

Alan, your problem is that you have elevated a system of understanding above the Holy Scriptures themselves.

Praise Jesus

No amount of torturing of the word apostasia will yield a physical departure.   Let's check in with Strongs: for Apostasia: it is a compound Greek word, made up of two other Greek words: do you imagine Strong "tortures" this word?

The question is, CAN this word mean something else?  It is a compound word - "apo" and "stasia."

Here is what STrong's says about "apo:

of separation

of local separation, 

after verbs of motion from a place i.e. of departing, of fleeing,...

of separation of a part from the whole - where of a whole some part is taken

of any kind of separation of one thing from another by which the union or fellowship of the two is destroyed

of a state of separation, that is of distance 

of place physical, of distance

In other words, this compound word certainly could contain the idea of a part of a group, removed spatially to another location - and it happen so fast it would appear and the rest of the people were stationary - did not move.


At the rapture, will some part of the entire population be taken? You know the answer is YES.

Will those taken be separated by DISTANCE? Again the answer is YES. 

The other part of the compound word 'stasia" is where we get "stationary" or "not moving" from.

Putting these two words together then can certainly mean a part of a whole group suddenly moved from where they were to a new location, and it happen so fast, the rest of the whole group seems stationary - not moving.

If we take this word IN CONTEXT where Paul used it, it has to be the restrainer being taken out of the way. It can be nothing else. 

If you wish to believe a falling away (from what Paul does not say) can be the restrainer removed - that is up to you. I think it makes far more sense that the Holy Spirit, working through the church is what is restraining the man of sin. 

This is "understanding" not torturing.

Edited by iamlamad
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  23
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  8,272
  • Content Per Day:  2.10
  • Reputation:   688
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  06/09/2013
  • Status:  Offline

10 minutes ago, Steve Conley said:

Greetings to all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,

Alan, spouting your system is not Biblical proof of anything. Your system has to go through many complicated contortions to maintain an escapist deception that will ultimately leave multitudes unprepared for the unprecedented persecution that will come upon the church prior to Christ's return.

Last Daze is exactly right, the period of intensified persecution that comes before Christ appears to catch us away, will be characterized by a falling away, a departure from the faith. Those who built their house upon the sand will see it fall when unprecedented persecution comes upon their stony hearts (Matt 13:20-21) and the lying signs and wonders will deceive those who are Christian in name only. They will end up following the beast. The only revival of that period will be the third of Israel which will have been made ready to receive their Messiah through the fire of affliction. "And so all Israel shall be saved". (Rom 11:26)

Praise the Lamb who was slain from the foundation of the world

Sorry, Steve, but you are doing the same thing! Much of what you write is not biblical either - it is only your preconceptions of what the word says. The contortions are on your side, not Alan's side. You must contort most of the book of Revelation to make your theory work. You must contort some of Matthew 24 to make your theory work. You certainly contort where the days of GT are. You imagine you can separate God's wrath from Satan's wrath, when in truth, they are simultaneous - happening at the same time and cannot be separated. 

Next, your theory will cause those who believe you to miss the rapture and be forced to face both the wrath of God and the wrath of Satan. And some could end up being lost during those days of GT - if it were possible. I would say your theory is dangerous. There may well be persecution coming - but the pretrib rapture will take the church out before THE DAY, and before His wrath - and certainly before the entire 70th week.  If I were you, I would chuck all your end times theories into the trash and start over.

Praise be to Our Lord, who will not set any appointments for us with His wrath - who will catch us out before the tribulation even starts!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  23
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  8,272
  • Content Per Day:  2.10
  • Reputation:   688
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  06/09/2013
  • Status:  Offline

47 minutes ago, Alan Hales said:

I have given you the Biblical truth for those questions, Do wake up and Pay attention. Jesus DIDN'T ask you those questions, Because He was always there. See Rev 4, and Rev 5: 6.

You are obviously a false religious man.

Just as I thought, you would not answer them. You cannot answer them because of your preconceived theories that are not biblical. 

Now let's show the TRUTH: What did John see:

behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne. [Father God is always seen on the throne]

there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald.

round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting

out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.  [The holy Spirit IN the throne room]

before the throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal: and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and behind.

 

Now compare with what Stephen saw:

Acts 7:56

And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

As any beginning reader can see, Jesus is NOT THERE.

Now, let's see the throne room WITH JESUS THERE:

Rev 5

And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth. [Here the Holy Spirit that was in the throne room in chapter 4 is now sent down, because Jesus just ascended]

And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.

Remember, this is not a "deceiving" it is a revealing: God is not trying to make this difficult! Jesus was NOT in the throne room, and then He WAS in the throne room some time later. 

As Jesus said to me: until you can answer the three questions correctly, you will never understand this part of John's vision. Throw your preconceptions into the trash and UNDERSTAND! For all of eternity past, the second person of the trinity was always at the right and of the First person of the trinity. For all of eternity future, Jesus Christ, the second person of the trinity will always be at the right and of the First person of the trinity - Father God. 

