The Rapture under attack

[Diaste]

5 minutes ago, OneLight said:

This may be your point ...

but my point was ...

And that's an excellent point with which I wholeheartedly agree.

My thoughts on that are, Are we truly ready if we are not fully informed about prophesied events?

Jesus took the time not only to expound on this in the Olivet Discourse but dedicated an entire 22 chapter prophecy to the time of the end. 

Sure, some may not find it important and that's their calling as the Spirit guides. 

If Jesus made provision for this then surely we should as well.

 

[OneLight]

11 minutes ago, Diaste said:

And that's an excellent point with which I wholeheartedly agree.

My thoughts on that are, Are we truly ready if we are not fully informed about prophesied events?

If knowledge was our measuring stick, then nobody would ever be truly ready.  1 Corinthians 13 tells us that we "see in a mirror, dimly" and that we "know in part". 

11 minutes ago, Diaste said:

Jesus took the time not only to expound on this in the Olivet Discourse but dedicated an entire 22 chapter prophecy to the time of the end. 

Sure, some may not find it important and that's their calling as the Spirit guides. 

If Jesus made provision for this then surely we should as well.

Prophecy makes up about 1/4 of scripture and I have yet found a single person, alive or historical, that understands it all, having an ability to put all prophetic messages together like a puzzle.  Prophecy gives us a glimpse of what is to come and much of it is shrouded in mystery, forcing the reader to, for a lack of a better word, guess what it means.   I don't see the office of a prophet as someone that understands prophecy, but of one who is trusted to give the people Gods prophetic word.

Yet, Jesus tells us all to make disciples wherever we go and to teach them to observe all things He commanded us.  There is no office or calling for this as it is for all to do.

[Revelation Man]

On 7/8/2022 at 5:11 AM, Diaste said:

Ice twists the truth as he must to defend the weakness of his position.

In checking these references: Luke 8:13, 1 Timothy 4:1, and Hebrews 3:12,

2 Timothy 2:19, 1 Timothy 6:5, Luke 2:37, 2 Corinthians 12:8, Acts 12:10 and Luke 4:13, the word in each is aphistemi, defined as;

"I make to stand away, draw away, repel, take up a position away from, withdraw from, leave, abstain from."

It's the same in Acts 5:37-38, 15:38, 19:9 and 22:29, a total of 14 times in the NT.

This idea of aphistemi is 'away from' not 'taken to'. 

Trying to make aphistemi equivalent to the abduction/rescue of harpazo is self evident chicanery.

By even the reference of the word as the gathering Mr. Ice is literally saying that instead of being taken to the Lord it's now a standing away from the Lord. 

I don't think we have to wonder further about the identity of the promoters of the falling away.

 

He is correct here of course brother. The problem with having preconceived notions is we sometimes allow our bias to prevent us from seeing obvious truths, I assume you would agree all men are built that way, we have a little thing called pride, Jesus called it the "Pride of Life". And it gets in our way at times.

The truth is, if one takes away all of their preconceived opinions and just looks at the facts, a sort of Occam's Razor look at this, we can see that a Gathering unto Jesus is spoken of (Rapture) in the context of 2 Thess. 2 but nowhere in the chapter is any mention of Faith ever put forth. If one understands the first verse they get the whole point tbh.

2 Thess. 2 Now we beseech you(Ask urgently), brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, {{This is ALL we really need to understand to understand the whole chapters meaning !! It really is, 1.) We Ask you very URGENTLY via the Rapture of the Saints unto Jesus Christ to do what ? TO NOT FEAR !! Which is all then explained down below !! It is literally that simple. Do NOT FEAR that the Day of the Lord is at hand. WHY.....Look above because (BY) of the Rapture of the Saints unto the Lord.}}

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.

You guys preconceived notion on this stops you from seeing the obvious. Its really simple tbh. We know words morph, you demand it be Apostosia, well a person in 50 years(if the Lord tarried, He wont) would read a 1930s book which called a man gay, and they would argue forthwith that this means this guy is a homosexual, but of course in 1930 it meant happy go lucky. I don't care what it has morphed into, I am a researcher of factoids, I only care what Paul meant when he wrote his letter unto the Thessalonians, and it is utterly obvious brother. 

