Why Pretrib Logic Fails

[DonkeySpeaksAgain]

17 hours ago, Steve Conley said:

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

DSA, it depends what you mean by tribulation. If you are referring to Paul's use of it in 2Thes 1:6 then you are correct. If you are referring to Christ's use of it in Matt 24 then you are wrong. My previous post explains what should be the obvious difference between the two.

2Th 1:6  Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;
2Th 1:7  And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
2Th 1:8  In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

Tribulation upon the beast worshipers after the rapture

Tribulation upon the elect before the rapture

Glory to Jesus Christ

As I have said all along, I agree that tribulation has been with us Christians since the very beginning. The "true" Christians have always been persecuted by not only the un-believing world, but by those who have taken control of Christianity and claim to be the true form of it. This goes back to all Scripture/prophecy that depicts the Church Age. We do not like what it says, so we assign it to other 'groups' or religions. 

Look at the 7 letters "to the churches" and which church does EVERY modern day church associate itself with? Philadelphia, of course. 

You mention 2Thess above. I see this tribulation period as the 3.5 year tribulation right before the 2nd coming. As I have said all along, it is ONLY 3.5 years long. The rapture is right there in those verses (vs 7 = rest from the coming tribulation), as a promise that AFTER the rapture, the un-believers and also the "un-true-believers" (those who have taken Jesus' name in vain = 'in name only' but refuse to obey Him and walk in righteousness). As written in vs 8 = "in flaming fire" (the 'furnace', 'refining fire', and all such prophetic phrases which refer to the final tribulation period of 3.5 years)... and "to take vengeance on those that know not God, AND those who disobey Jesus" (the time which the 5th seal martyrs are still waiting for - this includes the 'rapture' of seal #6).

The tribulation period is portrayed as the "place of weeping and gnashing of teeth" = weeping for those who are repentant and gnashing teeth for those who refuse to accept the true gospel. This phrase is ALWAYS tied into the 3.5 year tribulation EVERYWHERE it is used in the Bible!

[DonkeySpeaksAgain]

15 hours ago, iamlamad said:

"that means the 70th week began at that time"  No it does not! It may in your imagination though - but not in reality. Daniel shows the Messiah cut off AFTER the 69 but BEFORE the 70. Go back and read it again.  We KNOW the 70th week is future by the New Testament and especially by Revelation. It is NOT an error at all: did you read Rev. chapter 13? Is that about Christ - or the Beast? Did you notice when those in Judea flee? Did you notice when the trampling of the city will begin? Do you understand that is when the man of sin enters Jerusalem with His Gentile (think Muslim) armies? (he MUST arrive in Jerusalem because that is where the temple is that he will enter.)

Did you not read in the Old Testament that the DAy of the Lord is to destroy the earth and the sinners on the earth? The trumpet judgments begin systematically to destroy the earth. The vials continue it. Both the trumpets and the vials are included in the Day of the Lord.  Just one trumpet judgment takes out 1/3 of earth's population. That is GOD beginning to destroy the sinners on the earth.

The first 6 vials may well all be poured out in one hour....late in the week....to SHORTEN those days of great tribulation.

hello sir,

You do agree that there is "GAP" in the 70 weeks per your posts. I agree that there is a gap also, my point is that this gap is in the middle of the 70th week while you (and almost everyone else) say it is when the 69th week ends. I have shown with all Biblically (and historically) accurate calculations included how the 69th week ended at the baptism. The gap "after the cross" is crucial because the ministry and the cross are NECESSARY to be included as part of the 70 weeks prophecy. I say this because of the specific purposes outlined in Dan.9 - all of which the 70 weeks is the "determined" time for those purposes to be fulfilled. The ministry and cross are the most important and vital part of the prophecy. The prophecy is for the Jews (and city of Jerusalem) to fulfill. 

The covenant mentioned in the 70th week is THE covenant between Israel and God. It does NOT say, treaty or league, or agreement which are all OT words used for 'peace treaties between nations'. 

The "confirmation/ or strenghtening" of this covenant occurs when Jesus is baptized, preaches for a specific number of "days" as outlined in Daniel, and finally is cut-off or killed as the FINAL and ONLY sacrifice that God will accept from then on. Any further temple sacrifices would be considered an ABOMINATION. And for continued abominations (temple sacrifices), the temple itself is eventually destroyed.

