The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

(heavily moderated)

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby shorttribber on Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:17 am

This is an open question to all but primarily to Mark and Watching since they are the Greek grammar folks.

Can the "he" that "letteth"/"restrains" refer to more than one? As antichrist is referred to in some cases by some folks as a succession of antichrists until the final one.

In other words, could the "he" refer to the Holy Spirit, Michael, human government and the church? Can the "he" be used in the same sense as "only he who knows to do good and does it not to him it is sin"?

just asking :dunno:
Find seven years of tribulation plainly stated in the Bible.
User avatar
shorttribber
 
Posts: 2340
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 7:42 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby lamb7 on Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:38 am

Restrainer

2 Thessalonians 2:5-12

5 Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things? 6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. 7 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. 8 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 [a]coming; 9 that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and [c]signs and false wonders, 10 and with [d]all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. 11 For this reason God [e]will send upon them [f]a deluding influence so that they will believe [g]what is false, 12 in order that they all may be [h]judged who did not believe the truth, but [i]took pleasure in wickedness.


Comment:

Who is the only one who has the power to restrain evil? Who can hold back the full force of evil that would have swallowed up all faith and left no soul alive to whom Jesus Christ could come back to… Who is it that we do know: Our God.

[b]Mark 13:19-20
19 For those days will be a time of tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never will. 20 Unless the Lord had shortened those days, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the [b]elect, whom He chose, He shortened the days.


Comment:

There is no angel more powerful than God Almighty, and we the Church, although His children, are still a sinful lot; how dare we think we have the power to stop evil when it is all around us still and has been for over 2000 years. What makes us believe we could make a dent during that most horrendous time?

It is God who hardens hearts by giving over those who oppose His will to the full length of their opposition, it is He that allows men’s evil to abound so that He is glorified through us when our light shines out despite this evil. The free will of men must be allowed to choose between both good and evil and so some evil must be allowed, yet restrained enough to allow life to flourish within the realm of Satan and his minions.

Only during the Tribulation will all who fail to come to Jesus Christ truly see what the world will be like without the restraining hand of God so that He will be justified in His wrath and Satan will be seen by all fully naked, unrestrained in all his evil ways and seen for what he truly is. To give this power to the Church, to whom many themselves will fall away and be deceived, such power is beyond reason and logic. Only the hand of God, through His Holy Spirit could restrain evil in any form; to give this power to any other besides Him is foolishness and lies. Have we forgotten who we worship?

1 Samuel 25:26
“Now therefore, my lord, as the LORD lives, and as your soul lives, since the LORD has restrained you from shedding blood, and from avenging yourself by your own hand, now then let your enemies and those who seek evil against my lord, be as Nabal.

1 Samuel 25:26
26Now therefore, my lord, as the LORD liveth, and as thy soul liveth, seeing the LORD hath withholden thee from coming to shed blood, and from avenging thyself with thine own hand, now let thine enemies, and they that seek evil to my lord, be as Nabal.

Ezekiel 31:15
15Thus saith the Lord GOD; In the day when he went down to the grave I caused a mourning: I covered the deep for him, and I restrained the floods thereof, and the great waters were stayed: and I caused Lebanon to mourn for him, and all the trees of the field fainted for him.

1 Samuel 25:34
34 Nevertheless, as the LORD God of Israel lives, who has restrained me from harming you, unless you had come quickly to meet me, surely there would not have been left to Nabal until the morning light as much as one [a]male.”


Job 9

1 Then Job [a]answered,
2 “In truth I know that this is so;
But how can a man be in the right [b]before God?
3 “If one wished to dispute with Him,
He could not answer Him once in a thousand times.
4 “Wise in heart and mighty in strength,
Who has [c]defied Him [d]without harm?
5 “It is God who removes the mountains, they know not how,
When He overturns them in His anger;
6 Who shakes the earth out of its place,
And its pillars tremble;
7 Who commands the sun [e]not to shine,
And sets a seal upon the stars;
8 Who alone stretches out the heavens
And [f]tramples down the waves of the sea;
9 Who makes the Bear, Orion and the Pleiades,
And the chambers of the south;
10 Who does great things, [g]unfathomable,
And wondrous works without number.
11 “Were He to pass by me, I would not see Him;
Were He to move past me, I would not perceive Him.
12 “Were He to snatch away, who could restrain Him?
Who could say to Him, ‘What are You doing?’

13 “God will not turn back His anger;
Beneath Him crouch the helpers of Rahab.
14 “How then can I [h]answer Him,
And choose my words [i]before Him?
15 “For though I were right, I could not [j]answer;
I would have to implore the mercy of my judge.
16 “If I called and He answered me,
I could not believe that He was listening to my voice.
17 “For He bruises me with a tempest
And multiplies my wounds without cause.
18 “He will not allow me to get my breath,
But saturates me with bitterness.
19 “If it is a matter of power, behold, He is the strong one!
And if it is a matter of justice, who can summon [k]Him?

20 “Though I am righteous, my mouth will condemn me;
Though I am guiltless, He will declare me guilty.
21 “I am guiltless;
I do not take notice of myself;
I despise my life.
22 “It is all one; therefore I say,
‘He destroys the guiltless and the wicked.’
23 “If the scourge kills suddenly,
He mocks the despair of the innocent.
24 “The earth is given into the hand of the wicked;
He covers the faces of its judges.
If it is not He, then who is it?

25 “Now my days are swifter than a runner;
They flee away, they see no good.
26 “They slip by like reed boats,
Like an eagle that swoops on [l]its prey.
27 “Though I say, ‘I will forget my complaint,
I will leave off my sad countenance and be cheerful,’
28 I am afraid of all my pains,
I know that You will not acquit me.
29 “I am accounted wicked,
Why then should I toil in vain?
30 “If I should wash myself with snow
And cleanse my hands with lye,
31 Yet You would plunge me into the pit,
And my own clothes would abhor me.
32 “For He is not a man as I am that I may answer Him,
That we may go to [m]court together.
33 “There is no umpire between us,
Who may lay his hand upon us both.
34 “Let Him remove His rod from me,
And let not dread of Him terrify me.
35 “Then I would speak and not fear Him;
But I am not like that in myself.


Comment:

Who let down His hand to allow Job to be tempted and almost destroyed? Who allowed Job’s family to be destroyed, unattended, unrestrained? It was not Michael, it was not the church, it was God Almighty. What happened to Job is a perfect example of what will happen during the Tribulation. God’s hand will drop to His side and Satan will be unrestrained to test the whole of the earth, especially God’s children. It is a parallel so apparent and proof positive that God is the only one who restrains evil or allows it to flourish for His own purposes and will. He is the only one who could leave men to their own devices to draw the line in the sand as to who belongs to Christ and who does not.

Isaiah 23:9-11
9 The LORD of hosts has planned it, to defile the pride of all beauty,
To despise all the honored of the earth.
10 [a]Overflow your land like the Nile, O daughter of Tarshish,
There is no more [b]restraint.
11 He has stretched His hand out over the sea,
He has made the kingdoms tremble;
The LORD has given a command concerning Canaan to demolish its strongholds.


Isaiah 42:13-15
13 The LORD will go forth like a warrior,
He will arouse His zeal like a man of war.
He will utter a shout, yes, He will raise a war cry.
He will prevail against His enemies.

14 “I have kept silent for a long time,
I have kept still and restrained Myself.
Now like a woman in labor I will groan,
I will both gasp and pant.
15 “I will lay waste the mountains and hills
And wither all their vegetation;
I will make the rivers into coastlands
And dry up the ponds.


Isaiah 48:8-10
8 “You have not heard, you have not known.
Even from long ago your ear has not been open,
Because I knew that you would deal very treacherously;
And you have been called a [a]rebel from [b]birth.
9 “For the sake of My name I delay My wrath,
And for My praise I restrain it for you,

In order not to cut you off.
10 “Behold, I have refined you, but not as silver;
I have tested you in the furnace of affliction.


