Christians and the Tribulation

[Rhema]

It's not a gotcha setup. It is just to better understand where you are coming from. Please answer. What is a Christian and how do you become one.

Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.​

(Acts 2:37-38 KJV)​

Was Peter wrong? I don't see how that would be possible. Did Peter leave stuff out? Again, I don't see how that would be possible.

Rhema
(Now... Post 280 please?)

This is a Rom 14:5 discussion, no wrong answers.

I think it greatly matters how one becomes saved. There are billions of Christians (over the millennia) who shall find out that they aren't.

 

[Christ4Ever]

Christian: Follower of Jesus.
Being identified as a Christian does not necessarily equate to salvation, which is a common misconception among many self-proclaimed Christians. While they may indeed be saved, the declaration of being a Christian and the state of salvation are not inherently synonymous and can be mutually exclusive.

I have no issue with the concept of the "Rapture," regardless of its timing or occurrence. The important thing is that it does not distract us from the duties and tasks that our Lord has assigned to us.

I frequently ponder whether proponents of both viewpoints on the matter believe that the other's mistake could affect that individual's salvation, or maybe it indicates that they were never saved to begin with.

As far as being saved. I suggest one start with the Gospel first. \o/

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[KingJ]

@Brad Huber @Rhema @B-A-C

Since you guys don't want to explain what you believe a Christian is, please read this link What is a Christian and how do you become one?.

Facts to consider:

- A Christian is someone who has passed God's judgement of their heart and mind - Jer 17:9-11.
- One who is given faith and a revelation from the Holy Spirit to believe that Jesus is Lord - 1 Cor 12:3.
- A Christian is grafted into the family of God - Rom 11. A new creation in Christ - 2 Cor 5:17.
- Our full time job on earth is to be an ambassador for God 2 Cor 5:20.
- A Christian being guided by the Holy Spirit is part and parcel of God's plan for us, for those who 'live by faith' - John 16:13.
- The Holy Spirit 'leaves' the earth so that the antichrist can 'have his way' - 2 Thess 2:6-8.

We are not at war with flesh and blood. Our enemy is the forces of darkness - Eph 6:12. IE Satan, fallen angels and their influence on society.

Now Job was a great man of God. No doubt on that. But he was not a Christian. He was not tasked to put on his armour and travel to China and be a witness for Jesus. The devil was also restricted from killing him. In the tribulation the devil will not be restricted Rev 2:11. If you reject his mark you can expect to go hungry and die a martyr.

The criteria to come to God today, is via the revelation given to Paul in Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

In the tribulation we are justified by not getting the mark of the beast Rev 14:9-10 and dying a martyr Rev 2:10.

--------------------

Conclusion:

1. If the Holy Spirit leaves without us, it is abandonment by God. The example in post # 291 is valid.
2. It does not matter how much faith you have in Jesus in the tribulation. If you accept the mark of the beast or reject martyrdom, you are going to hell.

 

[Rhema]

@Brad Huber @Rhema @B-A-C

Since you guys don't want to explain what you believe a Christian is,

I did. Post #310. Perhaps you just missed it.

Facts to consider:

There is so much wrong here, I just don't know where to begin. And since you seem absolutely convinced of your own understanding, I'm wondering whether to even explain.

Let me address one presumption.

Fact 1 = The Holy Spirit will leave

- The Holy Spirit 'leaves' the earth so that the antichrist can 'have his way' - 2 Thess 2:6-8.

I really don't know how you arrive at that conclusion, because that's not what the text actually says, (although I realize it's a popular viewpoint).

Allow me to post a number of translations. Hopefully there's one that you would accept:

(2 Thessalonians 2:6-8 KJV) And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. 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:​

​

(2 Thessalonians 2:6-8 YLT) and now, what is keeping down ye have known, for his being revealed in his own time, for the secret of the lawlessness doth already work, only he who is keeping down now will hinder —till he may be out of the way, and then shall be revealed the Lawless One, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the manifestation of his presence,​

​

(2 Thessalonians 2:6-8 NRSV) And you know what is now restraining him, so that he may be revealed when his time comes. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work, but only until the one who now restrains it is removed. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will destroy with the breath of his mouth, annihilating him by the manifestation of his coming.​

First, I'm sure you can see that there are a lot of pronouns in this passage. "He" (he who?) "His" (whose?)... even a "what" (which what?). Is the Holy Spirit a "what"? Yet there is a "what" that is restraining (withholdeth; keeping down). And there is a "he" (the one) who restrains (letteth; keeping down) who is then supposedly "removed," "be out of the way," or "taken out of the way."