So, why does Paul not expound on this fact with perfect clarity? Because he was a Pastor to a flock in Thessalonika and he had already told them about this when he was with them before, thus he did not need to expound on this subject via a hand written letter (which takes time) he only needed to remind them of what he had told them before and rebuke them for listening to false teachers who were lying and thus had them fearing there were in God's Wrath, thus he says this:

5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now ye know what withholdeth (the Church is used by the Holy Spirit, the church gave the Fourth Beast the MORTAL WOUND) that he might be revealed in his time.

So, the Holy Spirit working through the Church HOLDS OFF the coming Anti-Christ, Jesus even stated emphatically that the Gates of Hell WILL NOT overcome my Church, so if we are overcome by this "Anti-Christ" Jesus lied !! Thus we are the overcomers in Rev. 2 and 3, to he who overcomes will I give a Crown, a Robe and he will sit amidst ,my Throne. All of the facts point one way, we see the Church in Heaven  in Rev. 4:4 and 5:9-10 BEFORE the Seals are ever opened, and after (Rev. 7:9-17) they are opened. 

God/Jesus taught us to never allow simple verses to overpower the Gospel/Holy word. That's why we are told line upon line precept upon precept because God knew Satan was, of course, going to try and confuse men, and he always will. The Pre Trib Rapture is obvious, nothing else even comes close to fitting. I can destroy any argument against it because any argument against it doesn't stand on the legs of truth. The timing never fits, the promises of God never fits, the prophesies of God never fits, unless its a Pre Trib understanding. 

As bad as some people seem to desire to go through the Tribulation, if they have the holy spirit in them, the will not be here for the 70th week. 

God Bless.

 

 

Edited July 9, 2022 by Revelation Man

[Robtay7123]

On 7/6/2022 at 8:12 AM, truth7t7 said:

I Disagree, feel free to post your quotes of the ECF on your claimed pre-trib rapture 

Darby 1830's is the father of what we have today, C.I. Scofield promoted Darby's teachings in his 1909 reference Bible, Dallas Theological Seminary is the world headquarters for the pre-trib rapture, and dispensationalism's theology 

What you say is not logical. Just because a teaching gained great popularity during a certain time period is NOT proof that it started at that time.  As I stated, some church fathers believed in the rapture and there are scriptures that teach it.  The Darby myth is again gaining great popularity I see.  By the way,  I never attended Dallas Seminary or read a Scofield Bible.  My belief in the rapture comes from the Bible alone,  not any man's teaching. 

[JoeCanada]

11 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

He is correct here of course brother. The problem with having preconceived notions is we sometimes allow our bias to prevent us from seeing obvious truths, I assume you would agree all me are built that way, we have a little thing called pride, Jesus called it the "Pride of Life". And it gets in our way at times.

The truth is, if one takes away all of their preconceived opinions and just looks at the facts, a sort of Occam's Razor look at this, we can see that a Gathering unto Jesus is spoken of (Rapture) in the context of 2 Thess. 2 but nowhere in the chapter is any mention of Faith ever put forth. If one understands the first verse they get the whole point tbh.

2 Thess. 2 Now we beseech you(Ask urgently), brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, {{This is ALL we really need to understand to understand the whole chapters meaning !! It really is, 1.) We Ask you very URGENTLY via the Rapture of the Saints unto Jesus Christ to do what ? TO NOT FEAR !! Which is all then explained down below !! It is literally that simple. Do NOT FEAR that the Day of the Lord is at hand. WHY.....Look above because (BY) of the Rapture of the Saints unto the Lord.}}

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.

You guys preconceived notion on this stops you from seeing the obvious. Its really simple tbh. We know words morph, you demand it be Apostosia, well a person in 50 years(if the Lord tarried, He wont) would read a 1930s book which called a man gay, and they would argue forthwith that this means this guy is a homosexual, but of course in 1930 is mean happy go lucky. I don't care what it has morphed into, I am a researcher of factoids, I only care what Paul meant when he wrote his letter unto the Thessalonians, and it is utterly obvious brother. 