By making all this about the A/C means that only the first few words of vs 26 refer to Jesus/the Messiah while everything else refers to the A/C. The ONLY mention of Jesus is that he comes at the end of the 69th week and that He is killed "but not for himself". The city and sanctuary being destroyed - then MUST have occurred in 70ad, and the desolations have continued. Yes, Israel has been restored as a nation, but NOT the temple. So you therefore must agree that the "people of the prince" are the Romans - thank you for confirming that by your own statements, because the 70th week (vs 27) has not yet begun on your chart.

Again, it is completely illogical to assume that the A/C would stop sacrifices in a rebuilt temple knowing that the temple and any activity within it would be considered an Abomination to God all by themselves. 

I have read it over and over...

MAYBE YOU SHOULD READ IT AGAIN - this time with your eyes OPEN!

 

[Steve Conley]

1 hour ago, iamlamad said:

Now, let's talk TRUTH here! Not man's ideas! The word "apostasia" means to depart, but there is NO INFORMATION as to what is being departed FROM. Therefore it is only man's ideas and human reasoning to say "religious departure."  Paul's theme is the departing of the church, not some religious departure.  Therefore I disagree.  Will you agree: there is always a FIRST use of a word? 

Did you ever wonder why Paul wrote, "and now you know?" Why on earth would Paul pen those words - unless he just TOLD THEM? 

⁶ And now ye know what (who) withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

Paul is talking about who or what is doing the restraining -  holding back the man of sin. And He tells us NOW YOU KNOW. Why then is it that we have no consensus of opinion about it? Paul KNEW and He told us so we would know. Yet people don't understand. 

Make no mistake here: in verse 3b, the man of sin IS REVEALED (In Paul's argument) so logic demands that in verse 3a the one restraining MUST HAVE BEEN  "taken out of the way."  (the meaning of every verse MUST fit the context of the entire passage.)

If we examine 3a, there is only ONE WORD that could possibly mean something "taken out of the way." It is the word "apostasia." Perhaps you have not studied this word in depth. As a compound word, its simple meaning is a departing. From what Paul does not specify. 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; physical, of distance of place

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.

Therefore I am convinced that Paul's intent is that THE CHURCH (or rather the Holy Spirit working through the church) is the entity doing the restraining. And when the church is "taken out of the way" THEN the man if sin can be revealed.  

Perhaps then, this idea is NOT "recent" but is exactly what the first readers of Paul's letter understood. He had a REASON to write, "and now you know." He used a word differently than normal use, and wanted them to go back and read it over and over. He TOLD them who was restraining and that it would be "taken out of the way." 

If you think a falling away (from what Paul does not tell us) fits "taken out of the way" better than the rapture, go for it!  If you think a falling away fits the restraining force being removed, go for it. I don't think so. 

On the contrary, I am very good with grammar. I think Paul made good sense. I can only imagine WHY Paul wrote this as he did, but my guess is, if Roman's read it, Paul wanted them to be clueless about the rapture.  He wrote it so that ONLY those in Thes. that heard him teach and read his first letter would get it.

 

 

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

Mr. Mad, here is a brief exposition of the 2Thes 2 text. Notice the difference between sound exegesis and what you present.

Paul says concerning Christ’s coming and the resurrection/rapture don’t be shaken or troubled that it, the day of Christ, is at hand or near in time.

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. 

The English expression “is at hand” was given by the translators to represent the Greek word ἐνέστηκεν from the root ἐνίστημι (enistēmi) in this context. The expression “at hand” was defined in that day as "near in time or not distant". The translation communicates that Paul said the day of Christ was not near in time. The persecution that they were experiencing as testified by 1Thes and 2Thes 1 was not that great tribulation that will be taking place just prior to Christ's return. His return and the following events are the day of Christ

Notice that there is nothing said in the text about them “thinking that they missed the rapture”. That is an extrapolation of those who interject of a secret rapture before the beginning of the week into the text. Such a pre-trib rapture has no support from the text so it must be added to nearly every statement to brainwash folks into thinking that it is the orthodox teaching of the Scriptures.

The day of Christ is His coming and our gathering unto Him. It is also called the day of the Lord because immediately after He arrives and the resurrection/rapture takes place He begins to pour out His fierce wrath upon the unbelieving Beast worshiping earth dwellers in the form of the trumpet and vial judgements.

Paul says here that the good work of partnership in the Gospel will be performed until the day of Jesus Christ.

Php 1:6  Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ: 

Paul says we are to be sincere and without offence till we see Christ. The day of Jesus Christ is when we see Him.

Php 1:10  That ye may approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ;

1Jn 3:2  Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. 

1Jn 3:3  And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.  

Then Paul tells them that two things must happen before that day (the second coming [parousia] and resurrection/rapture) can come: a falling away and the revelation of the man of sin.