Don't be fooled. Verse seven is not easy to translate. So I provide the exact Greek text, with interlinear:

το γαρ (FOR THE) μυστηριον (MYSTERY) ηδη (ALREADY) ενεργειται (OPERATES) της ανομιας (OF LAWLESSNESS) : μονον (ONLY) ο (THE ONE) κατεχων (RESTRAINING) αρτι (JUST NOW) εως (UNTIL) εκ (OUT OF) μεσου (MIDST) γενηται G1096 (IT MIGHT COME INTO BEING)​

And accounting for word order (in English) verse seven actually reads -

FOR THE MYSTERY OF LAWLESSNESS ALREADY OPERATES : ONLY THE ONE RESTRAINING JUST NOW UNTIL OUT OF (the) MIDST IT MIGHT COME-INTO-BEING.​

So what is the IT that COMES-INTO-BEING (G1096)?? It would seem to be Lawlessness. You might find it hard to believe, but do your own research on the verb γίνομαι (G1096). There is nothing that is removed, there is nothing that will "be out of the way" there is nothing "taken out of the way."

LINK to Liddell Scott Lexicon Entry for G1096

My point, is that the Holy Spirit is not removed from the earth. There is Nothing in the text that says the Holy Spirit will leave or be taken from the Earth. The word "Earth" is not even in the text. (Can we at least agree on that?) So where does this idea come from? People add in that last part "from the earth". And it's not wise to add in words.

Rhema

But I know you likely won't truly consider what I posted, and will just blurt out some emotional knee jerk rejection, because you already know what it all means. Eh?
(Expressing frustration.)

 

[KingJ]

I did. Post #310. Perhaps you just missed it.

You realize your current post is #304?

1. There is so much wrong here, I just don't know where to begin. / 2. And since you seem absolutely convinced of your own understanding, / 3. I'm wondering whether to even explain. / 4. Let me address one presumption. 5. I really don't know how you arrive at that conclusion because that's not what the text actually says / 6. Hopefully there's one that you would accept / 7. Let me address one presumption. / 8. But I know you likely won't truly consider what I posted / 9. ill just blurt out some emotional knee jerk rejection / 10. because you already know what it all means / 11. Eh?

11 Antagonizing statements from you in one post. I am a post or two away from putting you on ignore. You are among brothers and sisters if you are a Christian, relax and if you must get aggressive, focus it on a specific point that upsets you. But ensure that you are defending ''God being good'' if you do so. As opposed to ''your reading skills and opinion > mine''.

I really don't know how you arrive at that conclusion, because that's not what the text actually says, (although I realize it's a popular viewpoint).

Allow me to post a number of translations. Hopefully there's one that you would accept:

(2 Thessalonians 2:6-8 KJV) And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. 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:​

​

(2 Thessalonians 2:6-8 YLT) and now, what is keeping down ye have known, for his being revealed in his own time, for the secret of the lawlessness doth already work, only he who is keeping down now will hinder —till he may be out of the way, and then shall be revealed the Lawless One, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the manifestation of his presence,​

​

(2 Thessalonians 2:6-8 NRSV) And you know what is now restraining him, so that he may be revealed when his time comes. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work, but only until the one who now restrains it is removed. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will destroy with the breath of his mouth, annihilating him by the manifestation of his coming.​

First, I'm sure you can see that there are a lot of pronouns in this passage. "He" (he who?) "His" (whose?)... even a "what" (which what?). Is the Holy Spirit a "what"? Yet there is a "what" that is restraining (withholdeth; keeping down). And there is a "he" (the one) who restrains (letteth; keeping down) who is then supposedly "removed," "be out of the way," or "taken out of the way."