2 Corinthians 6:11-13
11 Our mouth [a]has spoken freely to you, O Corinthians, our heart is opened wide. 12 You are not restrained [b]by us, but you are restrained in your own [c]affections. 13 Now in a like exchange—I speak as to children—open wide to us also.


Isaiah 64:11-12
11 Our holy and beautiful house,
Where our fathers praised You,
Has been burned by fire;
And all our precious things have become a ruin.
12 Will You restrain Yourself at these things, O LORD?
Will You keep silent and afflict us beyond measure?


Lamentations 2:8
8 The LORD [a]determined to destroy
The wall of the daughter of Zion.
He has stretched out a line,
He has not restrained His hand from [b]destroying,
And He has caused rampart and wall to lament;
They have languished together.
lamb7
 
Posts: 418
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 7:54 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby benny balerio on Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:01 pm

lamb7 wrote:Restrainer

2 Thessalonians 2:5-12

5 Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things? 6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. 7 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. 8 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 [a]coming; 9 that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and [c]signs and false wonders, 10 and with [d]all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. 11 For this reason God [e]will send upon them [f]a deluding influence so that they will believe [g]what is false, 12 in order that they all may be [h]judged who did not believe the truth, but [i]took pleasure in wickedness.


Comment:

Who is the only one who has the power to restrain evil? Who can hold back the full force of evil that would have swallowed up all faith and left no soul alive to whom Jesus Christ could come back to… Who is it that we do know: Our God.

[b]Mark 13:19-20
19 For those days will be a time of tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never will. 20 Unless the Lord had shortened those days, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the [b]elect, whom He chose, He shortened the days.


Comment:

There is no angel more powerful than God Almighty, and we the Church, although His children, are still a sinful lot; how dare we think we have the power to stop evil when it is all around us still and has been for over 2000 years. What makes us believe we could make a dent during that most horrendous time?

It is God who hardens hearts by giving over those who oppose His will to the full length of their opposition, it is He that allows men’s evil to abound so that He is glorified through us when our light shines out despite this evil. The free will of men must be allowed to choose between both good and evil and so some evil must be allowed, yet restrained enough to allow life to flourish within the realm of Satan and his minions.

Only during the Tribulation will all who fail to come to Jesus Christ truly see what the world will be like without the restraining hand of God so that He will be justified in His wrath and Satan will be seen by all fully naked, unrestrained in all his evil ways and seen for what he truly is. To give this power to the Church, to whom many themselves will fall away and be deceived, such power is beyond reason and logic. Only the hand of God, through His Holy Spirit could restrain evil in any form; to give this power to any other besides Him is foolishness and lies. Have we forgotten who we worship?

1 Samuel 25:26
“Now therefore, my lord, as the LORD lives, and as your soul lives, since the LORD has restrained you from shedding blood, and from avenging yourself by your own hand, now then let your enemies and those who seek evil against my lord, be as Nabal.

1 Samuel 25:26
26Now therefore, my lord, as the LORD liveth, and as thy soul liveth, seeing the LORD hath withholden thee from coming to shed blood, and from avenging thyself with thine own hand, now let thine enemies, and they that seek evil to my lord, be as Nabal.

Ezekiel 31:15
15Thus saith the Lord GOD; In the day when he went down to the grave I caused a mourning: I covered the deep for him, and I restrained the floods thereof, and the great waters were stayed: and I caused Lebanon to mourn for him, and all the trees of the field fainted for him.

1 Samuel 25:34
34 Nevertheless, as the LORD God of Israel lives, who has restrained me from harming you, unless you had come quickly to meet me, surely there would not have been left to Nabal until the morning light as much as one [a]male.”


Job 9

1 Then Job [a]answered,
2 “In truth I know that this is so;
But how can a man be in the right [b]before God?
3 “If one wished to dispute with Him,
He could not answer Him once in a thousand times.
4 “Wise in heart and mighty in strength,
Who has [c]defied Him [d]without harm?
5 “It is God who removes the mountains, they know not how,
When He overturns them in His anger;
6 Who shakes the earth out of its place,
And its pillars tremble;
7 Who commands the sun [e]not to shine,
And sets a seal upon the stars;
8 Who alone stretches out the heavens
And [f]tramples down the waves of the sea;
9 Who makes the Bear, Orion and the Pleiades,
And the chambers of the south;
10 Who does great things, [g]unfathomable,
And wondrous works without number.
11 “Were He to pass by me, I would not see Him;
Were He to move past me, I would not perceive Him.
12 “Were He to snatch away, who could restrain Him?
Who could say to Him, ‘What are You doing?’

13 “God will not turn back His anger;
Beneath Him crouch the helpers of Rahab.
14 “How then can I [h]answer Him,
And choose my words [i]before Him?
15 “For though I were right, I could not [j]answer;
I would have to implore the mercy of my judge.
16 “If I called and He answered me,
I could not believe that He was listening to my voice.
17 “For He bruises me with a tempest
And multiplies my wounds without cause.
18 “He will not allow me to get my breath,
But saturates me with bitterness.
19 “If it is a matter of power, behold, He is the strong one!
And if it is a matter of justice, who can summon [k]Him?

20 “Though I am righteous, my mouth will condemn me;
Though I am guiltless, He will declare me guilty.
21 “I am guiltless;
I do not take notice of myself;
I despise my life.
22 “It is all one; therefore I say,
‘He destroys the guiltless and the wicked.’
23 “If the scourge kills suddenly,
He mocks the despair of the innocent.
24 “The earth is given into the hand of the wicked;
He covers the faces of its judges.
If it is not He, then who is it?

25 “Now my days are swifter than a runner;
They flee away, they see no good.
26 “They slip by like reed boats,
Like an eagle that swoops on [l]its prey.
27 “Though I say, ‘I will forget my complaint,
I will leave off my sad countenance and be cheerful,’
28 I am afraid of all my pains,
I know that You will not acquit me.
29 “I am accounted wicked,
Why then should I toil in vain?
30 “If I should wash myself with snow
And cleanse my hands with lye,
31 Yet You would plunge me into the pit,
And my own clothes would abhor me.
32 “For He is not a man as I am that I may answer Him,
That we may go to [m]court together.
33 “There is no umpire between us,
Who may lay his hand upon us both.
34 “Let Him remove His rod from me,
And let not dread of Him terrify me.
35 “Then I would speak and not fear Him;
But I am not like that in myself.


Comment:

Who let down His hand to allow Job to be tempted and almost destroyed? Who allowed Job’s family to be destroyed, unattended, unrestrained? It was not Michael, it was not the church, it was God Almighty. What happened to Job is a perfect example of what will happen during the Tribulation. God’s hand will drop to His side and Satan will be unrestrained to test the whole of the earth, especially God’s children. It is a parallel so apparent and proof positive that God is the only one who restrains evil or allows it to flourish for His own purposes and will. He is the only one who could leave men to their own devices to draw the line in the sand as to who belongs to Christ and who does not.

Isaiah 23:9-11
9 The LORD of hosts has planned it, to defile the pride of all beauty,
To despise all the honored of the earth.
10 [a]Overflow your land like the Nile, O daughter of Tarshish,
There is no more [b]restraint.
11 He has stretched His hand out over the sea,
He has made the kingdoms tremble;
The LORD has given a command concerning Canaan to demolish its strongholds.


Isaiah 42:13-15
13 The LORD will go forth like a warrior,
He will arouse His zeal like a man of war.
He will utter a shout, yes, He will raise a war cry.
He will prevail against His enemies.

14 “I have kept silent for a long time,
I have kept still and restrained Myself.
Now like a woman in labor I will groan,
I will both gasp and pant.
15 “I will lay waste the mountains and hills
And wither all their vegetation;
I will make the rivers into coastlands
And dry up the ponds.