So, why does Paul not expound on this fact with perfect clarity? Because he was a Pastor to a flock in Thessalonika and he had already told them about this when he was with them before, thus he did not need to expound on this subject via a hand written letter (which takes time) he only needed to remind them of what he had told them before and rebuke them for listening to false teachers who were lying and thus had them fearing there were in God's Wrath, thus he says this:

5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now ye know what withholdeth (the Church is used by the Holy Spirit, the church gave the Fourth Beast the MORTAL WOUND) that he might be revealed in his time.

So, the Holy Spirit working through the Church HOLDS OFF the coming Anti-Christ, Jesus even stated emphatically that the Gates of Hell WILL NOT overcome my Church, so if we are overcome by this "Anti-Christ Jesus lied !! Thus we are the overcomers in Rev. 2 and 3, to he who overcomes will I give a Crown, a Robe and he will sit amidst ,my throne. All of the facts point one way, we see the Church in Heaven  in Rev. 4:4 and 5:9-10 BEFORE the Seals are opened, and after (Rev. 7:9-17) they are opened. 

God/Jesus taught us to never allow simple verses to overpower the Gospel/Holy word. That's why we are told line upon line precept upon precept because God knew Satan was, of course, going to try and confuse men, and he always will. The Pre Trib Rapture is obvious, nothing else even comes close to fitting. I can destroy any argument against it because any argument against it doesn't stand on the legs of truth. The timing never fits, the promises of God never fits, the prophesies of God never fits, unless its a Pre Trib understanding. 

As bad as some people seem to desire to go through the Tribulation, if they have the holy spirit in them, the will not be here for the 70th week. 

God Bless.

 

 

This is a rather lengthy article, but it does put to rest the question of "does apostacy

refer to a physical departure". 

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

Does Apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 Refer to a ‘Physical Departure’ (i.e. the Rapture)?

September 11, 2015 by Dr. Alan Kurschner

Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion (apostasia) comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction – 2 Thessalonians 2:3 ESV (some versions render “rebellion” as “apostasy” or “falling away”)

Second Thessalonians chapter two has been the nemesis for pretribulationism. Or what I refer to as the 800-pound gorilla in the Bible of the pretribulationist.

This biblical passage has convinced more ex-pretribulationists that their pretrib theology is wrong than any other Bible passage. The reason for this is straightforward: The fundamental premise of pretribulationism is that there cannot be any prophesied events that will take place before the rapture, and consequently they believe in the novel idea of what has come to be called the “any moment” rapture (a.k.a. imminence).

Paul, however, gives an unambiguous statement in v. 3 that has lead many to reject imminence and thereby understand that there will be in fact at least a couple of key monumental events that will happen before the rapture.

Several pretrib teachers have attempted to get around the plain meaning of this Biblical text, but there has been one in particular that is indeed the most strained.

A few years back at a Bible prophecy  Conference I gave a series of lectures on Thessalonians. One of them was focused particularly on the pretrib argument that the Greek word behind “rebellion” (apostasia, ἀποστασία) can carry the meaning of a “physical and spatial departure,” thereby suggesting that Paul has the rapture in mind when he uses this word in this verse.

What follows are my notes from the lecture. I have adapted them and given some transitions between points since they were originally given via PowerPoint slides. In addition, I will have a whole chapter devoted to this issue in my forthcoming Prewrath Answering Pretribulationism (Eschatos Publishing, 2016).

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

Some pretribulationists, such as Thomas Ice, argue that the word “rebellion” (apostasia, ἀποστασία) means “physical departure”and not a “religious departure,” thus denoting the rapture.

This view was first introduced in 1895 by J. S. Mabie and  popularized by E. Schuyler English in 1949

In their first appeal they try to support this argument by noting earlier versions

Pretrib proponents have pointed out that early English Bibles such as Tyndale, Coverdale, and Geneva have rendered rebellion in v. 3 as “departing.”

The implication of the English word “depart” is suppose to suggest a “physical departing” and thus the concept of the rapture was in the mind of these English translators.

But this is not correct for a couple of reasons:

Appealing to sixteenth-century English versions to understand the meaning of a Greek word is naïve at best and only pushes the question back a step further: What did the sixteenth-century English word “departing” mean? Since the English word can be spatial or non-spatial in meaning.

These same early English versions use “departing” at Hebrews 3:12. For example the KJV reads, “Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.” In this instance, “departing” is clearly non-spatial, which demonstrates that the translators did not use the English word “departing” as having a single technical meaning.