Don't be fooled. Verse seven is not easy to translate. So I provide the exact Greek text, with interlinear:

το γαρ (FOR THE) μυστηριον (MYSTERY) ηδη (ALREADY) ενεργειται (OPERATES) της ανομιας (OF LAWLESSNESS) : μονον (ONLY) ο (THE ONE) κατεχων (RESTRAINING) αρτι (JUST NOW) εως (UNTIL) εκ (OUT OF) μεσου (MIDST) γενηται G1096 (IT MIGHT COME INTO BEING)​

And accounting for word order (in English) verse seven actually reads -

FOR THE MYSTERY OF LAWLESSNESS ALREADY OPERATES : ONLY THE ONE RESTRAINING JUST NOW UNTIL OUT OF (the) MIDST IT MIGHT COME-INTO-BEING.​

So what is the IT that COMES-INTO-BEING (G1096)?? It would seem to be Lawlessness. You might find it hard to believe, but do your own research on the verb γίνομαι (G1096). There is nothing that is removed, there is nothing that will "be out of the way" there is nothing "taken out of the way."

LINK to Liddell Scott Lexicon Entry for G1096

My point, is that the Holy Spirit is not removed from the earth. There is Nothing in the text that says the Holy Spirit will leave or be taken from the Earth. The word "Earth" is not even in the text. (Can we at least agree on that?) So where does this idea come from? People add in that last part "from the earth". And it's not wise to add in words.

Rhema

But I know you likely won't truly consider what I posted, and will just blurt out some emotional knee jerk rejection, because you already know what it all means. Eh?
(Expressing frustration.)

The passage does not need to mention earth. We are on....earth. Its a '''duh''' nitpick.

Then, please try better explain your interpretation of the passage. I cannot follow what you have typed here. Start with verse 6 = ABC, verse 7 - DEF, verse 8 = GHI and then verse 6-8 = JKL. At the moment it sounds like you have tackled one or two words in the 3 verses and somehow I am silly and you are smart...and I can't read English, because I can't read Greek. To me all the translations say the same thing when you consider verse 6-8 and not try isolate a small phrase. Even the Greek.

And yes, you correctly acknowledged it is popular. A vast majority of scholars disagree with you. So, you do need to better explain yourself. I am keen to hear your interpretation.

Perhaps it may also help friendly discussion if you first mention what you believe and why. At the moment it seems like you are only here to criticize others beliefs.

 

[Rhema]

You realize your current post is #304?

Oh dear... #301.

Thank you for pointing that out.
Rhema

 

[KingJ]

Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.​

(Acts 2:37-38 KJV)​

Was Peter wrong? I don't see how that would be possible. Did Peter leave stuff out? Again, I don't see how that would be possible.

I agree with that verse. Its not really A-Z, but it is a fine stand alone verse.

Now, tell me, can what Peter said here be inserted into Rev 2:10 or Rev 14:9-10?

Are you OSAS or anti OSAS by the way?

Rhema

You don't think this is vanity?

I think it greatly matters how one becomes saved. There are billions of Christians (over the millennia) who shall find out that they aren't.

The topic of the rapture timing is a Rom 14:5 issue.

 

[Rhema]

11 Antagonizing statements from you in one post.

11 Truthful statements from my perspective.

I am a post or two away from putting you on ignore.

You mean removing me? But I'd still be here on the Earth. So... obviously things can be removed or taken away while still remaining on Earth.

The passage does not need to mention earth. We are on....earth. Its a '''duh''' nitpick.

(How aggressive...)

Adding in words to create a theological fantasy is not wise. Even IF some restraint of the Holy Spirit is removed from Lawlessness, or the working of Lawlessness, it does not mean that the Holy Spirit is taken away from the Earth. I had hoped that you could at least agree that the word Earth is not in the text. ( It isn't. ) Nor is the Holy Spirit mentioned at all.

That still doesn't change the fact that there is no "taking" or "removing" of anything in 2 Thessalonians 2:7

You are among brothers and sisters if you are a Christian,

You mean if YOU decide I am one ?? ... . One would think that you'd treat non-Christians better, ( if we are to do good to our enemy). Unfortunately this is the type of bickering that Nick warned against, so I'd rather that we stick to the topic.

For better or worse, this is the text of verse 7

FOR THE MYSTERY OF LAWLESSNESS ALREADY OPERATES : ONLY THE ONE RESTRAINING JUST NOW UNTIL OUT OF (the) MIDDLE IT MIGHT COME-INTO-BEING.

To me all the translations say the same thing

And in many passages of the Bible, all of the translations are wrong. As an example, the word LORD isn't in the Hebrew text in Leviticus 1:1. Find me one English translation that is accurate. And no, translators don't put this in to "help you out." They change the words to push their own theological agenda.

