|
|
Post by rickstudies on Oct 24, 2022 14:49:57 GMT -8
Yeah, I`m sure you watched it. LOL! It sounds like you want to sell me a video that steals a page from the Universalist playbook and says that the translaters couldn`t understand Greek. No thanks and it isn`t advisable to give out my email when you can pm me privately. It should be a rule violation to ask for personal information. I don`t know you. May I go now? You can easily open up an alternative email account for your privacy. I have such an email account to keep myself anonymous when it is called for.
Look here for examples... link
You can within your own internet provider often create alternative email accounts with a created name if you wish.
Why are you afraid to let everyone see it? And FYI creating an e-mail with a ficticious name does not protect your ip address and isn`t any safer so that is very bad advice. |
|
genez
Full Member
Posts: 130
|
Post by genez on Oct 24, 2022 16:47:30 GMT -8
The smart alec comments do not impress me. My choice to not disclose my email should be respected and if you posted a source I would look at your video even though my expectation would be low. And, I am supposed to be the smart aleck? Its not a video. Its a recording of a Bible lesson given to the congregation. He had seminary students in his congregation and always made sure to give detailed exegesis where pertinent. On the other hand.. I had contact with a Professor Stan Ashby who worked for Military intelligence during WW ll.. He was associated with Harvard as a translator. He retired. He taught ancient languages at the Bible college I attended. He taught a series of messages which were involving exegesis of Genesis 1 and 2, concerning Adam and some other insights concerning creation. It was teaching that deeply impressed me. My room mate had some cassettes of that teaching and I listened to it. One night while sitting in front of Professor Ashby at church service, I turned around and thanked him, and told how impressed I was with the insights he provided. Instead of taking credit, he kept pointing me to the pastor-scholar I wanted to make you aware of. He kept telling me that he got what I heard from this pastor-scholar. Later, I found out that a good number of other teachers on campus had also used the same pastor-scholar's teachings for their study material. This pastor-scholar was known at that time by many pastors around the country. Billy Graham asked him to be a traveling mentor for him. Hal Lindsay and Chuck Swindoll both sat in the congregation. Both were accepted to Dallas Theological seminary based up the pastor-scholar's letters of recommendation. But, that's OK. You don't need it. |
|
|
|
Post by rickstudies on Oct 24, 2022 18:20:01 GMT -8
You are correct. I don`t need it. |
|
genez
Full Member
Posts: 130
|
Post by genez on Oct 24, 2022 18:29:34 GMT -8
You are correct. I don`t need it. Correct,,,, there are other things you would need to know before you could be ready for it. |
|
|
|
Post by rickstudies on Oct 25, 2022 2:53:08 GMT -8
Correct,,,, there are other things you would need to know before you could be ready for it. Wow, maybe someday I`ll be as wise as you  Maybe even read a 50 year old Hal Lindsey book. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2022 6:23:50 GMT -8
Said the man with the ark.... 2 Thessalonians 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; Do you read that as a conditional statement? " That day will not come unless there is first a falling away"? " That day will not come until there is first a falling away"? " That day will not come lest there is first an apostasy and that man is revealed"? That's important. It's important because if God has told Paul the day in question will NOT come except, unless, or until an apostasy has occurred then it's not a definitive condition. It is not a necessity. It is not an inevitability. Notice the KJV and ASV are the only translations that render the " me" as " except." Even the NKJV translates it " unless." The word literally means, " lest" ( G3361);it's a qualifier of a negation. We have a large swath of modern Christendom expecting something God's word indicates is not an inevitability. Something to think about. |
|
genez
Full Member
Posts: 130
|
Post by genez on Oct 25, 2022 10:06:02 GMT -8
Wow, maybe someday I`ll be as wise as you Maybe even read a 50 year old Hal Lindsey book. Paul is even older than that...... |
|
genez
Full Member
Posts: 130
|
Post by genez on Oct 25, 2022 10:08:19 GMT -8
2 Thessalonians 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; Do you read that as a conditional statement? " That day will not come unless there is first a falling away"? " That day will not come until there is first a falling away"? " That day will not come lest there is first an apostasy and that man is revealed"? That's important. It's important because if God has told Paul the day in question will NOT come except, unless, or until an apostasy has occurred then it's not a definitive condition. It is not a necessity. It is not an inevitability. Notice the KJV and ASV are the only translations that render the " me" as " except." Even the NKJV translates it " unless." The word literally means, " lest" ( G3361);it's a qualifier of a negation. We have a large swath of modern Christendom expecting something God's word indicates is not an inevitability. Something to think about. If it took apostasy to appear first? We could have been raptured anytime in the last 2000 years. And, while you are at it? Get in line. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2022 12:11:00 GMT -8