Further, there is no evidence that these translators on this verse understood apostasia as a “spatial departure.”

A second appeal is to lexical evidence. But which side is the lexical evidence on?

Here is where the rubber meets the road.

Is there any lexical evidence that would prove that apostasia can carry the meaning of “physical departing,” let alone in 2 Thessalonians 2:3?

Word studies always begin with proximity and works its way outward:

Author -> NT -> Septuagint -> Koine (Pseudepigrapha Josephus, Philo) -> Classical Greek -> Patristic

New Testament:

The term is used only one other time in the New Testament, which means a religious departure:

and they have been told about you, that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake [religious apostasy] Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. –Acts 21:21

Septuagint:

Four Times: Joshua 22:22; 2 Chronicles 29:19; 1 Maccabees 2:15; Jeremiah 2:19.

Every time it means apostasy or rebellion in a religious or political sense—never used as a spatial or physical sense.

Koine Greek Literature:

In Moulton and Milligan’s, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources, it is demonstrated that this term is only used in the political or religious defection sense—again, never used in a spatial departure sense (pp. 68–9).

Further, even pretribulationist scholar Paul Feinberg admits, “If one searches for the uses of the noun “apostasy” in the 355 occurrences over the 300-year period between the second century B.C. and the first century A.D., one will not find a single instance where this word refers to a physical departure.”

He is correct.

Classical Greek:

Liddell and Scott’s lexicon A Greek-English Lexicon lists the primary meaning of apostasia as “defection, revolt”: “esp. in religious sense, rebellion against God, apostasy, LXX Jo. 22.22, 2 Ep.Th. 2.3.” As a secondary sense, the lexicon has “departure, disappearance.” However, the lexicon only recognizes this secondary sense as found in the sixth century A.D. document Olympiodorus Philosophus: in Mete. = in Aristotelis Meteora commentaria, ed. W. Stüve (Comm. in Arist. Graeca xii pars ii), Berlin 1900. This latter example of a spatial departure is thus found five centuries later after the New Testament. It is sloppy and simply fallacious to read back, not only this obscure meaning, but one that is five centuries after the New Testament!

Patristic Greek:

The standard Greek lexicon for Patristic Greek is Lampe, which has the primary meaning of apostasia as “revolt, defection,” and it gives only one example for the sense of a spatial departure. This one instance is found in a NT apocryphal work on the tradition of the Assumption of Mary. Again, this “physical departure” sense is outside the Koine period dated to the later 5th century A.D.

So what do we make of all this lexical evidence?

Here are the documented lexical facts:

There were five Greek sources examined. The most weighty and important sources are in the Koine period, the New Testament and the Septuagint–not a single instance does apostasia carry the meaning of “physical departure.” Instead, every instance has the meaning of religious or political departure.

The last two sources—Classical and Patristic Greek—are the least weighty and important because they are the furthest removed from the New Testament.

There were only two instances from these  sources that have a physical departure meaning—and both of these examples are dated late well into the 5th-6th century.

This is why one will not find the “physical” (i.e. spatial) meaning in standard New Testament lexicons.

BDAG defines this word as “defiance of established system or authority, rebellion, abandonment, breach of faith”

BDAG‘s predecessor Thayer

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Kittel)

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Brown)

Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (Balz)

A third appeal to the cognate verb

So how does the pretribber respond to these lexical facts? This is where the desperate leap takes place.

We have done a responsible thorough examination of the noun apostasia demonstrating that the term does not carry a “physical-spatial” meaning in the Koine period.

The pretribber will make the leap by pointing to the cognate verb form of apostasia, which is aphistemi, which means “to withdraw, remove, depart, leave.” It is used 14 times in the NT and is used both in a spatial and non-spatial sense. This is where the leap happens by assuming that the verb meaning carries over to the noun meaning.

E. S. English succinctly states the pretrib reasoning: “since a noun takes its meaning from the verb, the noun, too, may have such a broad connotation.”

Davey goes further saying, “Since the root verb has this meaning of ‘departure’ from a person or place in a geographical sense, would not its derivatives have the same foundational word meaning.”

Enter the cognate and root fallacy.