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; 

The falling away is described in detail by Christ in the Olivet Discourse. In Christ’s dealing with the period of unprecedented persecution and deception that takes place prior to His coming He says that many will be offended (fall away). The falling away is due to the severe persecution, false Christs, false prophets, and supernatural deceptions. Jesus said that the deception will be so great that if it were possible even the truly elect would be deceived.

The revelation of the man of sin will involve the Antichrist (Beast) in the Temple demanding to be worshiped as God. Jesus referred to this as the start of the great tribulation (Matt 25:15, 21) which Daniel testified will take place in the middle of the week (Dan 9:27).

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. 

This is none other than the Beast that arises out of the sea (Rev 13), because it is he that worship is directed toward on behalf of the Dragon. There is no Scriptural indication that the false prophet receives worship on behalf of the Dragon.

Paul says that he told the Thessalonians these things before.

2Th 2:5  Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 

What Paul says in verse 6 can be interpreted in two ways so that both statements are equally true. Although I know Paul had one intended meaning, I cannot be certain which of the two is the one he intended.

The first is that the Thessalonians now know what is keeping the Antichrist from being revealed until it is the Antichrist’s time. The second is that the Thessalonians now (henceforth) know (because Paul just told them in verse 3) what is preventing the revelation of Christ (the day of Christ), the falling away and the revelation of the man of sin must come first. Both statements are true, but I cannot be certain which Paul meant. It is difficult to identify the subject of the pronouns that Paul uses. There is also something or someone preventing both Christ’s day from being at hand and the revelation of the Beast. The use of “what” also points towards it referring to Christ. Much writing could easily be devoted to these two interpretations, but I will not do that here. The important thing is to recognize that both statements are true, whichever Paul meant.

2Th 2:6  And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 

In verse 7 the one withholding is a he, not a what. It should be noted that the same Greek word is used for “withholdeth”, “letteth”, and “let”. Each expresses the idea of hindering or restraining. It should also be noted that the word translated “the way” is the Greek word “mesos” which means middle. Additionally, we should consider the unusual translation of “ginomai” in this text. Of the 672 uses of the word in the NT, only once, here in this text, is it translated “be taken”. What does all this mean? It means that we must with great care be diligent to not err concerning who this restrainer of the mystery of iniquity is. Who is presently restraining Satan from giving power unto the man of sin?

2Th 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. 

The restrainer is Michael the archangel that Daniel said would stand up (stand aside) after which would be a time of unparalleled trouble. This unparalleled trouble is that same period of persecution that Jesus called great tribulation.

The revelation of the Beast in the Temple takes place in the middle of the week.

Michael stands aside in the middle of the week. Satan is cast out of heaven by Michael in the middle of the week. The middle is very significant.

Dan 12:1  And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 

Dan 12:2  And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 

Dan 12:7b  … it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished. 

Mat 24:21  For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Mat 24:15  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:) 

Dan 9:27  And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. 

Michael is specially equipped to deal with Satan.

Jud 1:9  Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. 

Rev 12:7  And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 

Rev 12:8  And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 

Rev 12:9  And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. 

Rev 12:12  Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. 

Dan 10:13  But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia. 

When Michael casts Satan to the earth in the middle of the week (Rev 12) the Antichrist shall be revealed. His end is to be consumed in the brightness of Christ’s presence.

2Th 2:8  And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 

Satan gives the Beast his power and lying wonders are performed by the False Prophet. Those who choose not the love of the truth are deceived and perish.

2Th 2:9  Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 

2Th 2:10  And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 

Because they didn’t love, but instead rejected the truth, the earth dwellers will be convinced by the miracles performed by the False Prophet and worship the Beast, receiving his mark and thereby be eternally damned. God gives those, who refuse the truth and love their sins, a lie that they might be damned.

2Th 2:11  And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 

2Th 2:12  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 

Glory be to Jesus

[DonkeySpeaksAgain]

At the root of this remains the 70th week itself. I know all pre-millennialists have made the same assumption that the entire 70th week remains unfulfilled - (and some are even suggesting MORE than 7 years?). 

I have been asking this for weeks and no one has responded. Why are you so afraid?

Please show the proof for the end of the 69th week. If you say it is the baptism (thank you for agreeing with me), then answer why the ministry and death of the Messiah are not necessary to be part of the 70 weeks when it specifically mandated a "set" or "determined" amount of time (70 weeks) for the Jewish people and the city of Jerusalem to accomplish 6 very specific things within the 70 weeks time frame. 