In ALL of time  - and time outside of "time" (before and after "time" God the Son has been, is and will be at the right hand of the Father - that is, for all but that tiny speck of time when Jesus LEFT His throne in glory, and came to take on the flesh of a human being. 

Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
 
During Jesus' time on earth, He was NOT at the right hand of the FAther. During His time on earth, He had to LAY ASIDE His omnipotence and omnipresence. He could only be at one place at one time, and He chose to leave heaven and come to earth. 
 
You wish to ADD to the book, and insert 2000 years into the text just before or just after Jesus got the book into His own hands. That is a NO NO! The text shows us that Jesus took the book the moment He ascended. That is eternal truth written in His word - neither you nor anyone else can change it. 
 
Next, WERE YOU HERE in my house when Jesus spoke to me? I think not. You did not hear His words - I did. The ONLY reason you have to doubt me is because of your preconceptions that deny what is truly written in His word. 
 
You are obviously a false religious man.  Why would you say such a thing? We are both brothers in the Lord!  The only problem we have is we disagree on what the Word of God is saying.  One day you will agree with me. You can count on that! It is TRUTH.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  5
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  401
  • Content Per Day:  0.18
  • Reputation:   226
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  02/19/2018
  • Status:  Offline

8 hours ago, iamlamad said:

No amount of torturing of the word apostasia will yield a physical departure.   Let's check in with Strongs: for Apostasia: it is a compound Greek word, made up of two other Greek words: do you imagine Strong "tortures" this word?

The question is, CAN this word mean something else?  It is a compound word - "apo" and "stasia."

Here is what STrong's says about "apo:

of separation

of local separation, 

after verbs of motion from a place i.e. of departing, of fleeing,...

of separation of a part from the whole - where of a whole some part is taken

of any kind of separation of one thing from another by which the union or fellowship of the two is destroyed

of a state of separation, that is of distance 

of place physical, of distance

In other words, this compound word certainly could contain the idea of a part of a group, removed spatially to another location - and it happen so fast it would appear and the rest of the people were stationary - did not move.


At the rapture, will some part of the entire population be taken? You know the answer is YES.

Will those taken be separated by DISTANCE? Again the answer is YES. 

The other part of the compound word 'stasia" is where we get "stationary" or "not moving" from.

Putting these two words together then can certainly mean a part of a whole group suddenly moved from where they were to a new location, and it happen so fast, the rest of the whole group seems stationary - not moving.

If we take this word IN CONTEXT where Paul used it, it has to be the restrainer being taken out of the way. It can be nothing else. 

If you wish to believe a falling away (from what Paul does not say) can be the restrainer removed - that is up to you. I think it makes far more sense that the Holy Spirit, working through the church is what is restraining the man of sin. 

This is "understanding" not torturing.

Greetings to all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,

Mr. mad, most of the time I don't read your responses. Once someone has said, as you have, that God has given them special revelation, I leave them to their own devices. However, I will respond for the good of others who read these posts. You fancy yourself a Greek scholar but you don't know the first thing about Greek linguistics. Above you committed what any first-year Greek student would recognize as the cognate fallacy. The chief factor in the meaning of any word is context, context, context, not speculative etymology. That is why I have said a half dozen times in various posts that the word apostasia never once in all Koine Greek literature was used to indicate a spatial departure. There isn't a single example in 300 years of available Koine Greek literature (2nd century BC through 1st century AD), where the word apostasia appears 355 times, that we see anything other than a religious or political departure indicated by its use. All you have for support of your idea is the speculation and wresting of the text by desperate men who had swallowed Darby's secret rapture hook line and sinker.  J. S. Mabie came up with this teaching in 1895 and it was made popular in the middle of the 20th Century by E. Schuyler English. Since that time it has been promoted by many of the most prominent pretribulationists, most of whom are no more adept in Greek linguistics than you are. They believe so strongly in the pretribulational dispensational eschatological system that they will grasp at anything that would seem to fill the empty void of explicit teaching from the Scriptures on a pretribulational rapture.

Leave the translating to those who know what they are doing.

Praise Jesus

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  23
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  8,272
  • Content Per Day:  2.10
  • Reputation:   688
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  06/09/2013
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, Steve Conley said:

Greetings to all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,

Mr. mad, most of the time I don't read your responses. Once someone has said, as you have, that God has given them special revelation, I leave them to their own devices. However, I will respond for the good of others who read these posts. You fancy yourself a Greek scholar but you don't know the first thing about Greek linguistics. Above you committed what any first-year Greek student would recognize as the cognate fallacy. The chief factor in the meaning of any word is context, context, context, not speculative etymology. That is why I have said a half dozen times in various posts that the word apostasia never once in all Koine Greek literature was used to indicate a spatial departure. There isn't a single example in 300 years of available Koine Greek literature (2nd century BC through 1st century AD), where the word apostasia appears 355 times, that we see anything other than a religious or political departure indicated by its use. All you have for support of your idea is the speculation and wresting of the text by desperate men who had swallowed Darby's secret rapture hook line and sinker.  J. S. Mabie came up with this teaching in 1895 and it was made popular in the middle of the 20th Century by E. Schuyler English. Since that time it has been promoted by many of the most prominent pretribulationists, most of whom are no more adept in Greek linguistics than you are. They believe so strongly in the pretribulational dispensational eschatological system that they will grasp at anything that would seem to fill the empty void of explicit teaching from the Scriptures on a pretribulational rapture.