Cognates and roots is not the way any responsible exegete determines word meanings (Imagine reading the newspaper this way. Or love letters!)

Instead, word meanings are determined by semantic range and its usage in context.

Even Feinberg rejects this naïve method when he comments on this specific word: “the meaning of derivative nouns must be established through their usage.” (emphasis his)

Perfect case in point: aphistemi

Apostasion is a cognate noun to this verb, which only means “divorce or some other legal act of separation.”

Apostater another cognate noun which means “one who has power to dissolve an assembly” or “to decide a question.”

Since these derivative nouns do not contain the meaning of a spatial or physical departure (as the pretribber will not argue), there is absolutely no basis to assume that our target noun apostasia does as well. In other words, the pretrib cannot have their lexical cake and eat it too. It is first rank special pleading.

The fourth appeal: context

Since the semantic range does not include “physical or spatial departure” it is moot to even evaluate context—unless someone wants to argue that this is the only instance within 500 years that the term means a “physical departure”!

Nevertheless, let’s argue context.

To interpret the word “rebellion” in v. 3 as the “rapture” does not comport with the context, and as we will see it makes Paul unintelligible, even humorous.

First, Paul is making a contrast of what precedes and what follows. The “gathering” (rapture) and parousia/day of the Lord is what follows (“For that day will not come unless”) the rebellion and revelation of the man of lawlessness. The pretrib view would have Paul in essence saying, “The rapture cannot happen until the rapture happens” But Paul is clearly marking certain events as signs or conditions that must take place before Christ’s return.

Second, Paul does not simply mention “rebellion” (apostasy) and leave it at that. But the verse begins with Paul’s exhortation, “Let no one deceive you in any way.” This is followed by “For,” which in this case is called an “explanatory hoti (ὅτι).” That is to say, Paul is connecting the exhortation not to be deceived with the fact of rebellion and the man of lawlessness being revealed.

In addition, some pretrib teachers have attempted to argue that since there is an article “the” before “rebellion” it indicates that the Thessalonians were familiar with some previous teaching by Paul. This is baseless, since they have to assume that it refers to the rapture. It is classic begging the question.

But what does the context show us?

Since this word in the Koine period always meant a “religious or political departure” should we then not be surprised that Paul makes references in this very context to “the truth” and “the Christian faith”?

Indeed, he does:

v. 2 “not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed”
v. 3 “Let no one deceive you in any way”
v. 10 “they refused to love the truth”
v. 11 “Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false”
v. 13 “through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth”
v. 15 “stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.”

In addition, the rebellion and the revealing of the man of lawlessness are not two disconnected or unrelated events, but should be seen as a two-fold unifying event: “first” refers to both of the events that must happen before the day of the Lord.

And what is the connection between Antichrist and the apostasy/rebellion?

“The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false.” 2 Thessalonians 2:9–11.

I recognize that there are other viewpoints of who actually apostatizes:

(1) A conspicuous increase in godlessness (or rebellion) within the world? (but the definite article before “rebellion” would suggest a more specific discernible event)
(2) A significant apostasy within the professing church?
(3) True believers lose their salvation? (but see 2 Thess 2:13).
(4) Jewish in scope? (but the context here includes Gentiles)

My own position is #2 because I believe the immediate context in chapter 2 of the Antichrist’s activity informs us of the identity of the rebellion. Nevertheless, this is not particularly essential to my point in this article.

Here is the big picture: The pretribulational “Physical Departure” argument fails on all four levels:

It fails on appealing to early English versions
It fails on appealing to five bodies of Greek literature
It fails on appealing to its verbal cognate form
It fails on appealing to context.

Even the most noted pretibulational scholar John F. Walvoord did not take this “physical departure” interpretation:

In the first edition of his popular book The Rapture Question (1957) he defended the “Physical Departure” argument. But after considering some of these arguments put forth by Robert H. Gundry, Walvoord rejected this common pretrib argument which he notes in his second edition of The Rapture Question (1979).

Also, noted pretrib scholar Paul Feinberg writes, “there is no reason to understand Paul’s use of apostasia as a reference to the rapture” (When the Trumpet Sounds, 311).