[Revelation Man]

5 hours ago, Cletus said:

the wrath does not come until the mercy seat is no longer available.  judgment and wrath are different.  the great trib and wrath is different. 

 revelation 15:7 & 8.  Isaiah 6, ex 40, 1 Kings 8.

The Rapture happens pre 70th Week. Israel repents during the 70th week as do Gentiles who missed the Rapture {5 Virgins}. Evidently all men can repent but don't, even as the 2nd Woe is being brought forth.

The last verse in chapter 9 via the 2nd Woe says this...........Rev. 9:21 Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.

Which means they can repent, but chose not to it would seem.

6 hours ago, Cletus said:

i understand when the wrath comes as being after the bride is caught up... and then the bowl/vials are poured out.  its not until Jesus returns.  do you understand where the mercy seat is in the OT temple?  this places the wrath right after the time Jesus comes back for His bride.  no more petitions or intercessions will be heard until the judgment is complete. 

The Seals are called the Lambs Wrath. God's Wrath starts with the First Seal. Jesus comes back for the Bride BEFORE the 70th Week starts.

6 hours ago, Cletus said:

the departure is not "the rapture"  if you study the greek you will learn this.  they are departing from the Lord.  falling away.  just think about it for a few ticks... Jesus wont come back and rapture us until after he raptures us?  any time you read that day or the day or the day of The Lord... its speaking to when Jesus comes for us.  if you study the greek AND hebrew you will also learn this.  its the same implication in both OT and NT.  in the greek its the word Hemera.  the day.  so how then can the day... the day of the Lord... come before the day comes?  now i once again point to the title of this thread.  pretrib logic fails. 

 

I have studied the Greek and have a blog on the very subject.  The Rapture happens BEFORE the 70th week, so the little parlor trick doesn't work, which I don't think is a trick anymore, I think you guys are really just confused about the Rapture. So the Rapture happens BEFORE the Second Coming, you are the one that is confusing the two, else you wouldn't that saying the the Rapture won't happen until the Rapture. No the Rapture happens FIRST, then the Anti-Christ shows up, THEN the Wrath of God THEN the Second Coming !!

6 hours ago, Cletus said:

edit: seriously go study this word depart... it has the meaning of falling... gravity works and its Gods order of things.  you cant fall into the clouds... you can be caught up... rapturo.  the words have polar opposite meanings. 

Is the Falling Away a false teaching ?

I have evolved with much study on this. I used to argue to all that there had to be this great Falling Away also. All because of this one passage. 2 Thessalonians 2:3. I do agree that the world gets far more evil towards the (now) end, as foretold in Romans chapter 1, and as Peter said, there will be scoffers in the last days etc. etc. But I do not think the True Church can "Fall Away", either you are of Christ/God or you are not, and will get left behind by the Bridegroom. Anyway, here is my understanding of 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

“Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction…” – 2 Thessalonians 2:3 (NASB) This verse is used by many and they say it implies a "Falling Away" from the faith. But a guy named Tommy Ice has shed some exceptional light on this passage.

Mr. Ice has pointed out that the Greek noun, apostasia, is used only twice in the New Testament. The other occurrence is in Acts 21:21 where it states that an accusation was made against Paul that he was “teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake [apostasia] Moses.” 

The word is used in verb form a total of 15 times in the New Testament, and only three of these have anything to do with a departure from the faith (Luke 8:13, 1 Timothy 4:1, and Hebrews 3:12). In other settings, the word is used for departing from iniquity (2 Timothy 2:19), departing from ungodly men (1 Timothy 6:5), departing from the temple (Luke 2:27), departing from the body (2 Corinthians 12:8), and departing from persons (Acts 12:10 and Luke 4:13). 

This insight about the use and meaning of the word was certainly compelling, but the argument Mr. Ice presented that was most convicting was his revelation that the first seven English translations of the Bible rendered the noun, apostasia, as either “departure” or “departing.” 

They were as follows: 

1.The Wycliffe Bible (1384) 

2.The Tyndale Bible (1526) 

3. The Coverdale Bible (1535) 

4. The Cranmer Bible (1539) 

5. The Great Bible (1540) 

6. The Beeches Bible (1576) 

7. The Geneva Bible (1608) 

Mr. Ice also noted that the Bible used by the Western world from 400 AD to the 1500s — Jerome’s Latin translation known as “The Vulgate” — rendered apostasia with the Latin word, discessio, which means “departure.” The first translation of the word to mean apostasy in an English Bible did not occur until 1611 when the King James Version was issued. So, why did the King James translators introduce a completely new rendering of the word as “falling away”? The best guess is that they were taking a stab at the false teachings of Catholicism. 