Isaiah 48:8-10
8 “You have not heard, you have not known.
Even from long ago your ear has not been open,
Because I knew that you would deal very treacherously;
And you have been called a [a]rebel from [b]birth.
9 “For the sake of My name I delay My wrath,
And for My praise I restrain it for you,

In order not to cut you off.
10 “Behold, I have refined you, but not as silver;
I have tested you in the furnace of affliction.


2 Corinthians 6:11-13
11 Our mouth [a]has spoken freely to you, O Corinthians, our heart is opened wide. 12 You are not restrained [b]by us, but you are restrained in your own [c]affections. 13 Now in a like exchange—I speak as to children—open wide to us also.


Isaiah 64:11-12
11 Our holy and beautiful house,
Where our fathers praised You,
Has been burned by fire;
And all our precious things have become a ruin.
12 Will You restrain Yourself at these things, O LORD?
Will You keep silent and afflict us beyond measure?


Lamentations 2:8
8 The LORD [a]determined to destroy
The wall of the daughter of Zion.
He has stretched out a line,
He has not restrained His hand from [b]destroying,
And He has caused rampart and wall to lament;
They have languished together.


Outstanding!....Praise the Lord!
User avatar
benny balerio
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 10:00 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby benny balerio on Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:38 pm

I think that the reason why many here will attempt to refute that the Holy Spirit is the Restrainer is because,....it reveals a pre-trib rapture and destroys their views that are contrary to a pre-trib rapture.
User avatar
benny balerio
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 10:00 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby mark s on Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:40 pm

morpheus wrote:I don't want to get sidetracked on the Angel of the Lord thing. I am not saying they can't be God, just some may not be.


Why would we count any as Michael? God is plainly identified. Saying that the others are Michael is not only entirely speculative, but goes against continuity in interpretation.

As for the Septuagint, there are two different versions that I recall. I think the translations are helpful. They use the word rise up for amad. However, I think Rev 12 gives us the most detail concerning this rising up or amad, in that Michael goes to heaven and wages war on Satan and kicks him out. So it seems Michael rises up from from the earth, goes to heaven and wages war. Daniel is the less clear, Revelation 12 the most clear.


This tells us what the ancient Jews understood Daniel to be saying. But it does not mean that he ascends into the heavens. That's one of the beautiful things about Greek, it is so very specific.

But even so, where is heaven?

You seem to be presupposing some locality that takes Michael away from the earth, but Scripture gives us many many indications that heaven is a different continuum, and that beings can be present in both places at the same time.

So this does not present a difficulty.

The main issue I think is not as much what Michael does but where he does it at. It is this change in location that is the significant change. This change of location is what sets in motion the events that follow.

The question here, to me, is this, does Michael stop protecting Israel? Or does he continue to protect Israel? The Bible says he's the protector of Israel.

So that's what I go with.

Love in Christ,
Mark
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby mark s on Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:42 pm

Benny, I tend to agree with you that some people may find it difficult to separate doctrines when studying them. We oftentimes realize the implications of various views as we are considering them, and this can, imo, influence our thinking. We have to guard against that.

Love in Christ,
Mark
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby morpheus on Sat Jul 16, 2011 2:53 pm

You seem to be presupposing some locality that takes Michael away from the earth, but Scripture gives us many indications that heaven is a different continuum, and that beings can be present in both places at the same time.


I'd be interested in seeing the Scripture support on "Many indications that beings can be present in both places at the same time" I would think the evidence is for the opposite.

This tells us what the ancient Jews understood Daniel to be saying. But it does not mean that he ascends into the heavens. That's one of the beautiful things about Greek, it is so very specific.


Rev 12 tells us Michael goes to heaven and wars in heaven against Satan. This war takes place at the exact same time as Daniel 12:1. Therefore Dan 12 rise up must mean Michael rises up to heaven. The more clear interprets the less clear. There is no contradiction with the Greek here. It is so specific and harmonious.

The question here, to me, is this, does Michael stop protecting Israel? Or does he continue to protect Israel? The Bible says he's the protector of Israel.


Michael stops protecting Israel otherwise why would Israel be facing such a hard time in the Great Trib? That is why Israel gets hammered. You have to admit that Israel gets hammered in the Great Trib, right? Michael, who is normally the protector of Israel, is recalled to heaven to make war against Satan. Satan gets kicked out of heaven and goes to where Michael is no longer.

Israel is given two wings of an eagle to carry them away (an interesting thing to guess about.) Satan then gets mad, pours out a flood, and makes war on Israel and those that protect Israel. We are told to expect lots of persecution at this time. The fifth seal is all the souls under the alter who get beheaded. Obviously Michael isn't protecting them.

Ultimately, of Israel, it is the 144,000 that escape Satan's wrath and are specially sealed against the wrath of God. They are the remnant of Israel that are protected. This is the specific info given in Scripture. All the other less detail references need to be interpreted in light of this specific data.

So Israel both gets hammered overall and a remnant get protected. (but not by Michael) Again the more detail interprets the less detailed.
morpheus
 
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:30 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby shorttribber on Sat Jul 16, 2011 3:03 pm

morpheus wrote:Rev 12 tells us Michael goes to heaven and wars in heaven against Satan. This war takes place at the exact same time as Daniel 12:1. Therefore Dan 12 rise up must mean Michael rises up to heaven. The more clear interprets the less clear. There is no contradiction with the Greek here. It is so specific and harmonious.


He"Rises up/amads" to heaven, is that how you interpret it?
Find seven years of tribulation plainly stated in the Bible.
User avatar
shorttribber
 
Posts: 2340
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 7:42 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby mark s on Sat Jul 16, 2011 3:15 pm

morpheus wrote:
You seem to be presupposing some locality that takes Michael away from the earth, but Scripture gives us many indications that heaven is a different continuum, and that beings can be present in both places at the same time.


I'd be interested in seeing the Scripture support on "Many indications that beings can be present in both places at the same time" I would think the evidence is for the opposite.


Ephesians 2, for instance. We are seated with Christ in the heavenlies. Colossians 3, we are hid with Christ in God. Christ is in heaven. Christ also lives in us.

How far away is heaven?
This tells us what the ancient Jews understood Daniel to be saying. But it does not mean that he ascends into the heavens. That's one of the beautiful things about Greek, it is so very specific.


Rev 12 tells us Michael goes to heaven and wars in heaven against Satan. This war takes place at the exact same time as Daniel 12:1. Therefore Dan 12 rise up must mean Michael rises up to heaven. The more clear interprets the less clear. There is no contradiction with the Greek here. It is so specific and harmonious.


Actually, rise up, as in to heaven, would call for a different word, such as anabaino. The word used doesn't mean that.

The question here, to me, is this, does Michael stop protecting Israel? Or does he continue to protect Israel? The Bible says he's the protector of Israel.


Michael stops protecting Israel otherwise why would Israel be facing such a hard time in the Great Trib? That is why Israel gets hammered. You have to admit that Israel gets hammered in the Great Trib, right? Michael, who is normally the protector of Israel, is recalled to heaven to make war against Satan. Satan gets kicked out of heaven and goes to where Michael is no longer.


And are all the Israelites 'getting hammered'? Do you in fact think that there will be those in the wilderness not 'getting hammered'? If so, why are they not? What could account for that?

Ultimately, of Israel, it is the 144,000 that escape Satan's wrath and are specially sealed against the wrath of God. They are the remnant of Israel that are protected. This is the specific info given in Scripture. All the other less detail references need to be interpreted in light of this specific data.


Based on this, we have some very different ideas not only on eschatological timing, but on how the book of the Revelation is laid out.

So Israel both gets hammered overall and a remnant get protected. (but not by Michael) Again the more detail interprets the less detailed.
Why not by Michael? What rules that out? Considering that Scripture tells us he's the one specifically who stands for Israel?