[truth7t7]

5 hours ago, Robtay7123 said:

What you say is not logical. Just because a teaching gained great popularity during a certain time period is NOT proof that it started at that time.  As I stated, some church fathers believed in the rapture and there are scriptures that teach it.  The Darby myth is again gaining great popularity I see.  By the way,  I never attended Dallas Seminary or read a Scofield Bible.  My belief in the rapture comes from the Bible alone,  not any man's teaching. 

A pre-trib rapture is found no place in scripture, it's a fabricated fairy tale of man

Feel free to post quotes of your Church fathers, waiting?

Edited July 9, 2022 by truth7t7

[Diaste]

16 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

He is correct here of course brother. The problem with having preconceived notions is we sometimes allow our bias to prevent us from seeing obvious truths, I assume you would agree all me are built that way, we have a little thing called pride, Jesus called it the "Pride of Life". And it gets in our way at times.

But I would assume you, being free from pride, see with perfect clarity?

16 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

The truth is, if one takes away all of their preconceived opinions and just looks at the facts, a sort of Occam's Razor look at this, we can see that a Gathering unto Jesus is spoken of (Rapture) in the context of 2 Thess. 2 but nowhere in the chapter is any mention of Faith ever put forth. If one understands the first verse they get the whole point tbh.

No one says there isn't a gathering. It's timing.

16 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

2 Thess. 2 Now we beseech you(Ask urgently), brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, {{This is ALL we really need to understand to understand the whole chapters meaning !! It really is, 1.) We Ask you very URGENTLY via the Rapture of the Saints unto Jesus Christ to do what ? TO NOT FEAR !! Which is all then explained down below !! It is literally that simple. Do NOT FEAR that the Day of the Lord is at hand. WHY.....Look above because (BY) of the Rapture of the Saints unto the Lord.}}

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.

Again, it's not the fact of the gathering, it's the timing.

16 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

 

You guys preconceived notion on this stops you from seeing the obvious. Its really simple tbh. We know words morph, you demand it be Apostosia, well a person in 50 years(if the Lord tarried, He wont) would read a 1930s book which called a man gay, and they would argue forthwith that this means this guy is a homosexual, but of course in 1930 is mean happy go lucky. I don't care what it has morphed into, I am a researcher of factoids, I only care what Paul meant when he wrote his letter unto the Thessalonians, and it is utterly obvious brother. 

The prophetic word of an Eternal God concerning the salvation of His people shouldn't be likened to "The Great Gatsby". 

That's a terrifying, mad fearlessness of the power of the Most High.

16 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

So, why does Paul not expound on this fact with perfect clarity? Because he was a Pastor to a flock in Thessalonika and he had already told them about this when he was with them before, thus he did not need to expound on this subject via a hand written letter (which takes time) he only needed to remind them of what he had told them before and rebuke them for listening to false teachers who were lying and thus had them fearing there were in God's Wrath, thus he says this:

5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now ye know what withholdeth (the Church is used by the Holy Spirit, the church gave the Fourth Beast the MORTAL WOUND) that he might be revealed in his time.

But you don't know what was told by Paul. You're making a great assumption then basing a conclusion on what was assumed to be said. 

16 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

So, the Holy Spirit working through the Church HOLDS OFF the coming Anti-Christ, Jesus even stated emphatically that the Gates of Hell WILL NOT overcome my Church, so if we are overcome by this "Anti-Christ Jesus lied !! Thus we are the overcomers in Rev. 2 and 3, to he who overcomes will I give a Crown, a Robe and he will sit amidst ,my throne. All of the facts point one way, we see the Church in Heaven  in Rev. 4:4 and 5:9-10 BEFORE the Seals are opened, and after (Rev. 7:9-17) they are opened. 

Well, to overcome you have to be in the fight. You don't fight, you don't win. This makes a pretrib idea on overcoming by not even being in the stadium ludicrous.

16 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

God/Jesus taught us to never allow simple verses to overpower the Gospel/Holy word. That's why we are told line upon line precept upon precept because God knew Satan was, of course, going to try and confuse men, and he always will. The Pre Trib Rapture is obvious, nothing else even comes close to fitting. I can destroy any argument against it because any argument against it doesn't stand on the legs of truth. The timing never fits, the promises of God never fits, the prophesies of God never fits, unless its a Pre Trib understanding. 