One other point Mr. Ice made that I think is significant is that Paul used a definite article with the word apostasia. The significance of this is emphasized by Daniel Davey in a thesis he wrote for the Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary: 

Since the Greek language does not need an article to make the noun definite, it becomes clear that with the usage of the article, reference is being made to something in particular. In 2 Thessalonians 2:3 the word apostasia is prefaced by the definite article which means that Paul is pointing to a particular type of departure clearly known to the Thessalonian church. 

In light of this grammatical point, Tommy observed that “the use of the definite article would support the notion that Paul spoke of a clear, discernible notion.” And that notion he had already identified in verse 1 when he stated that he was writing about “our gathering together to Him [Jesus].” This interpretation also corresponds to the point that Paul makes in verses 6 and 7 where he states that the man of lawlessness will not come until what “restrains” him “is taken out of the way.” 

And what it is that restrains evil in the world today? The Holy Spirit working through the Church. I think when the Church Departs, the Anti-Christ will be free to come to power. (First Seal after the Fake Peace)

I do not think this has anything to do with a Falling Away. It is the Church Departing before the Anti-Christ is brought forth. The King James Bible changed the known understanding that had been around for 1100 years in 1611. 
 

 

[iamlamad]

3 hours ago, Steve Conley said:

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

Mr. Mad, here is a brief exposition of the 2Thes 2 text. Notice the difference between sound exegesis and what you present.

Paul says concerning Christ’s coming and the resurrection/rapture don’t be shaken or troubled that it, the day of Christ, is at hand or near in time.

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. 

The English expression “is at hand” was given by the translators to represent the Greek word ἐνέστηκεν from the root ἐνίστημι (enistēmi) in this context. The expression “at hand” was defined in that day as "near in time or not distant". The translation communicates that Paul said the day of Christ was not near in time. The persecution that they were experiencing as testified by 1Thes and 2Thes 1 was not that great tribulation that will be taking place just prior to Christ's return. His return and the following events are the day of Christ

Notice that there is nothing said in the text about them “thinking that they missed the rapture”. That is an extrapolation of those who interject of a secret rapture before the beginning of the week into the text. Such a pre-trib rapture has no support from the text so it must be added to nearly every statement to brainwash folks into thinking that it is the orthodox teaching of the Scriptures.

Glory be to Jesus

Let's check out your sound exegesis: The Greek word behind "at hand" was translated as follows:

present (3x), things present (2x), be at hand (1x),

In other words, "present" was the preferred translation.

"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. "

The truth is, they WERE troubled: they were under severe persecution and then somehow they heard that THE DAY had already started and they were IN IT.  Some Greek manuscripts say Day of the Lord, and others say Day of Christ. Since in Paul's first letter he used "day of the Lord," I think it is probably what Paul wrote. Anyway, since Christ IS Lord, I think Paul is talking about the Day of the Lord mentioned many times in the Old Testament: the dark day where God destroys the world and the sinners in the world. 

If Paul had taught them of a posttrib rapture, and they thought they were IN the trib, why on earth would they be troubled by the news? They would know they just had to wait out the rest of the 7 years. In other words, if Paul had taught them a post trib rapture - then this text makes NO SENSE.

On the other hand, if Paul had taught them that the rapture would come before the Day of the Lord, and then they heard they were IN the day of the Lord, it is easy to see why they were troubled: either Paul was wrong or they had MISSED the rapture. 

Therefore in this case a pretrib rapture fits the text far better than any other time of the rapture.

Why set up a strawman? Who ever said the rapture would be "secret?" There will be a loud trumpet sound, then a loud shout of our Lord. I suspect the world will hear these things but not know what they are hearing.  However, I do suspect that it will pretty much be invisible: the moment we are changed, perhaps we disappear. John does not tell us so we cannot know for sure. 

Such a pre-trib rapture has no support from the text   I guess just good exegesis is not enough: you have to add such nonsense as this to make your point. A better way to make your point would be to say "I can find no textual support for a pretrib rapture."  I could say exactly the same: I can find no textual support for a posttrib rapture. Let's just quit with the pokes and jabs and teach scripture as we understand it: will you agree?

What do you mean by "the trib?" Do you mean the 70th week of Daniel? 

The pretrib rapture IS supported by 1 Thes. chapter 5 and by Revelation showing the great crowd, too large to number, in heaven before John has started the 70th week. 

The pretrib is further supported by the marriage and supper IN HEAVEN before Christ descends to earth to the Battle of Armageddon.  This text also destroys a post trib rapture.