How can you say, "We are wise, and the TORAH of YHWH is with us," when, in fact, the lying pen of the scribes has made it into a lie? (Jeremiah 8:8)​

50 years ago, I discovered that neither the KJV nor the NIV accurately followed the Greek text. That's when I decided to learn the language for myself. At times, the NRSV is even worse, not to mention the innumerable recent attempts (NLV, NHE, EST... MOUSE) But if you decide that that makes you (how did you say) "silly" That's on YOU. I provided an accurate rendition, and if you don't like it, go learn the language for yourself. You are quite welcome to put me on ignore.

I cannot follow what you have typed here.

Upon reflection I ought to have provided a better word order for English. Sorry about that. Sometimes I think in English words with Greek grammar.

Verse 7: And now ye know what withholdeth / holds back (the day of the Lord) that he (the Son of Perdition) might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of lawlessness already operates, only restrained (held back) just now until he (the Son of Perdition) "out of middle" might-come-into-being. (Greek with annotation)​

Then, please try better explain your interpretation of the passage.

So let me set some background, which you likely already know....

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 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. 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; 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. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? (2 Thessalonians 2:1-5 KJV)​

To be honest, there are books written on this passage of Paul, although I have no desire to walk over to my seminary's library and try to count them. The key phrase is the "DAY OF THE LORD," which is found in OT prophecy 23 times, from Isaiah on through Malachi. It's a rather important phrase, but can mean different things, like the prophecy about Islam in Ezekiel 30.

Obviously, the concern of the congregation to whom Paul writes is "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him." This is a direct reference to Matthew 24, and it would seem that this church had even received some type of letter saying that such had already happened. Paul assures them that it cannot happen until the "man of sin, ... the Son of Perdition" (as opposed to the Son of God) be revealed. After listing some characteristics about this Son of Perdition, Paul refers to things that he taught in person. Unfortunately, these are not things that have been written down. ... Anywhere.

So now we arrive at the passage that is badly translated.

(2 Thessalonians 2:6-10 KJV) And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth (added words have been removed), until he be taken out of the way. 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, (added words have been removed) whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.​

Please take some time reading the above passage. I removed the words that the KJV added because they shouldn't be there. Period. But it seems strange, this one segment, "... with the brightness of his coming whose coming is after the working of Satan..." That's because the word "after" is the wrong gloss for KATA (G2596), which means against. The Lord's coming is against the working of Satan... Now allow me to provide a better word order than I gave before, with clarification of the pronouns:

And now ye know what withholdeth / holds back (the day of the Lord) that he (the Son of Perdition) might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of lawlessness already operates, only restrained (held back) just now until he (the Son of Perdition) might "out of middle" come-into-being. (Greek with annotation)​

It would seem that the "Son of Perdition" had not yet been born (come into being), so the church need not worry. While lawlessness already operates, the mystery is that the Day of the Lord is held back until the Son of Perdition is born comes-into-being. Truth be told, the "out of middle" has me a bit perplexed. The text does not say middle of what. While I am not inclined to speculate, maybe "out of midair"? An event for which most people are unaware.

The final truth is that neither the word Earth nor the Holy Spirit are actually present in this entire passage, and that was my point - Not to base your eschatology on the Holy Spirit disappearing from the planet.

I am keen to hear your interpretation.

Okie dokie.... (but put on your seat belt and strap in) ...

DNA is the Law of life. It is also the Law of Death, since death is encoded in your DNA (e.g. telomeres). Law-Less-Ness is the genetic manipulation of DNA by men (possibly this Son of Perdition), the purpose of which is to create a human body that will live forever - and Not Die. Your Second Coming will occur when genetic research produces a human (who also might be this Son of Perdition) that cannot die. At that point, the active ingredient of "Tree of Life" can be synthesized in the lab so ALL humans could no longer age and die. (There's a reason for this.)

Now if the Tuft's University Perseus website was working, I could link you into the definition of "mystery" which shows the Greek word to indicate QUOTE object used in magical rites UNQUOTE, and I see no reason why this could not refer to the equipment used in biochemistry.

And THAT's why the Day of the Lord is almost at hand... No other reason.

God bless,
Rhema

A vast majority of scholars disagree with you.