Love in Christ,
Mark
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby shorttribber on Sat Jul 16, 2011 3:20 pm

:snack:
Find seven years of tribulation plainly stated in the Bible.
User avatar
shorttribber
 
Posts: 2340
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 7:42 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby Jay Ross on Sat Jul 16, 2011 4:12 pm

hello

In Daniel 7 there are two periods of judgements described that I believe are separated by 1,000 years plus a little while, about 24 years in imho, which is enough time, imho, to incite the people and nations at the four corners of the earth to rise up against God and to then march towards Jerusalem where they are doublecrossed and Satan claims that "He" is the deity that all people should worship.

Daniel 7:9-13 describes the first judgement period where Satan is thrown out of heaven to earth and grabbed and restrained in a lock dungeon in the bottomless pit which divides Hades, the terrible beast is slain and given over to be burned by fire, which is the second death, however, the verses in Daniel are silent as to whether or not this occurs straight after he was slain or whether he was locked up until the end when he would be put into the fire, that is the lake of fire, the second death.

The other three beasts had their dominions removed from them and their lives prolonged for a season and a time or a little while.

The Son of man at this judgement time was given dominion and glory and a kingdom that all peoles, nations and languages should serve Him. These events of Daniel 7:9-13 we are presently waiting for as it marks the beginning of the Millennium Age as we have labelled it. We are also waiting for the final act described in Daniel 2:31-45.

The second judgement take place in Daniel 7:26-27 at the end of the 1000 years plus the little while and the dominion of Satan shall be taken away and he is to be consumed and destroyed in the Lake of Fire, destroyed to the end. The second portion of this judgement time in Daniel 7:27 tells us that those who are judged to be righteous, the people of the Saints of the Most High shall be given the kingdom and the dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heavens which shall be an everlasting kingdom and all dominions shall serve and obey them.

Satan is restrained for 1,000 years before he is released and not restrained until the great day of the Lord when the decreed end is poured out on the desolator at the end of the labelled "70th week."

I have often wondered about Ezekiel 34:17-24, where God talks about separating sheep from sheep, rams from he-goats how God intends to go about separating the sheep from the sheep and whether or not God uses Satan's intent of evil to achieve His desired outcome before he Judges the rams from the he-goats and gives over the kingdom to the righteous.

Is it not at this time that the saints are raptured at the time of the Second resurrection?

Shalom

Jay Ross

PS – Oh, Who is the angel in this passage? - "Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain. And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years were ended." Michael?
Jay Ross
 
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:11 am

Re: The Restrainer is Michael the Archangel

Postby The Orange Mailman on Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:17 pm

Hi OM,

I've not read all your posts . . . could you give me in a nutshell the passages that show this connection? How do we know the 10 nation alliance won't exist before Satan is cast to the earth?


Hello Mark-

I have read all of your posts on this thread in their entirety. In fact, I've read just about every post on this thread since I want to have meaningful dialogue with others. I will wait until you read my posts so you understand what you are responding to.

But I haven't backed the assertion that the ten nation alliance rises at the midpoint of Daniel's 70th week. But Revelation 12-13 make it clear that the beast rises out of the sea, then the beast has authority for 42 months. Notice that in Revelation 12 as the dragon is cast out from heaven at the dawn of time, that the authority is vested in the seven heads of the dragon. This is signified by the seven diadems on the seven heads. Now when the beast rises out of the sea, there is a significant change. Now the authority is vested in the ten horns (the ten kings) because the diadems are now on the ten horns.

I'm sure that you put time, effort, and thought into your posts; and I do the same. Please take the time to read and understand my positions so that we can have some good conversation.

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman
User avatar
The Orange Mailman
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:45 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:30 pm

shorttribber wrote:This is an open question to all but primarily to Mark and Watching since they are the Greek grammar folks.

Can the "he" that "letteth"/"restrains" refer to more than one? As antichrist is referred to in some cases by some folks as a succession of antichrists until the final one.

In other words, could the "he" refer to the Holy Spirit, Michael, human government and the church? Can the "he" be used in the same sense as "only he who knows to do good and does it not to him it is sin"?

just asking :dunno:



Hi shorttribber,

Yes, it is possible for “ὁ κατέχων” to be referring to more than one person, even though the article ὁ in “ὁ κατέχων” is a singular masculine article.

It just depends on the context, and how it is being used; just as the singular masculine pronoun “he” can also refer to more than one person depending on how it is being used.

Here is a very similar example of this from scripture:

Mat 24:13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.


24:13 ὁ δὲ ὑπομείνας εἰς τέλος οὗτος σωθήσεται


Here is how this would translate in English:

(the one) δὲ (but) ὑπομείνας (who is enduring) εἰς (unto) τέλος (end) οὗτος (the same) σωθήσεται (shall be saved)

And here is how this would read in the English:

But the one who is enduring unto the end the same shall be saved.

However, I do not feel that this is the situation with 2 Thessalonians 2:7.

Let me explain why.

As we have already discussed, in verse 6, the neutral article, τὸ is used.

So, basically, verse 6 is saying:

And now, WHAT is holding, you have seen, UNTO the revealing of him in his own time.

So, I just don’t see how this could possibly be referring to those who are holding fast.

That just doesn’t make sense to me.

So, even if it might be conceivable for verse 7 to be referring to those who are holding fast, it just does not make any sense, to me, for verse 6 to be referring to those who are holding fast.

Here is how verse 7 is worded, once again, except that I will substitute “holding fast” for letteth.

2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who is holding fast now until he be taken out of the way (out of the middle he becomes).

So, as you can see, it is not beyond the realm of possibility for verse 7 to be construed as those who are holding fast.

But even if that were to be the case, I just do not see any rationale for how verse 6 could be referring to those who are holding fast, especially based on everything else that we have previously discussed in this thread concerning that verse.

So, even though you could substitute "he who is holding fast" in verse seven, it just doesn't make any sense to me based on the context of 2 Thessalonians 2.
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:43 pm

Hi lamb7,

There is no denying that God can do anything.

However, there is no indication in 2 Thessalonians 2 that the man of sin is being restrained, or that the mystery of iniquity is being restrained.

2 Thessalonians 2:6
King James Version (KJV)
6And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.


2 Thessalonians 2:7
King James Version (KJV)
7For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.


Emphasis added mine.
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is Michael the Archangel

Postby mark s on Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:13 pm

The Orange Mailman wrote:
Hi OM,

I've not read all your posts . . . could you give me in a nutshell the passages that show this connection? How do we know the 10 nation alliance won't exist before Satan is cast to the earth?


Hello Mark-

I have read all of your posts on this thread in their entirety. In fact, I've read just about every post on this thread since I want to have meaningful dialogue with others. I will wait until you read my posts so you understand what you are responding to.

But I haven't backed the assertion that the ten nation alliance rises at the midpoint of Daniel's 70th week. But Revelation 12-13 make it clear that the beast rises out of the sea, then the beast has authority for 42 months. Notice that in Revelation 12 as the dragon is cast out from heaven at the dawn of time, that the authority is vested in the seven heads of the dragon. This is signified by the seven diadems on the seven heads. Now when the beast rises out of the sea, there is a significant change. Now the authority is vested in the ten horns (the ten kings) because the diadems are now on the ten horns.

I'm sure that you put time, effort, and thought into your posts; and I do the same. Please take the time to read and understand my positions so that we can have some good conversation.

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman


As time allows, my friend!

But you've answered my question simply, as I had hoped you would. I will not find the support I was asking about.

Love in Christ,
Mark
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby The Orange Mailman on Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:15 pm

Watching-

I've read your post back on the 13th about three and one half times now. I'm processing and something came to me. Here is what I'm thinking and of course you know my position. What if Paul is referencing two different "he"-s in verse 7. Let me explain what I mean as the passage develops as a whole. You know my approach is to look at the overall passage as opposed to dissecting each phrase and word. Here are my thoughts. Again, I'm following ESV unless a good reason can be given to use another wording.