The pretrib rapture is further supported by 2 thes 2, correctly understood. 

As you say, Glory be to the wonderful name of Jesus!

[iamlamad]

3 hours ago, Steve Conley said:

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

...

The day of Christ is His coming and our gathering unto Him. It is also called the day of the Lord because immediately after He arrives and the resurrection/rapture takes place He begins to pour out His fierce wrath upon the unbelieving Beast worshiping earth dwellers in the form of the trumpet and vial judgements.

Paul says here that the good work of partnership in the Gospel will be performed until the day of Jesus Christ.

Php 1:6  Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ: 

Paul says we are to be sincere and without offence till we see Christ. The day of Jesus Christ is when we see Him.

Php 1:10  That ye may approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ;

1Jn 3:2  Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. 

1Jn 3:3  And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.  .

 

Sorry, but there is no clear cut verse explaining what Paul thought about the "Day of Christ."  Paul certainly does not tie his rapture verses to the Day of Christ. But just three verses after his classic rapture verse of 1 Thes. 4:17, Paul mentions the Day of the Lord, just as if the rapture would trigger the Day of the Lord. 

I am getting a hint that you don't believe the classic rapture teaching: that Jesus will come to the AIR (no touchdown) and then return to heaven with His bride. Please clear this up: do you believe John 14 as classic pretrib teaches it? If not, please tell us what YOU think John 14 is meaning. You must admit, in 1 Thes. 4 & 5 there is no touchdown: Jesus is in the AIR and in a cloud. 

Perhaps in the mind of Paul, there was a difference between the Day of the Lord, and the Day of Christ. On the other hand, maybe there was not. It is not wise to base doctrine on ambiguous verses. It seems from the verses you have posted that the day of Christ may just be the 24 hour day in which Jesus descends to the air and we are caught up. I see this day as between the 5th seal and the 6th seal in Revelation - definitely PRETRIB.  

But then, I see the trib or the 70th week as marked by the 7's: the 7th seal begins it and the 7th vial ends it. Many don't share that belief. They can be wrong if they choose...and they have chosen.

Next, I don't think the rapture will come INSIDE the Day of the Lord. I think Paul teaches the rapture will TRIGGER the Day of the Lord. That day will be a DARK day of destruction, not a bright day of His coming.

[iamlamad]

3 hours ago, Steve Conley said:

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

...

Then Paul tells them that two things must happen before that day (the second coming [parousia] and resurrection/rapture) can come: a falling away and the revelation of the man of sin.

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; 

The falling away is described in detail by Christ in the Olivet Discourse. In Christ’s dealing with the period of unprecedented persecution and deception that takes place prior to His coming He says that many will be offended (fall away). The falling away is due to the severe persecution, false Christs, false prophets, and supernatural deceptions. Jesus said that the deception will be so great that if it were possible even the truly elect would be deceived.

...

Glory be to Jesus

This passage sure gives you trouble! Perhaps if you read it very slowly:  "that day shall not come, except there come the "apostasia" first, and that man of sin be revealed"  Now, what EXACTLY does Paul say comes first? Does he say the revealing comes first? NO! Does He say THE DAY comes first? NO! Paul is very specific: ONLY ONE THING comes first, and that is the apostasia. And we will disagree on Paul's intended meaning. 

Remember, we are to talk truth? From the day of Pentecost, the church has GROWN. If some fall away in some place, MORE COME IN in another place. The church is NOT falling away, the church worldwide is GROWING. Just this truth blows the "falling away" theory out of the water. It was a very poor translation that does not fit the context of the passage. 

The truth: they WERE troubled thinking the DAY had come and they were left behind  - or the Day had come and Paul was WRONG about the timing of the rapture. Paul's argument then was to show them how they or anyone else can KNOW FOR SURE that the DAY has come and they were IN IT: if anyone sees the man of sin revealed, they will KNOW FOR SURE they are IN the day of the Lord: it has started and they are IN IT. That is Paul's argument in a nutshell. 

However, Paul tells us that something must come FIRST before the man of sin can be revealed. There is a restraining force PREVENTING his revealed before the proper time. One day that restraining force will be "taken out of the way." If you imagine a "falling away" fits "taken out of the way" that is your choice. I think the rapture fits "taken out of the way far better. If you imagine a falling away (from What Paul does not tell us) can restrain evil, again it is your choice. I am convinced only God can restrain evil and He does it through the church and by the Holy Spirit. 

If you study Matthew 24, you will discover that "¹⁰ And then shall many be offended," fits or goes with "the end is not yet." In other words, many offended is speaking of church age events. 