Oh spare me... . How many "vast majority of scholars" have you met or read? It would be greatly beneficial if you could drop the hyperbole.

 

[Rhema]

Its not really A-Z,

So then you believe that Peter preached an incomplete gospel, and those 3,000 were not saved?

Now, tell me, can what Peter said here be inserted into Rev 2:10 or Rev 14:9-10?

Don't know, couldn't care less. Revelation is not in our canon. Nor was it in your canon until 367 AD. In 325 AD half the bishops at Nicaea thought it was trash, and I am inclined to agree. The Apocalypse of John belongs with the Apocalypse of Peter. I have never found anything good to come out of that book.

But why do you refuse to accept the fact that Rev 2:10 was written to the Church in Smyrna, and therefore has nothing to do with any time period after Laodicia? I hope you get unstuck on that issue.

Are you OSAS or anti OSAS by the way?

Hmmm... Are you Jehovah's Witness by the way?

The topic of the rapture timing is a Rom 14:5 issue.

No it's not. Rom 14:5 is about sabbaths and festivals.

You don't think this is vanity?

??????? Signing my name?

Why would that be vanity?



(Was this you judging me as vain?)

 

[Christ4Ever]

Sorry to interrupt your discussion with KingJ, but I do have a question for you.

Adding in words to create a theological fantasy is not wise. Even IF some restraint of the Holy Spirit is removed from Lawlessness, or the working of Lawlessness, it does not mean that the Holy Spirit is taken away from the Earth. I had hoped that you could at least agree that the word Earth is not in the text. ( It isn't. ) Nor is the Holy Spirit mentioned at all.

What manuscript are you using in order to come to the conclusion that what is shown in most English Translations was not so in the Greek ones used by the translators of the commonly used translations?

I appreciate your help with answering this question.
With the Love of Christ
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[hopefulson]

I did. Post #310. Perhaps you just missed it.


There is so much wrong here, I just don't know where to begin. And since you seem absolutely convinced of your own understanding, I'm wondering whether to even explain.

Let me address one presumption.


I really don't know how you arrive at that conclusion, because that's not what the text actually says, (although I realize it's a popular viewpoint).

Allow me to post a number of translations. Hopefully there's one that you would accept:

(2 Thessalonians 2:6-8 KJV) And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. 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:​

​

(2 Thessalonians 2:6-8 YLT) and now, what is keeping down ye have known, for his being revealed in his own time, for the secret of the lawlessness doth already work, only he who is keeping down now will hinder —till he may be out of the way, and then shall be revealed the Lawless One, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the manifestation of his presence,​

​

(2 Thessalonians 2:6-8 NRSV) And you know what is now restraining him, so that he may be revealed when his time comes. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work, but only until the one who now restrains it is removed. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will destroy with the breath of his mouth, annihilating him by the manifestation of his coming.​

First, I'm sure you can see that there are a lot of pronouns in this passage. "He" (he who?) "His" (whose?)... even a "what" (which what?). Is the Holy Spirit a "what"? Yet there is a "what" that is restraining (withholdeth; keeping down). And there is a "he" (the one) who restrains (letteth; keeping down) who is then supposedly "removed," "be out of the way," or "taken out of the way."

Don't be fooled. Verse seven is not easy to translate. So I provide the exact Greek text, with interlinear:

το γαρ (FOR THE) μυστηριον (MYSTERY) ηδη (ALREADY) ενεργειται (OPERATES) της ανομιας (OF LAWLESSNESS) : μονον (ONLY) ο (THE ONE) κατεχων (RESTRAINING) αρτι (JUST NOW) εως (UNTIL) εκ (OUT OF) μεσου (MIDST) γενηται G1096 (IT MIGHT COME INTO BEING)​

And accounting for word order (in English) verse seven actually reads -

FOR THE MYSTERY OF LAWLESSNESS ALREADY OPERATES : ONLY THE ONE RESTRAINING JUST NOW UNTIL OUT OF (the) MIDST IT MIGHT COME-INTO-BEING.​

So what is the IT that COMES-INTO-BEING (G1096)?? It would seem to be Lawlessness. You might find it hard to believe, but do your own research on the verb γίνομαι (G1096). There is nothing that is removed, there is nothing that will "be out of the way" there is nothing "taken out of the way."