3 Let no one deceive you in any way, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction 4 who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.

So far, Paul is speaking about the man of sin. He, his, himself, this is all one person.

5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time.

Here the restraining is spoken of as restraining present tense, as opposed to the future when "he" will be revealed in "his" time. The he and his are also the man of sin. The primary focus of a male personage in this passage is on the antichrist.

7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way.

Now I'm speculating. The first male personage must be the restraining, or the restrainer, however you want to term it. But the second "he" could very well be referring back to the antichrist. Sort of like continuing the main thought. You are the one who has pointed out that the thing that is holding is not holding the revealing, but holding (simultaneously) unto the revealing of him. Also, with your thought on coming out from the middle (of something?), is this coming out of the middle of being restrained? So here I go with 7 and beyond but with some slight suggestions as to how we might read this.

7 For the mystery of lawlessness (antichrist type activity) is already at work. Only he (Michael) who now restrains it (through lawful God-ordained government) will do so until he (the man of sin) is out of the way. 8 And then (after he is out of the way or out from the middle of the restraining?) the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming.

This also preserves the order that Paul mentioned earlier when he stated that the day (of the coming and gathering) would not come until the apostasy comes first in conjunction with the revealing of the man of sin.

I am seriously interested in your thoughts on this since you are usually objective.

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman
User avatar
The Orange Mailman
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:45 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:50 pm

Hi Orange Mailman,

I'm following ESV unless a good reason can be given to use another wording.


I hope you do not take this the wrong way, but to tell you the truth, when reading how the ESV has translated some of these verses in 2 Thessalonians 2, it actually INFURIATES me.

I am just trying to be honest.

Changing the order around a little bit, here and there……………or adding a little word in, here and there………or taking one out………………may not seem like a big deal………………………BUT IT IS A BIG DEAL WHEN IT CHANGES THE MEANING OF THE SCRIPTURE!!!!!!!!!

I’m sorry if I’m being blunt.

But after seeing what the ESV has done to some of these verses, I would MUCH RATHER USE THE KING JAMES!!!!!!!!!!

I really think that we first have to agree on the translation, before we can even attempt to interpret it.

Because what is the point of trying to come up with an interpretation, if it is based on a faulty translation to begin with.

I do not mind if you want to debate whether these translations are accurate, or not, as a starting point.

In fact, I think we should probably do that first, before proceeding any further.

But, I just can’t sit here and pretend that these translations are accurate, especially after seeing what the ESV has done with verses 6 and 7.
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby morpheus on Sat Jul 16, 2011 11:23 pm

(I am answering a bunch of people all at once. Please pick and choose)

When passages are equivocal, you must look elsewhere for the solution. Picking a best translation is not going to solve the questions. I think there are other passages of Scripture that are more detailed that explain what is happening in 2 Thess. 2. One should go to these more detailed passages to interpret the less clear.

(I keep riding this horse because it is the right one to ride. Not that I don't like Greek or Hebrew study.)

Ephesians 2, for instance. We are seated with Christ in the heavenlies. Colossians 3, we are hid with Christ in God. Christ is in heaven. Christ also lives in us.


I think these passages do not support what you think. I see "being seated with Christ in the heavenlies" as we have a seat at Christ's table reserved in our name. No strange interpretation needed here. As for being hid with Christ in God, I see this a metaphor, not some new doctrine in how to we can be in two places at one time. I still maintain Michael is not in two places at one time.

And are all the Israelites 'getting hammered'? Do you in fact think that there will be those in the wilderness not 'getting hammered'? If so, why are they not? What could account for that?


Two wings of an eagle - whatever that means. However, I do not interpret the eagle as being Michael or the HS - especially not Michael since he was just mentioned a few verses before. Satan first tries a flood but the earth opens up - again not Michael. Then Satan seeks to make war against all the saints. How successful he is remains to be seen.

Why not by Michael? What rules that out? Considering that Scripture tells us he's the one specifically who stands for Israel?


Michael is the one who stands for Israel. But where is he making his stand? At the midpoint, in heaven. Why rule out Michael as the one who defends Israel in Rev 12? Because scripture tells us Michael is in heaven waging war on Satan. The two wings of an eagle are the one's who help Israel. Then the earth itself opens up. Maybe Michael does follow Satan immediately to earth and keeps up the defense. But there is no detailed Scripture evidence. Only the less detailed Daniel 12:1. Again Rev 12 is more detailed. The detailed should interpret the less detailed.

I think that the reason why many here will attempt to refute that the Holy Spirit is the Restrainer is because,....it reveals a pre-trib rapture and destroys their views that are contrary to a pre-trib rapture.


I still haven't seen any valid proof here of the HS as restrainer. If I missed it, I'm sorry. Even if the HS was the restrainer, I still see the restrainer getting removed at the AoD in 2 Thess 2. Therefore it couldn't be used as proof the pre-trib position at all. Mid-trib maybe, but not pre-trib.

I wrote...

I once though prophecy was so hard to understand but it was only because I was making so many mistakes. Once I found the combination to the lock, things got a lot easier and clearer. In fact, down right simple. If you find prophecy hard, then you are trying to put the puzzle pieces together with the wrong box top. The Bible is not muddy; only people's false conclusions are muddy. It is not rocket science.

That is not to say we can know all the answers to every question. Scripture does not give us all the answers to every question we might have. But we should be able to find the answers to the questions we need. We need to follow conclusions to their proper point and pursue no further. The rest we just have to wait and see.

Jesus commanded we watch. It is not optional. He listed signs in the Olivet DIscourse. At the very least, make a list from the Olivet Discourse and compare it to the evening news. When things happen, check the item off the list. The beginning of sorrows is nothing new. That stuff has been going on for 2000 years. But when Jerusalem is surrounded, the AoD happens, the Great Trib happens, the apostasy, the persecution, the sun and moon go dark, then you know it is time. Michael is coming with his angels. See the sign of the son of man coming in the clouds of glory. Look up for your redemption draws nigh.

That is eschatology in a nutshell. It really is that simple.


Somebody else wrote in response

prophecy is still not as "easy" as you have come to believe.


Prophecy is easy for me. Like I said, it wasn't always that way. I had been taught a lot of wrong things and had to work through all this garbage first. But prophecy is easy now for me. I also know other people who feel the same as me, so it is not just a me who feels this way. If you think prophecy is hard, then maybe you are still working it all out and haven't gotten your synthesis complete yet. No worries. I know what it is like to feel overwhelmed before your synthesis is done. But there should come a point where all the significant puzzle pieces fall into place and you see the box top. Then it is easy.

There are still a million details one can investigate. We are not given exhaustive info about these things and to try and figure them all out is endless. We do have to temper ourselves less we spend all our time trying to solve what may not be able to be solved now. But in time, these little details will become clear.

The question of prophecy is not just what does the Bible say, but why and what are we suppose to do about it. That is why I stated my summary of eschatology. Do people agree with the summary? If not, then state your own summary. I would love to see it.
morpheus
 
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:30 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby mark s on Sat Jul 16, 2011 11:49 pm

morpheus wrote:(I am answering a bunch of people all at once. Please pick and choose)

When passages are equivocal, you must look elsewhere for the solution. Picking a best translation is not going to solve the questions. I think there are other passages of Scripture that are more detailed that explain what is happening in 2 Thess. 2. One should go to these more detailed passages to interpret the less clear.

(I keep riding this horse because it is the right one to ride. Not that I don't like Greek or Hebrew study.)

Ephesians 2, for instance. We are seated with Christ in the heavenlies. Colossians 3, we are hid with Christ in God. Christ is in heaven. Christ also lives in us.