Next, did you ever consider, if Paul did mean a "falling away" how in the world would any who were troubled as these were know when ENOUGH had "fallen away" to fit Paul's very significant "falling away?"  On the other hand, the day after the rapture there will be NO DOUBT a very significant departing has taken place. 

Sorry, but I don't agree with you. I don't think your theory fits the texts.

[iamlamad]

4 hours ago, Steve Conley said:

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

...

The revelation of the man of sin will involve the Antichrist (Beast) in the Temple demanding to be worshiped as God. Jesus referred to this as the start of the great tribulation (Matt 25:15, 21) which Daniel testified will take place in the middle of the week (Dan 9:27).

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. 

This is none other than the Beast that arises out of the sea (Rev 13), because it is he that worship is directed toward on behalf of the Dragon. There is no Scriptural indication that the false prophet receives worship on behalf of the Dragon.

Paul says that he told the Thessalonians these things before.

2Th 2:5  Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 

...

Glory be to Jesus

Praise the Lord forever! It seems we AGREE on something! Hallelujah! As I see it, the man of sin will enter the temple and declare that He is the God of the Jews, and expect the Jews to worship him as their God. Those living in Judea will flee, and Satan will then use the man of sin to go after them.

AT the same time, Michael will go after Satan to cast him down. Therefore, as soon as Satan is cast down, he will possess the man of sin who will ten be the Beast of Rev. 13. 

When the false prophet shows up, he will work miracles (false) when he is in close proximity to the Beast.  These miracles will deceive the masses. The days of great tribulation will begin. People will be told to worship the image or die. (Just like Nebuchadnezzar) They will be forced to accept the mark or die. In Revelation these days begin after chapter 14.

[JoeCanada]

27 minutes ago, Revelation Man said:

The Rapture happens pre 70th Week. Israel repents during the 70th week as do Gentiles who missed the Rapture {5 Virgins}. Evidently all men can repent but don't, even as the 2nd Woe is being brought forth.

The last verse in chapter 9 via the 2nd Woe says this...........Rev. 9:21 Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.

Which means they can repent, but chose not to it would seem.

The Seals are called the Lambs Wrath. God's Wrath starts with the First Seal. Jesus comes back for the Bride BEFORE the 70th Week starts.

 

I have studied the Greek and have a blog on the very subject.  The Rapture happens BEFORE the 70th week, so the little parlor trick doesn't work, which I don't think is a trick anymore, I think you guys are really just confused about the Rapture. So the Rapture happens BEFORE the Second Coming, you are the one that is confusing the two, else you wouldn't that saying the the Rapture won't happen until the Rapture. No the Rapture happens FIRST, then the Anti-Christ shows up, THEN the Wrath of God THEN the Second Coming !!

Is the Falling Away a false teaching ?

I have evolved with much study on this. I used to argue to all that there had to be this great Falling Away also. All because of this one passage. 2 Thessalonians 2:3. I do agree that the world gets far more evil towards the (now) end, as foretold in Romans chapter 1, and as Peter said, there will be scoffers in the last days etc. etc. But I do not think the True Church can "Fall Away", either you are of Christ/God or you are not, and will get left behind by the Bridegroom. Anyway, here is my understanding of 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

“Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction…” – 2 Thessalonians 2:3 (NASB) This verse is used by many and they say it implies a "Falling Away" from the faith. But a guy named Tommy Ice has shed some exceptional light on this passage.

Mr. Ice has pointed out that the Greek noun, apostasia, is used only twice in the New Testament. The other occurrence is in Acts 21:21 where it states that an accusation was made against Paul that he was “teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake [apostasia] Moses.” 

The word is used in verb form a total of 15 times in the New Testament, and only three of these have anything to do with a departure from the faith (Luke 8:13, 1 Timothy 4:1, and Hebrews 3:12). In other settings, the word is used for departing from iniquity (2 Timothy 2:19), departing from ungodly men (1 Timothy 6:5), departing from the temple (Luke 2:27), departing from the body (2 Corinthians 12:8), and departing from persons (Acts 12:10 and Luke 4:13). 

This insight about the use and meaning of the word was certainly compelling, but the argument Mr. Ice presented that was most convicting was his revelation that the first seven English translations of the Bible rendered the noun, apostasia, as either “departure” or “departing.” 