LINK to Liddell Scott Lexicon Entry for G1096

My point, is that the Holy Spirit is not removed from the earth. There is Nothing in the text that says the Holy Spirit will leave or be taken from the Earth. The word "Earth" is not even in the text. (Can we at least agree on that?) So where does this idea come from? People add in that last part "from the earth". And it's not wise to add in words.

Rhema

But I know you likely won't truly consider what I posted, and will just blurt out some emotional knee jerk rejection, because you already know what it all means. Eh?
(Expressing frustration.)

I like this Greek parallel. I'm not sure I buy all in this translation. I do completely agree this is an obscure translation in the cannon. One thing I will say about 2 Thess. it is definitive in that it contains a time stamp of the rapture event. It is a time stamp that both Daniel prequalifies and Jesus definitively states first comes the antichrist seated in the temple leading to the statement one taken one left This is judgement. But I can see nothing but the rapture as an explanation. The judgement is on jews in Israel at that time Luke 17:20-+. An interesting question and answer The disciples ask Where Lord do they go? The answer I have always taken literally where the body is the eagles gather. I know what most think about our bodies changing and disappearing but I'm not buying the disappearing part. I think the dead body stays right here. We are changed and meet The Lord.
I also believe that Thess.2 is referencing a total dispensational shift. The substance of reality changes at this point and evil takes sway in creation and The Lord allows the devil to step into his final deception and on to a hellish destruction. All on earth will feel his wrath as Jesus states it will require that time will be shortened or no flesh will be saved. So I'm just throwing this all out there in a brief fashion for exploration. There are a lot of scriptural reasons that are the foundation of these statements but I can't cover them now. Remain Blessed.

 

[Br. Bear]

Greetings,

Truth be told, the "out of middle" has me a bit perplexed. The text does not say middle of what. While I am not inclined to speculate, maybe "out of midair"?

No.

It's a tricky little verse/part verse.
Probably best to allow the scope of Scripture prevail over focus on specific, straight, word for word 'translation'?

Does 'middle' have to be that?
As per 'the way'.

Always interesting where these (all) words also are used in different portions in the Bible.
If we also can connect the New to the Old, we often find extra clarity.

Was the Apostle Paul referencing any particular Scripture?

The 'mystery' which is already; lawlessness, has a beginning and end?


Bless you ....><>

PS: there is no τοῦ before 'middle' (actually, μέσου ) therefore is it a 'the' that confuses?

 

[Rhema]

Sorry to interrupt your discussion with KingJ, but I do have a question for you.

Not a problem, Nick.

What manuscript are you using in order to come to the conclusion that what is shown in most English Translations was not so in the Greek ones used by the translators of the commonly used translations?

Not just one manuscript (singular), as even the Textus Receptus is a compilation of about six manuscripts. I am comfortable with anything from the 21st edition of the Nestle–Aland Novum Testamentum Graecetext and onward up to the current 28th edition commonly know as NA28. And at this point the text of the NA28 has converged with the UBS5.

While I utilize the Interlinear gloss selected by Dr. Alfred Marshall, there are a few places where the Liddell Scott Lexicon and the Cambridge Greek Lexicon give me pause and reason to choose an alternative rendering. As an example, we read:

​

(Matthew 5:5 KJV) Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.​

But "meek" is absolutely the wrong word. πραΰ́ς (G4239) does not mean "meek." It is an adjective used to describe a war horse that is trained well enough to not break stance in the heat of battle. As such, 5:5 ought to read "Blessed are the Steadfast: for they shall inherit the earth."

So while it may be the case that the various newfangled translations (of which mine might be one) use the same Critical Text of NA28, Word selection, word order, and basic rules of grammar might be applied differently. Now the passage above reads in the TR as:

2Th 2:6 και νυν το κατεχον οιδατε εις το αποκαλυφθηναι αυτον εν τω εαυτου καιρω (7) το γαρ μυστηριον ηδη ενεργειται της ανομιας μονον ο κατεχων αρτι εως εκ μεσου γενηται (8) και τοτε αποκαλυφθησεται ο ανομος ον ο κυριος αναλωσει τω πνευματι του στοματος αυτου και καταργησει τη επιφανεια της παρουσιας αυτου (9) ου εστιν η παρουσια κατ ενεργειαν του σατανα εν παση δυναμει και σημειοις και τερασιν ψευδους (10) και εν παση απατη της αδικιας εν τοις απολλυμενοις ανθ ων την αγαπην της αληθειας ουκ εδεξαντο εις το σωθηναι αυτους ​

There are two minor differences between the TR and NA28, but nothing of import.