I think these passages do not support what you think. I see "being seated with Christ in the heavenlies" as we have a seat at Christ's table reserved in our name. No strange interpretation needed here.


Hi morpheus,

Personally, I don't see that as a strange interpretation. I recognize that I have a dual nature, a physically bounded identity, tied to this world, and a living spirit, that is not necessarily bounded in the same way. The Bible says I'm seated in heaven with Christ, why should I not believe that?

I know its common for many people to read a passage, and say of it, well, it says that, but it can't really mean that. And they find an easier for them way to believe it, however, I prefer to stay with the straightforward meanings of passages.

I already know my spirit is something different that my physical body, why should it not be in heaven? This doesn't have to mean two places at the same time.

Personally, I think that when we as believers die, and our eyes close to this realm, they simply open to the other realm.

As for being hid with Christ in God, I see this a metaphor, not some new doctrine in how to we can be in two places at one time. I still maintain Michael is not in two places at one time.


Again, I'm not talking about being in two places at once. I'm talking about two different sorts of places that I occupy at the same time.

And are all the Israelites 'getting hammered'? Do you in fact think that there will be those in the wilderness not 'getting hammered'? If so, why are they not? What could account for that?


Two wings of an eagle - whatever that means. However, I do not interpret the eagle as being Michael or the HS - especially not Michael since he was just mentioned a few verses before. Satan first tries a flood but the earth opens up - again not Michael. Then Satan seeks to make war against all the saints. How successful he is remains to be seen.


I believe that Scripture interprets Scripture. Where have we seen this imagery before?

Exodus 19:4 "You have seen what I did to Egypt; and I bore you on wings of eagles and brought you to Me."

How did God bring the Israelites out of Egypt? He struck Egypt with great plagues. The went before them in a pillar of fire. He raised up a deliver. Any or all of these could be what these eagles wings refer to. Elijah will come, and prepare them for the Lord. Perhaps he will lead them out. Perhaps he will strike the armies of the anti-christ with plagues. Perhaps the earth swallowing the flood will compare with the Red Sea drowning Pharaoh's army? I see any of these being the reference. But that is where I look to interpret the eagle's wings.

Love in Christ,
Mark
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby shorttribber on Sun Jul 17, 2011 12:55 am

morpheus wrote:The question of prophecy is not just what does the Bible say, but why and what are we suppose to do about it. That is why I stated my summary of eschatology. Do people agree with the summary? If not, then state your own summary. I would love to see it.


Mine is available for your viewing on the front page of this debate section.....it's a thread called "shorttrib/prewrath"....please take the time to read it.........slowly......do not look quickly through it to find what you disagree with.

Do as Marven Rosenthal suggested and put ALL your preconceived, "prewrath" ideas on the shelf, look then at it with open mind rather than a critical mind.
Find seven years of tribulation plainly stated in the Bible.
User avatar
shorttribber
 
Posts: 2340
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 7:42 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby benny balerio on Sun Jul 17, 2011 2:54 am

morpheus wrote:(I am answering a bunch of people all at once. Please pick and choose)

When passages are equivocal, you must look elsewhere for the solution. Picking a best translation is not going to solve the questions. I think there are other passages of Scripture that are more detailed that explain what is happening in 2 Thess. 2. One should go to these more detailed passages to interpret the less clear.

(I keep riding this horse because it is the right one to ride. Not that I don't like Greek or Hebrew study.)

Ephesians 2, for instance. We are seated with Christ in the heavenlies. Colossians 3, we are hid with Christ in God. Christ is in heaven. Christ also lives in us.


I think these passages do not support what you think. I see "being seated with Christ in the heavenlies" as we have a seat at Christ's table reserved in our name. No strange interpretation needed here. As for being hid with Christ in God, I see this a metaphor, not some new doctrine in how to we can be in two places at one time. I still maintain Michael is not in two places at one time.

And are all the Israelites 'getting hammered'? Do you in fact think that there will be those in the wilderness not 'getting hammered'? If so, why are they not? What could account for that?


Two wings of an eagle - whatever that means. However, I do not interpret the eagle as being Michael or the HS - especially not Michael since he was just mentioned a few verses before. Satan first tries a flood but the earth opens up - again not Michael. Then Satan seeks to make war against all the saints. How successful he is remains to be seen.

Why not by Michael? What rules that out? Considering that Scripture tells us he's the one specifically who stands for Israel?


Michael is the one who stands for Israel. But where is he making his stand? At the midpoint, in heaven. Why rule out Michael as the one who defends Israel in Rev 12? Because scripture tells us Michael is in heaven waging war on Satan. The two wings of an eagle are the one's who help Israel. Then the earth itself opens up. Maybe Michael does follow Satan immediately to earth and keeps up the defense. But there is no detailed Scripture evidence. Only the less detailed Daniel 12:1. Again Rev 12 is more detailed. The detailed should interpret the less detailed.

I think that the reason why many here will attempt to refute that the Holy Spirit is the Restrainer is because,....it reveals a pre-trib rapture and destroys their views that are contrary to a pre-trib rapture.


I still haven't seen any valid proof here of the HS as restrainer. If I missed it, I'm sorry. Even if the HS was the restrainer, I still see the restrainer getting removed at the AoD in 2 Thess 2. Therefore it couldn't be used as proof the pre-trib position at all. Mid-trib maybe, but not pre-trib.

I wrote...

I once though prophecy was so hard to understand but it was only because I was making so many mistakes. Once I found the combination to the lock, things got a lot easier and clearer. In fact, down right simple. If you find prophecy hard, then you are trying to put the puzzle pieces together with the wrong box top. The Bible is not muddy; only people's false conclusions are muddy. It is not rocket science.

That is not to say we can know all the answers to every question. Scripture does not give us all the answers to every question we might have. But we should be able to find the answers to the questions we need. We need to follow conclusions to their proper point and pursue no further. The rest we just have to wait and see.

Jesus commanded we watch. It is not optional. He listed signs in the Olivet DIscourse. At the very least, make a list from the Olivet Discourse and compare it to the evening news. When things happen, check the item off the list. The beginning of sorrows is nothing new. That stuff has been going on for 2000 years. But when Jerusalem is surrounded, the AoD happens, the Great Trib happens, the apostasy, the persecution, the sun and moon go dark, then you know it is time. Michael is coming with his angels. See the sign of the son of man coming in the clouds of glory. Look up for your redemption draws nigh.

That is eschatology in a nutshell. It really is that simple.


Somebody else wrote in response

prophecy is still not as "easy" as you have come to believe.


Prophecy is easy for me. Like I said, it wasn't always that way. I had been taught a lot of wrong things and had to work through all this garbage first. But prophecy is easy now for me. I also know other people who feel the same as me, so it is not just a me who feels this way. If you think prophecy is hard, then maybe you are still working it all out and haven't gotten your synthesis complete yet. No worries. I know what it is like to feel overwhelmed before your synthesis is done. But there should come a point where all the significant puzzle pieces fall into place and you see the box top. Then it is easy.

There are still a million details one can investigate. We are not given exhaustive info about these things and to try and figure them all out is endless. We do have to temper ourselves less we spend all our time trying to solve what may not be able to be solved now. But in time, these little details will become clear.

The question of prophecy is not just what does the Bible say, but why and what are we suppose to do about it. That is why I stated my summary of eschatology. Do people agree with the summary? If not, then state your own summary. I would love to see it.


You Quote:

I still haven't seen any valid proof here of the HS as restrainer. If I missed it, I'm sorry. Even if the HS was the restrainer, I still see the restrainer getting removed at the AoD in 2 Thess 2. Therefore it couldn't be used as proof the pre-trib position at all. Mid-trib maybe, but not pre-trib.