Leave the translating to those who know what they are doing.

Praise Jesus

 

 Steve! There is no need for slander or name calling! It is only that we disagree.  I am not mad: I am quite likely more sane than you. 

Let's look in on some experts: people that translated the entire bible or at lest the New Testament:

384 Wycliffe N.T. 
That no man deceyue you in any maner / for no but departynge aweye (or dissencon) schal come firste & the man of synne schall be schewid [shewed] the sone of perdicioune.

1534 Tyndale N.T. 
Let no ma deceave you by eny meanes for the lorde commeth not excepte ther come a departynge fyrst and that that synfnll man be opened ye sonne of perdicion

1535 Coverdale Bible 
Let no man disceaue you by eny meanes. For the LORDE commeth not, excepte the departynge come first, and that Man of Synne be opened, even the sonne of perdicion.

1539 Cranmer Great Bible 
Let no man deceaue you by any meanes, for the Lorde shall not come excepte there come a departinge fyrst, & that that synfull man be opened, the sonne of perdicion.

1549 Matthew's Bible
Let no man deceyue you by any meanes, for the Lord commeth not, except there come a departyng first, and that, that sinful man be opened, the sonne of perdicyon

1565 Beza Bible
Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for [that day shall not come,] except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, [euen] the son of perdition.

1575 Geneva Bible 
Let no man deceiue you by any meanes for that day shal not come, except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition.

 

Of these, it seems only one recognized that this is s SIGNIFICANT departing. In Greek, "ἡ ἀποστασία" or THE apostasia.  Only Coverdale got it.  It is not just any departing, it is THE departing!  And what is the theme of the passage? It is the departing or the gathering "to depart).

Then when we consider what Strongs had to say, it makes a VERY STRONG CASE! And when we consider the CONTEXT, it is a rock solid case that the intent of Paul was a departing of the church (the restrainer taken out of the way) and then the man of sin could be revealed.

Can you translate apostasia in any other way that makes good sense as the restrainer "taken out of the way?" Let's see it!

 I  write from the Word of God. I quote scripture. It is sad then that you don't read it. What is really sad is that you don't recognize truth.  It is even more sad that YOU don't receive revelation from heaven. God has an abundant supply! He said, "my sheep hear my voice..."  Are you a sheep? 

I am certainly NOT a Greek scholar, but I copy and past from Greek Scholars and I read what they write. It seems you just don't like What Strong wrote in this instance. Well, when He translated "toxon" from the first seal, as a simple bow as in ribbon, rather than a bow that shoot arrows, I disagreed with HIM then. Here I am disagreeing with you. I have a idea that you don't understand Paul's context here, but think you do. 

The truth is, THE DEPARTING fits the context. It is the restrainer being taken out of the way.  Have you ever hear of someone "coining" a word? Can you imagine that Paul was smart enough to use this word in an unusual way, and then point to it by writing, "and now you know what is restraining..."  In other words, it really does not matter if no one else ever used this word in this way. Paul did and made a special effort to show that he was using it in a different way.  When we get to heaven, you can ask him why. 

Let me show you a modern example: "Paradigm." As a compound word, its real meaning is "to show" "side by side." Para as in parallel, or paratrooper: side by side. Digm as "to show." Paul makes a perfect paradigm in 1 Thes. 5 where he brings up two groups of people in front of us to show that one group gets one result, but another group gets a different result at the same moment in time. Those in Christ get raptured, while those in the darkness get sudden destruction.

I heard this word uses over and over from college professors and it was never used in this manner. They were usually speaking of a "paradigm shift."  It seems the word had gradually changed its meaning. 

In the very same way, Strongs shows us what each of the compound words in Apostasia really mean - and the truth is, they fit the context perfectly as the church departing or being "taken out of the way.  And, after all, that is Paul's theme.

It seems YOU have swallowed the Darby and Mabie story hook line and sinker! The truth is, PAUL invented the pretrib rapture. And others wrote of it BEFORE Darby. 

Next, I don't "grasp" at anything as in desperation. I study - probably more diligently than you. I see far more pretrib in scriptures than any other theory. I have your kind of rhetoric more times than I could count. The truth is, posttrib theory has more holes in it than pretrib.  And prewrath theory even more. 

Praise the name of Our Lord forever and ever!

Edited by iamlamad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...