Yeah. Some scriptural truth is more truthful than other truth. Feel safe to ignore what you don't like.

No thank you.

16 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

As bad as some people seem to desire to go through the Tribulation, if they have the holy spirit in them, the will not be here for the 70th week. 

This is just a very sad emotional appeal to a false conception.

No one wants to be in this time. The difference is some have great confidence and trust in Jesus that He will walk us through and deliver us to eternal life no matter what battle rages all around us. 

Just like Noah and the ark during the flood, when Noah was saved from the flood in the ark; when the flood of the fire of testing comes, the Spiritual Ark of Christ's power and provision for our safety is where we will weather the firestorm.

[Revelation Man]

8 hours ago, JoeCanada said:

This is a rather lengthy article, but it does put to rest the question of "does apostacy

refer to a physical departure". 

Only in your preconceived mind brother, because its not really a truth. None of the facts fits. None of the timing fits. Where I destroy you guys is in the details, just because YOU AGREE with this guy doesn't him nor you are correct, it makes you both incorrect. On the other hand I explain in simple terms all things, like Jesus saying the Gates of Hell WILL NOT overcome my Church. Did Jesus lie? Of course not, Satan  whispers lies to men, the reason the Gates of Hell can't overcome the Church is the Church is taken out of the 70th week Pre Trib. SIMPLE STUFF.

 

[JoeCanada]

17 minutes ago, Revelation Man said:

Only in your preconceived mind brother, because its not really a truth. None of the facts fits. None of the timing fits. Where I destroy you guys is in the details, just because YOU AGREE with this guy doesn't him nor you are correct, it makes you both incorrect. On the other hand I explain in simple terms all things, like Jesus saying the Gates of Hell WILL NOT overcome my Church. Did Jesus lie? Of course not, Satan  whispers lies to men, the reason the Gates of Hell can't overcome the Church is the Church is taken out of the 70th week Pre Trib. SIMPLE STUFF.

 

Right..... so it's okay for you to agree with Tommy Ice! And because you agree with T0mmy Ice it makes you both correct? Tommy and Tim Lahaye, the hucksters of the Pre-Trib Research Centre? Tommy, who has written 35+ books trying to defend the pre-trib rapture over the past 24 years...... well there you go.... just follow the money. Pre-trib is BIG money. Everyone wants to escape pre-trib and they buy all his books and donate millions of dollars to the Centre every year. It's nothing but a carnival act.

Tim Lahaye..... really???????

Dr Kurschner destroyed Tommy Ice in a debate on pre-trib.

But you go ahead and agree with whomever you want to.

You've been shown time and time again the error of pre-trib, yet you continue to spew out false......... "facts" like you like to call them. Pffffft!

Just look at how ridiculous your version of pre-trib is:

You say that the 2000 (+-) church age tribulation is greater than the 7 year trib.

You say that's what Jesus meant when He said there would be "great tribulation", because 2000 is greater than 7. 

So, the church is going to be raptured "pre-tribulation"??????

Humorous to say the least.

[Revelation Man]

3 hours ago, Diaste said:

But I would assume you, being free from pride, see with perfect clarity?

Yes, I have always understood how to HEAR the voice of the Holy Spirit even when I was not given aollof the Answers, I could tell lies of Satan, its kinda hard to explain, but then again not so hard. When I heard the Robert W Armstrong stuff about the Lion (England) and the Eagle (USA) etc. it was intriguing to read, but the Holy Spirit would always warn me off of thee things, even though He might not give me all of the answers. The Spirit ALWAYS testifies unto the Spirit (which is why I knew Beny Hinn was not a fake and that some others were). 

But, not being DECEIVED is of course not the same as being ENLIGHTENED right? Of course. So, I was called over 37 years ago by God to Prophecy/End Time Understandings I assumed because of a Vision I had. I was running with two small kids as a very young Christian, from some evil dudes, I hid by a house behind some bushes and I heard a BOOMING voice from Heaven tat said "The Man of Sin is Here" and that was all that the Voice said !! Quite simple, now I know God had told me that the Anti-Christ was alive, in the world, NOW. At the time it probably did not register tbh, but when I had another vision, I understood Gid was revealing DEEP TRUTHS unto me because  was in a huge auditorium with like maybe 9 or 10 people and Jimmy Swaggart was preaching, within a week or two he had fallen from Grace and then I knew, God showed me this in a Vision !! And then it finally hit me, the Man of Sin (Anti-Christ) really was alive on this world and God showed me this LATER VISION to affirm His first vision was fast and true no mater how long it would take for this evil  tyrant thug to come to power.