My Reply:
The bride is removed slightly prior to the Day of the Lord(1 Thessalonians 1;10)
The Day of the Lord begins with Ezekiel 38;18-20,...which occurs slightly prior to the beginning of Daniels 70th week.
In Genesis 6:3 it is declared that the Spirit of God was restraining sin in the days of Noah.
But in those days,..the Holy Spirit was not indwelling the believer.
So who was it that was restraining evil prior to the Day of Pentecost?...the answer is that it was the Holy Spirit who is omnipresent.
So!......If the Holy Spirit is omnipresent,..then why did the Lord send the Comforter?...is not the Comforter the Holy Spirit? How can you send someone who is already omnipresent?
The reason the Lord sent the Comforter was that He would indwell believers.
The Holy Spirit will not indwell a man unless he sincerely asks and Believes Jesus as his Lord and Savior.
The Holy Spirit will "only" seal a "true" believer with the promise of redemption.(God does not break promises)
And the result of being sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise is..."SAVED BY GRACE"

But those who enter Daniels 70th week and come to Jesus During those days,...Their salvation is conditional,...they must endure unto the end, and the same shall be saved.These are saved by faith that must be evidenced by their works of faith,...meaning that these were not saved by grace,...that these were not sealed of the Holy Spirit of promise when they first believed.
The reason why is because the Comforter no longer functions the same way as He did during the Church age,..Fore He was taken out of the way,..and since it is that the Holy spirit Indwells believers in the Church age,...then they too were caught up!(Taken out of the way)
The Holy Spirit did not indwell believers prior to the Day of Pentecost,..and as we can see,..the Holy Spirit will not be indwelling those who are left behind when the Rapture occurs.
User avatar
benny balerio
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 10:00 am

Re: The Restrainer is Michael the Archangel

Postby Douggg on Sun Jul 17, 2011 4:32 am

The Orange Mailman wrote:But I haven't backed the assertion that the ten nation alliance rises at the midpoint of Daniel's 70th week. But Revelation 12-13 make it clear that the beast rises out of the sea, then the beast has authority for 42 months. Notice that in Revelation 12 as the dragon is cast out from heaven at the dawn of time, that the authority is vested in the seven heads of the dragon. This is signified by the seven diadems on the seven heads. Now when the beast rises out of the sea, there is a significant change. Now the authority is vested in the ten horns (the ten kings) because the diadems are now on the ten horns.


Hi Orange, :mrgreen:

In Daniel 7, the beast is both a king and a kingdom. 7:17 indicates king and 7:23 indicates kingdom. So we carry that dual concept of the beast forward into Revelation 13.

Likewise, since the little horn in Daniel 7 is not the beast, but a horn on the beast, the wounded head in Revelation 13 is not the beast but one of the 7 kings....number 7 by process of elimination, since the 6th was ruling at the time of John in Revelation 17.

So the little horn (the Antichrist man) king number 7 initially is not the beast from the bottomless pit. When he is incarnated by the beast (spirit) ascending from the bottomless pit - then he becomes king number 8 (Revelation 17:11).

Therefore, the kingdom of the ten kings has to be in existence at the time the little horn makes his appearance. The little horn rules for a short period (Revelation 17:10) which would correspond to the first half of the 7 years. Notice that John does not mention the length of rule of the other 6 kings. So the shortness of the king seven's rule is important and differentiates him from the other 6 kings.

The beast from the bottomless pit does not start out the seven years. He only comes into play with nominally 42 month left. We have king 7 and then king 8 still future. The Antichrist man (the little horn) will be king 7, and when he is mortally wounded and recovers, incarnated by the beast spirit from the bottomless pit, he will become king 8.

But Revelation 12-13 make it clear that the beast rises out of the sea, then the beast has authority for 42 months. Notice that in Revelation 12 as the dragon is cast out from heaven at the dawn of time, that the authority is vested in the seven heads of the dragon. This is signified by the seven diadems on the seven heads. Now when the beast rises out of the sea, there is a significant change. Now the authority is vested in the ten horns (the ten kings) because the diadems are now on the ten horns.


Two things.

1. What is meant by "the beast" having authority for 42 months? Since in Revelation 17 the beast is king number 8, "the beast" must be talking about the Antichrist beast (the mortally wounded and recovered Antichrist man who will be incarnated by the beast spirit coming from the bottomless pit)

2. The beast, as a kingdom in Revelation 13, is the final configuration of the kingdom of the ten kings. imo, since the description of the beast is a composite of the other three kingdoms, the final configuration will be that the territory controlled by the fourth kingdom will include all of the territories of the former three kingdoms, which basically includes the major oil producing states in the middle east, i.e. Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia. It is easy to see the incentive for the Europeans to want to have that control, which imo will be the driving force as to them giving all of their support to Antichrist beast.

I think though you have mis-interpreted the significance of the crowns being on the 7 heads in Revelation 12, while in Revelation 13 the crowns are on the 10 horns. You seem to be suggesting that there is a transfer of power. But I think that is wrong. Perhaps I mis-interpreted your comment.

When considering the crowns, we have to factor in king number seven, i.e. the little horn that comes to power in the pre-existing kingdom of ten kings. In Revelation 13, king number seven is mortally wounded. Since he is the last of the seven kings, there are no crowns on the heads in Revelation 13. Revelation 13 switches to king number 8, the Antichrist beast. Timeframe? 42 months left.

In Revelation 12, the timeframe is 12:6 + 12:14, seven years. So the significance of the crowns on the seven heads of the dragon with 7 years left is that king number 7 has come to power. Thus, Daniel 7, the rise of the little horn, necessitates that the kingdom of the ten kings be in place before the final seven years. We may see that soon with the EU and their financial woes.

Orange, you had written, "Now the authority is vested in the ten horns (the ten kings) because the diadems are now on the ten horns" (Orange) from the seven heads. However, the seven heads and ten horns are two completely different groups of kings. There is not a transfer of authority - taking away of authority from one group and placing it with another group. You might want to rethink that. Revelation 17:13 says the ten kings give their power and strength to the beast..."These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast"....not that Satan is vesting his power from the seven heads to the ten kings.

Doug L.
Last edited by Douggg on Sun Jul 17, 2011 9:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2289
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:00 am

Hi Orange Mailman,

The Orange Mailman wrote: 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time.


The problem with the ESV translation of verse 6, aside from the fact that they have changed the order of the word "now" is that they have also added in the little word "him."


The Orange Mailman wrote: 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way.


And the problem with verse 7, is that the ESV has added in the little word "it."

These may seem like minor insignificant changes, to someone who is only casually reading the Bible.

But, for someone who is studying prophecy on a deeper level, these little ALTERATIONS, and/or ADDITIONS to the text, completely ALTER THE MEANING OF THE SCRIPTURE.

That is why, the King James, from what I have noticed, has been very careful about ADDING OR TAKING ANYTHING AWAY FROM SCRIPTURE, and has only done so, when it was absolutely necessary, because the original sentence may have seemed incomplete. But whenever they have done this, they have at least shown the words that were added in to the text in italics or [in brackets] so that the reader knows that those words were not in the original text.

But, adding little words like "him" and "it" to the texts, with no apology, and thereby CHANGING THE MEANING OF THE TEXT, is what would be considered ADDING TO THE SCRIPTURE.

These alterations, therefore, may allow for the following interpretation:

7 For the mystery of lawlessness (antichrist type activity) is already at work. Only he (Michael) who now restrains [it] (through lawful God-ordained government) will do so until he (the man of sin) is out of the way. 8 And then (after he is out of the way or out from the middle of the restraining?) the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming.

However, based on the way the scripture was original written, this interpretation would not be allowed, because for one thing, the little word "it", is nowhere to be found in the original text.

So, to answer your question, based on your interpretation, and on the way that the ESV translation was done, the above interpretation could be a possibility, now that I think about it.