Do you read that as a conditional statement? " That day will not come unless there is first a falling away"? " That day will not come until there is first a falling away"? " That day will not come lest there is first an apostasy and that man is revealed"? That's important. It's important because if God has told Paul the day in question will NOT come except, unless, or until an apostasy has occurred then it's not a definitive condition. It is not a necessity. It is not an inevitability. Notice the KJV and ASV are the only translations that render the " me" as " except." Even the NKJV translates it " unless." The word literally means, " lest" ( G3361);it's a qualifier of a negation. We have a large swath of modern Christendom expecting something God's word indicates is not an inevitability. Something to think about. If it took apostasy to appear first? We could have been raptured anytime in the last 2000 years. Yep. Which is part of the problem to be solved with some of the modern eschatologies. Well, if that is intended as snark you may count me out. I have no interest in that conversation. The salient point is the fact of scripture. The verse cited was proof-texted, and that's our first indication of a problem. The other poster appealed to " connected scripture and context," are ironic (at best) given the proof-texting. When the matter of connected scripture and context are considered the clear message is that Paul was talking conditionally, and he was talking conditionally about conditions existing at the time of his letters to the Thessalonians. But that's going to stir a lot of dissent among us. Not if we have to first wait for another temple to be built  . If the rapture is first contingent upon X, Y, AND Z to happen then the entire prospect of an anytime rapture instantly becomes untenable and irrational. ALL those eschatologies asserting precursors ALL contradict the doctrine of imminency. Note: most of Christendom does not separate the rapture from the second advent. Only Dispensational Millennialism does that. For most of Christian eschatology the two events are part of the same event, they are co-occurring. That particular eschatolgocial point of view also teaches a series of events will transpire and although there is some variation within that point of view we're all supposed to be waiting on things like the original geographic boundaries of Israel to be restored, the building of another stone temple, the re-institutionalization of animal sacrifices (for 15 million Jews worldwide, btw), and more. In terms of this op, we'll all have to wait for the rapture to first occur before anyone sees the great tribulation..... but according to the verse the other poster proof-texted, 2 Thes. 2 tells is that won't happen unless the apostasy first occurs. In other words, this pre-trib pov is a mess. If the doctrine of imminency is correct, then none of us need wait for anything temporal to occur beforehand. Jesus can come at any time and there is nothing more upon which we must wait. If, on the other hand, there's a bunch of stuff yet to occur, then there's absolutely no need for anyone to think Jesus can or will return any day now. The two positions are contradictory to one another. They are mutually exclusive to one another. Pre-trib? I don't think so. Matthew 24:8-10, 19-21 8But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pangs. 9Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name. 10“At that time many will fall away and will betray one another and hate one another.... 19But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20But pray that your flight will not be in the winter, or on a Sabbath. 21For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will...."Regardless of the eschatology, the scripture is plain and explicit: the disciples go through "a great tribulation," one as has never before occurred, then or since. Revelation 2:19-22 I know your deeds, and your love and faith and service and perseverance, and that your deeds of late are greater than at first. 20‘But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bondservants astray so that they commit acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. 21‘I gave her time to repent, and she does not want to repent of her immorality. 22‘Behold, I will throw her on a bed of sickness, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of her deeds. God is going to through His bondservants who commit adultery with idols into the great tribulation. God is going to through His bondservants who commit adultery with idols into the great tribulation..... and if that idolatrous adultery of the bondservants is the same apostasy Paul mentioned in his letter to the Thessalonians, then it is not an inevitability. Either way.... it's not pre-trib. It is post-trib. Me neither. Well, that depends on 1) how one defines "apostasy," and 2) how one defines the Church, the ecclesia, because some folks believe the Church has been apostate for a long time, but others hold to the doctrine of Church Impeccability simply because the Church is the body of Christ and Christ is Impeccable. The body is temporally imperfect, but eternally destined for incorruptibility. And no matter how apostate the apostasy geographic boundaries first need to be recovered, another temple has to be built, animal sacrifices for 15 million jews have to restart, etc., etc., etc. So.... no, the rapture couldn't possibly have happened anytime in the last 2000 years. according to some. And that is what passes as sound theology (eschatology) for many. No snark required, desired, or expected. |
|
genez
Full Member
Posts: 130
|
Post by genez on Oct 25, 2022 12:44:06 GMT -8
If Paul were speaking of 'apostasy' coming first? That would be illogical.