What can be categorically stated is that neither the phrase "Holy Spirit" nor the word "Earth" is in this text at all. And the action verb is come-into-being, not something being taken away.

At times I think translators might be worse than politicians and used car salesmen, in that they both want to keep a job and make money, so are reluctant, very reluctant to go against tradition, even when the mistake is right there in front of them in black and white.

Let me know if you have any questions on the translation provided above.

2Th 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth / holds back (the day of the Lord) that he (the Son of Perdition) might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of lawlessness already operates, only restrained (held back) just now until he (the Son of Perdition) might "out of middle" come-into-being (Rhema)​

​

At some point I shall have to spend about three months to tinker around with this phrase "out of middle" (KJV - Midst) before I'm comfortable with what Paul might mean.

Hope this suffices,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

But I can see nothing but the rapture as an explanation.

I think much of the discussion was about when the Rapture happened - pre-trib, mid-trib (in the Midst of), and post-trib.

I know what most think about our bodies changing and disappearing but I'm not buying the disappearing part. I think the dead body stays right here. We are changed and meet The Lord.

Well said.

1 Corinthians 15:53 KJV​

For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.​

And would it not have been the same way even with Jesus?

Rhema

 

[Rhema]

Does 'middle' have to be that?

Like it or not, we must deal with what is written - μέσος (G3319) .... and yes, without a definite article

So I provide A LINK to the Liddell Scott entry for G3319 mesos - middle, in the middle,

Looks to be a root word for Mesa and Mezainine. The thing in the middle. There are potential idioms, and there are potential inferences. It will certainly take awhile if I pursue that study.

PS: there is no τοῦ before 'middle' (actually, μέσου ) therefore is it a 'the' that confuses?

Americans say I'm going to THE hospital. The British say I'm going to hospital.
Americans say, "I'm going to Church." But they also say, "I'm going to THE church." and these mean two different things !!

The definite article is definitely a bugger.

Then the KJV changes "middle" to "way" and puts the "the" in front.

Blessings,
Rhema

 

[Butch5]

Can I ask why there is an assumption that the one withholding is the Holy Spirit?

 

[Christ4Ever]

Dear @Rhema
So, in reviewing what you posted in reply to my question, of course brings others to mind, but of which I will address only in part.

When you are dissatisfied with how a reference translates a specific word, do you consult another source or rely on your own interpretation/original learning, ensuring it aligns with other authoritative sources?

The example you use is Matthew 5:5 with its use of the word "meek", which you believe should instead be "steadfast", brings to mind the other usage of "meek" in the NT. Do, you also believe in the following instances that "steadfast" should have been used as well?

[Mat 5:5 KJV] 5 Blessed [are] the meek: [G4239] for they shall inherit the earth.
[Mat 21:5 KJV] 5 Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, [G4239] and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.
[1Pe 3:4 KJV] 4 But [let it be] the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, [even the ornament] of a meek [G4239] and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.

So, you are saying when steadfast is used in most translations of the NT which is ἑδραῖος (G1476), βέβαιος (G479), or στερεός (G4731) one of those words should have been found instead in the manuscripts where "meek" πραΰς (G4239) is found?

It ultimately boils down to the translator's discretion to determine the accuracy of a translation from the manuscripts available, considering any differences among them. When there is uncertainty about the use of a specific Greek word, it is the translator who decides which interpretation aligns best with the intended message, isn't it?

I await your reply with interest.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[Butch5]

 

[MedicBravo]

Wrath should be defined here, but according to Scripture the wrath of Satan greatly intensifies when he is kicked out of heaven to earth.

Satan will be a participant of God's wrath at that time, along with those who are unsaved.

Many people around the world show how EASILY they love their sins and mock God.

 

[Rhema]

At some point I shall have to spend about three months to tinker around with this phrase "out of middle" (KJV - Midst) before I'm comfortable with what Paul might mean.

We have an idiom in English... "out of nowhere." I'm beginning to suspect that "out of middle" may be the Koine equivalent. But I also said this will take me months, so this is not a conclusion.

Rhema