So, I knew my calling, but did Gid PRESTO give me everything at that time? Of course not I plowed away, studied, worked hard, studied and prayed, got married, but after about 30 years of being suddenly stuck in a rut pattern I prayed one night, "God, why did you show me all of that 30 years ago, but now 30 years later I see 100s of understandings of what Babylon means, what the Harlot means, who the 144,000 are, when the Rapture takes place, who the 7 Headed Beast is etc. etc., why are we as a Church so confused and conflated when this is supposed to be the very end times when you promised you would reveal ALL THINGS unto us? 

And I got this:

"Ron, you guys already know it all" 

Now, even though I was nit the kind to accept the Armstrong stuff, the RCC is the Beast not the Islamic angle, I knew what God was telling me, as per Prophecy we were stifling the Holy Spirit from revealing His truths unto us because w already had ALL THE ANSWERS and we git them from OTHER MEN !! Why? Because as young Christians we saw the book of Revelation, Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah and Zechariah etc. as over our heads so we read Hal Lindsay (good man) or other peoples ideas but we never went into these Prophecy books and simply ASKED God to give us His answers as we did when we first read the Gospels and they came alive unto us via the Holy Spirit quickening us through that holy writ. We thus got our ideas from  men. Jesus told the Pharisees the reason they could not see who he was in the Scriptures was because of their "Men's Traditions" So, I started over, I started reading all of the books of Prophecy with a blank mind about 7 or so years ago, and whenever I came to a seeming contradiction, I refused to move on until God gave me an answer, and as long as I "wait upon the Lord" I finally get an answer.

So, do I know all of these things? Yes of course I do, because I have learned that I do not KNOW IT ALL, and that only God does, thus by humbling myself I will be showed it all, but one has to understand how to purge wrong beliefs in the first place. If I was taught that 2 + 2 = 7 until the 5th grade that would be my thinking at 10 years old, that would be obstacle for my 5th grade teacher to overcome. That is what God told me, "Ron, you guys already know it all" So, my blog of three months on Babylon had to be taken down and written over, I stated THAT CITY was Rome and the Holy Spirit (when you RECIVE the voice saying Ron, YOU ARE WRONG, He will come at you often, believe me) was like, Ron, you are wrong, look at verse 18 (Rev. 17) THAT CITY is pointing unto the vision (verses 3-6 is all of the vision) and THAT CITY is pointing to Babylon the Great because the Harlot was associated with False Religion. 

So, my prayer was answered, God told me why we can not see these TRUTHS in full. Thus I learned how not only to see UNTRUTHS (that's the easy part, In have always had that gift), but I learned how to overcome the 100s of points of view put there and to just smile and go back to basics and simple say, Lord, what does this mean !! It works every time !! Especially NOW because God wants to reveal all of these End Time Events unto us.

So, I am no more special than you, but I simply prayed and got an answer which led me to understand tat I needed to stop leaning on other men's ideas and just ask God to reveal His truths, after all this was my original calling. Also, about 25 years ago a guy who was contemplating suicide was at my sisters house, when I walked in he kinda got weirded out. My sister told me he had told her when he saw me walk through town at night he saw a spotlight from heaven on me. So, I have know God chose e way back fur a special calling, as He does us all I guess, but mine has to do with End Time Eschatology. 

So, we all see darkly now, of course, but of course God is going to always chose a few for missions, he chose Moses, He chose Jacob, He chose Joshua, he chose preachers to preach, he chose Cyrus the gentile king etc. etc. Just because God chose me to understand prophecy that all good to me, its not me of course, it is the Glory of God that reveals, we just have to stop BLOCKING him. IMHO, anyone tat says the Church goes through he tribulation is just blocking God from revealing His truth unto them because of things they learned from OTHER MEN !!

I will finish up later. Dog needs to go wee wee and I need some coffee. God Bless.