For Paul was telling them not to worry.
Because the 'departure' must come first.
If he were speaking in reference to apostasy? He would have nothing to stand on as to get them to stop worrying!
For apostasy was everywhere around them to be found.
Not to mention, Paul's epistles many times were dealing with apostasy! It was already there!
Paul was not telling them...
"Don't worry. Because what must happen first, is happening all around us at present. "
We need to make sense. For, God makes sense. God is not illogical.
The departure must come first before the Antichrist is revealed.
|
|
|
|
Post by rickstudies on Oct 25, 2022 14:13:21 GMT -8
2 Thessalonians 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; Do you read that as a conditional statement? " That day will not come unless there is first a falling away"? " That day will not come until there is first a falling away"? " That day will not come lest there is first an apostasy and that man is revealed"? That's important. It's important because if God has told Paul the day in question will NOT come except, unless, or until an apostasy has occurred then it's not a definitive condition. It is not a necessity. It is not an inevitability. Notice the KJV and ASV are the only translations that render the " me" as " except." Even the NKJV translates it " unless." The word literally means, " lest" ( G3361);it's a qualifier of a negation. We have a large swath of modern Christendom expecting something God's word indicates is not an inevitability. Something to think about. The Bible lists 4 events that must take place before the first ressurection will occur. 1 Elijah comes 2 a large number of people quit Christianity 3 the antichrist sits in the Jerusalem Temple and says he is god 4 The sun and moon are darkened If God is determined to fulfill all the words of the prophets as Jesus claimed He does, then these 4 events are inevitable. |
|
genez
Full Member
Posts: 130
|
Post by genez on Oct 25, 2022 20:08:08 GMT -8
The Bible lists 4 events that must take place before the first ressurection will occur. 1 Elijah comes 2 a large number of people quit Christianity 3 the antichrist sits in the Jerusalem Temple and says he is god 4 The sun and moon are darkened If God is determined to fulfill all the words of the prophets as Jesus claimed He does, then these 4 events are inevitable.
Those must happen before Christ returns with His resurrected church.
You are confusing the Rapture/resurrection with the Return of Christ.
In the Rapture Christ meets believers in the air. He does not return to earth. Not until after he prepares resurrected believers for reigning with Him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2022 20:23:48 GMT -8
Do you read that as a conditional statement? " That day will not come unless there is first a falling away"? " That day will not come until there is first a falling away"? " That day will not come lest there is first an apostasy and that man is revealed"? That's important. It's important because if God has told Paul the day in question will NOT come except, unless, or until an apostasy has occurred then it's not a definitive condition. It is not a necessity. It is not an inevitability. Notice the KJV and ASV are the only translations that render the " me" as " except." Even the NKJV translates it " unless." The word literally means, " lest" ( G3361);it's a qualifier of a negation. We have a large swath of modern Christendom expecting something God's word indicates is not an inevitability. Something to think about. The Bible lists 4 events that must take place before the first ressurection will occur. 1 Elijah comes 2 a large number of people quit Christianity 3 the antichrist sits in the Jerusalem Temple and says he is god 4 The sun and moon are darkened If God is determined to fulfill all the words of the prophets as Jesus claimed He does, then these 4 events are inevitable. Lists without scripture are meaningless. Well..... according to Jesus, Matthew 17:9-139When they were coming down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, “Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man has risen from the dead.” 10And His disciples asked Him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” 11And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things; 12but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did [d]to him whatever they wanted. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer [e]at their hands.” 13Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist. Elijah has already come. This is what happens when the Old Testament is relied upon to the exclusion of the New Testament's witness and Christianity is Judaized. Hmmm... assuming that is a reference to 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-10
Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 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, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God. Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things? And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way. Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming; that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved.