They were as follows: 

1.The Wycliffe Bible (1384) 

2.The Tyndale Bible (1526) 

3. The Coverdale Bible (1535) 

4. The Cranmer Bible (1539) 

5. The Great Bible (1540) 

6. The Beeches Bible (1576) 

7. The Geneva Bible (1608) 

Mr. Ice also noted that the Bible used by the Western world from 400 AD to the 1500s — Jerome’s Latin translation known as “The Vulgate” — rendered apostasia with the Latin word, discessio, which means “departure.” The first translation of the word to mean apostasy in an English Bible did not occur until 1611 when the King James Version was issued. So, why did the King James translators introduce a completely new rendering of the word as “falling away”? The best guess is that they were taking a stab at the false teachings of Catholicism. 

One other point Mr. Ice made that I think is significant is that Paul used a definite article with the word apostasia. The significance of this is emphasized by Daniel Davey in a thesis he wrote for the Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary: 

Since the Greek language does not need an article to make the noun definite, it becomes clear that with the usage of the article, reference is being made to something in particular. In 2 Thessalonians 2:3 the word apostasia is prefaced by the definite article which means that Paul is pointing to a particular type of departure clearly known to the Thessalonian church. 

In light of this grammatical point, Tommy observed that “the use of the definite article would support the notion that Paul spoke of a clear, discernible notion.” And that notion he had already identified in verse 1 when he stated that he was writing about “our gathering together to Him [Jesus].” This interpretation also corresponds to the point that Paul makes in verses 6 and 7 where he states that the man of lawlessness will not come until what “restrains” him “is taken out of the way.” 

And what it is that restrains evil in the world today? The Holy Spirit working through the Church. I think when the Church Departs, the Anti-Christ will be free to come to power. (First Seal after the Fake Peace)

I do not think this has anything to do with a Falling Away. It is the Church Departing before the Anti-Christ is brought forth. The King James Bible changed the known understanding that had been around for 1100 years in 1611. 
 

 

Hi RM,

If we can look into scripture for the first use (Law of Primacy) of the word "Apostasy", we find it in the Old Testament,  in Jer 2:19, and Josh 22:22. Every time it means apostasy or rebellion in a religious or political sense.....never used as a spatial or physical sense.

Even the pre-tribulationist scholar Paul D Feinburg, who wrote the argument FOR the pre-tribulation view in the first edition of "Three views of the Rapture" admits, and quotes....

"If one searches for the uses of the noun 'apostasy' in the 355  occurrences over the 300 years period between the second century BC and the first century AD, one will not find a single instance where this word refers to a physical departure"

If Thomas Ice had used the Greek, (which he doesn't appeal to) he would have found this: (by the way, this is the same Greek Dictionary that you appealed to in an earlier response)

Greek Bible Lexicon

Dictionary Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 results for apostasy    Go Back 

---

 

1.G0646 apostasia apostaseeah feminine of the same as G0647 n f
a falling away defection apostasy Feminine of the same as G0647 defection from truth properly the state apostasy falling away forsake

2.G1042 gabbatha gabbathah of Aramaic origin H1355 n pr loc
...avement of stones In Ahazs case his act was the conclusive token of his abject apostasy So here of Pilate coming down to the apostate Jews In the former case it was a Jewish ruler dominated by a Gentile idolater in the latter a Gentile idol...

3.G2692 katastrophe katastrofay from G2690 n f
...onsecration From G2690 an overturn catastrophe that is demolition figuratively apostasyoverthrow subverting

4.G3038 lithostrotos lithostrotos from G3037 and a derivative of G4766 adj
...ones In Ahazs case his act was the conclusive token of his surrender to abject apostasy So here of Pilate coming down to the level of the apostate Jews In the former case it was a Jewish ruler dominated by a Gentile idolater in the latter a...

5.G4348 proskomma proskommah from G4350 n n
...s by which is caused to sin From G4350 a stub that is figuratively occasion of apostasy offence stumblingblock stumblingstone

6.G4566 Satan satan of Hebrew origin H7854 n pr m
...e prince of evil spirits the inveterate adversary of God and Christ he incites apostasy from God and to sin circumventing men by his wiles the worshippers of idols are said to be under his control by his demons he is able to take possession...

7.G4567 Satanas satanas of Aramaic origin corresponding to H4566 with the definite affix n pr m
...e prince of evil spirits the inveterate adversary of God and Christ he incites apostasy from God and to sin circumventing men by his wiles the worshippers of idols are said to be under his control by his demons he is able to take possession...

8.G4624 skandalizo skandalidzo scandalize from G4625 v
...5 to entrap that is trip up figuratively stumble transitively or entice to sin apostasy or displeasure make to offend

9.G5289 hupostole hoopostolay from G5288 n f
...one stealthily retreating From G5288 shrinkage timidity that is by implication apostasy draw back