It's the man of lawlessness, not the antichrist that does the sitting and declaring. There's nothing in the Bible that equates the two. It has always been an assumption the two are identical. According to the very next verse the believers in Thessalonica knew what was holding that man back, which means if he's a man and he was alive in the first century (how could he be restrained if he wasn't alive and living?) then he has come and gone. Furthermore, there were two temples existing when Paul wrote the Thessalonians, one of which is still standing. Since there's not a single verse in the entire Bible that says a third temple of stone will be built... the context dictates the temple Paul is referencing is one of the two existing at that time. The " mystery of lawlessness" was already at work back then. That is what the text actually states. I don't care what the various eschatologies say it says. What it states is what it states. It's the man of lawlessness sitting in the temple, not the antichrist. Do not conflate the two without scripture. Do not conflate the two without cause. . Got scripture for that? I can't find the word " Christianity" in my Bible at all. In order for Christians to quuite Christianity the saints would have to stop being saints, the bondservants would have to stop being bondservants, those called out would have to stop being those called out. It's a messed-up theology that says Christians can stop being Christians. Poseurs were never Christians in the first place. Ah, yes, Matthew 24:29 and Mark 13:24... Matthew 24:29 KJVImmediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken. Mark 13:24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light...After the tribulation, not before. NOT pre-trib. However, there's another problem with the way this verse is handled by modern futurists, especially those of the Dispensational variety who are taught to read scripture literally. First, the moon has no light of its own. The moon is reflective. The only light the moon gives off is as a reflection of the sun. The sun, on the other hand is a direct source of light. The source of the sun's light is nuclear fusion. Two hydrogen atoms fuse to form helium. It takes the light the sun gives off about 8 minutes and 20 seconds to reach the earth, so the sun would be darkened for eight minutes before anyone knew it had stopped shining. In order for that to happen all its nuclear fusion would have to cease! All photosynthesis on the planet would instantly cease the moment the sun's light stopped hitting the earth. Some larger trees could survive that for many years but all the smaller vegetation would die. The planet would no longer be warmed. Within a week the temperature would by -4F/-20C and within a few months the freezing temperatures would cause and all human life would cease to exist. Before that happens the waters of the earth would freeze - even the surface of the oceans would freeze over - and that would cause all water-dependent life to cease. The two closest stars are Proxima Centauri and Alpha Centauri, about 4.2-3 light-years away. That means if it was falling at the speed of light it would take 4.5 years for those two stars to reach earth. If the sun was not shining during that time all life on earth would be gone (with the possible exception of some bacteria). If one of them struck the earth moving at the speed of life the earth would be instantly pulverized into dust. That's just one star. A year and a half later the next closest star, Barnard's Star would reach the place in space where the earth had once been... but the earth wouldn't be there because one of the Centauri stars had smashed the earth into none-existence. The shifts in gravity of those stars and the non-existent earth no longer being in their God-fixed points in the universe would cause the entire gravitation field of the universe to change. That is NOT what Jesus is saying. It is a metaphor. It's figurative language and the best means to understand what he is saying is to look at other scripture to see what God's word reveals about falling stars. But the point most germane to this op is that it happens after the tribulation, not before and whatever it is, it is not literal stars literally falling onto the earth. lol. As has already been pointed out, 2 Thes. 2:3 is a conditional matter. If there's no apostasy, then there's no man of lawlessness and if there's no man of lawlessness then there's no day of the Lord. Furthermore, according to the Bible, at least two of the four precursors have come and gone a long time ago, one of them is conditional (i.e., God is NOT determined) and might never happen, and the fourth is not to be taken literally. That is if we read scripture exactly as written and don't let modern futurist eschatologies skew our reading of what is plainly stated. Do you now see why I asked why this op wasn't posted in the End Times board? At any rate, I completely agree. The pre-tribulation position is untenable simply because it contradicts several explicit statements in the Bible (but so does a lot of modern-futurism ). |
|
|
|
Post by rickstudies on Oct 26, 2022 0:05:51 GMT -8
The Bible lists 4 events that must take place before the first ressurection will occur. 1 Elijah comes 2 a large number of people quit Christianity 3 the antichrist sits in the Jerusalem Temple and says he is god 4 The sun and moon are darkened If God is determined to fulfill all the words of the prophets as Jesus claimed He does, then these 4 events are inevitable.
Those must happen before Christ returns with His resurrected church.
You are confusing the Rapture/resurrection with the Return of Christ.
In the Rapture Christ meets believers in the air. He does not return to earth. Not until after he prepares resurrected believers for reigning with Him.
Sorry Hal but your opinion isn`t Biblical. |
|
genez
Full Member
Posts: 130
|
Post by genez on Oct 26, 2022 0:10:03 GMT -8
Those must happen before Christ returns with His resurrected church.
You are confusing the Rapture/resurrection with the Return of Christ.
In the Rapture Christ meets believers in the air. He does not return to earth. Not until after he prepares resurrected believers for reigning with Him.
Sorry Hal but your opinion isn`t Biblical. Why you want to be that way is between you and the Lord.
I have a feeling that this forum is going to be taken over by some sects and ruin it before it can sprout wings. |
|
Maybe even read a 50 year old Hal Lindsey book.
.