But, it COULD NOT be a possibility, based on the way the original text was written.
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:26 am

Orange Mailman,

I just wanted to add..............that there is NO DOUBT that Michael will play a role, or maybe I should say, a "special" role, during the latter half of the seventieth week...............

............Just as there is NO DOUBT that God/Jesus/the Holy Spirit will DEFINITELY play a role during this time, as well.

2 Thessalonians 2:8

King James Version (KJV)

8And 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:


However, that does not mean that Paul MUST be talking about Michael, in 2 Thessalonians 2, just because we know, that Michael will play a role during the latter half of the seventieth week, based on other scriptures, THAT WERE NOT WRITTEN BY PAUL, BTW, especially since Paul did not even mention Michael ONCE anywhere in the text of 2 Thessalonians 2.
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby morpheus on Sun Jul 17, 2011 3:35 pm

watching,

You said:

However, that does not mean that Paul MUST be talking about Michael, in 2 Thessalonians 2, just because we know, that Michael will play a role during the latter half of the seventieth week, based on other scriptures, THAT WERE NOT WRITTEN BY PAUL, BTW, especially since Paul did not even mention Michael ONCE anywhere in the text of 2 Thessalonians 2.


While technically true, it is not the whole story. Paul most certainly did talk about an archangel (can we all agree this is Michael?) In 1 Thess Paul does not name Michael by name but he does talk about the archangel as playing an important role at the time of the rapture.

When comparing Scripture with Scripture, the first place we should go to explain 2 Thess should be 1 Thess? Paul wrote 2 Thess to follow up with what he wrote in 1 Thess. Does it not make sense that if he mentions the archangel (Michael) in the first book, he very well could be referring to the same being in the second book?

Here is 1 Thess 4...

For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.


Then in 2 Thess 2 we see Paul saying this:

5 Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? 6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.


One has to admit this helps the Michael as restrainer argument. Not saying it proves it, but it does strengthens it. But to say Paul never names Michael in 2 Thess. by name is not a good argument to make.
morpheus
 
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:30 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby morpheus on Sun Jul 17, 2011 4:14 pm

benny,

you wrote...

The bride is removed slightly prior to the Day of the Lord(1 Thessalonians 1;10)
The Day of the Lord begins with Ezekiel 38;18-20,...which occurs slightly prior to the beginning of Daniels 70th week.
In Genesis 6:3 it is declared that the Spirit of God was restraining sin in the days of Noah.
But in those days,..the Holy Spirit was not indwelling the believer.
So who was it that was restraining evil prior to the Day of Pentecost?...the answer is that it was the Holy Spirit who is omnipresent.
So!......If the Holy Spirit is omnipresent,..then why did the Lord send the Comforter?...is not the Comforter the Holy Spirit? How can you send someone who is already omnipresent?
The reason the Lord sent the Comforter was that He would indwell believers.
The Holy Spirit will not indwell a man unless he sincerely asks and Believes Jesus as his Lord and Savior.
The Holy Spirit will "only" seal a "true" believer with the promise of redemption.(God does not break promises)
And the result of being sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise is..."SAVED BY GRACE"

But those who enter Daniels 70th week and come to Jesus During those days,...Their salvation is conditional,...they must endure unto the end, and the same shall be saved.These are saved by faith that must be evidenced by their works of faith,...meaning that these were not saved by grace,...that these were not sealed of the Holy Spirit of promise when they first believed.
The reason why is because the Comforter no longer functions the same way as He did during the Church age,..Fore He was taken out of the way,..and since it is that the Holy spirit Indwells believers in the Church age,...then they too were caught up!(Taken out of the way)
The Holy Spirit did not indwell believers prior to the Day of Pentecost,..and as we can see,..the Holy Spirit will not be indwelling those who are left behind when the Rapture occurs.


I have no problem with the bride being removed at the start of the DOTL. We agree there.

But saying Ex 38 starts the DOTL which starts the 70th week - I think not. Here is passage you referred to.

18 This is what will happen in that day: When Gog attacks the land of Israel, my hot anger will be aroused, declares the Sovereign LORD. 19 In my zeal and fiery wrath I declare that at that time there shall be a great earthquake in the land of Israel. 20 The fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, the beasts of the field, every creature that moves along the ground, and all the people on the face of the earth will tremble at my presence. The mountains will be overturned, the cliffs will crumble and every wall will fall to the ground.


Where exactly in this passage do you find this starts of anything? I see "in that day" but not "at the start of that day." I do not see it at all. Instead what about these verses.

30 I will show wonders in the heavens
and on the earth,
blood and fire and billows of smoke.
31 The sun will be turned to darkness
and the moon to blood
before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD.


You should know where this passage is from. (If not, you need to read the whole Bible first, then reexamine your eschatology.) So your proof verses do not say anything about what starts the DOTL. The one I quoted does. We can link that up in the Olivet Discourse to see when the sun and moon go dark and therefore where the DOTL begins. Seeing this is well after the AoD, I think you have a massive problem. In fact in Rev 6 where the sun and moon go dark we read this:

12 I watched as he opened the sixth seal. There was a great earthquake. The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red, 13 and the stars in the sky fell to earth, as figs drop from a fig tree when shaken by a strong wind. 14 The heavens receded like a scroll being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place.

15 Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and everyone else, both slave and free, hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. 16 They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us[f] from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 For the great day of their[g] wrath has come, and who can withstand it?”


Sun and moon go dark and - the DOTL starts. This is after the five seals which match up with the Olivet Discourse. In fact, this sixth seal matches up too. And right after this sixth seal - why that matches up to. The Sign of the Son of Man coming in clouds and the angel gathering the elect.

So I have to say your proof falls apart at step two. The only other point you back with Scripture is point 3. But that is talking pre-Flood, pre-Israel. That is pretty far removed from end-times. The Bible says Michael is the one who now stands for Israel. Michael appears in many end-times passages. The HS does not. So I think going back to Genesis 6 is a far stretch. It is not totally wrong to do so, but you must go with the later info and more clear scriptures.

Seeing you have a mistake at point 2 and inferior proof at step 3, I think I have adequately responded. After that, all your points don't mention Scripture. That usually is a very bad sign.
morpheus
 
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:30 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Sun Jul 17, 2011 7:08 pm

Hi morpheus,

morpheus wrote:When comparing Scripture with Scripture, the first place we should go to explain 2 Thess should be 1 Thess?


Why should the first place to go, to understand 2 Thessalonians 2, be 1 Thessalonians 4?

Shouldn’t the first place to go to understand 2 Thessalonians 2, be 2 Thessalonians 2?

To me, 2 Thessalonians 2 seems to be self explanatory.

So, I do not see any need to go looking all over the place for answers, when all the answers seem to, already, be right there in front of me.

I mean, who was it that said the following statement?

“If the plain sense makes sense, then seek no other sense.”

I keep hearing that a lot.

I’m not sure who it was that said that, originally; but it makes sense, to me. :wink:

In any case, as I said before, I’m not denying that Michael will play a role in the end times. And I am in no way disputing that.

However, I just don’t see any reason for attributing anything, in 2 Thessalonians 2, to Michael.

Nevertheless, I do agree with you, in that I do not adhere to the teaching, that 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7 is referring to the Holy Spirit, either, however.
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby The Orange Mailman on Sun Jul 17, 2011 7:13 pm

Hello Watching-

Thanks for the response. How about if we use KJV or NASB?

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;4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself (man of sin) above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he (man of sin) as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself (man of sin) that he (man of sin) is God.5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6And now ye know what withhold that he (man of sin) might be revealed in his (man of sin) time.7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work : only he (restraining) who now letteth will let, until he (man of sin) be taken out of the way.8 And then shall that Wicked (man of sin) be revealed , whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:9 Even him, (man of sin) whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

The idea that I’m trying to get at is that the man of sin is the primary male personage in this passage. Only specifically where the restraining is mentioned should be see the identity of a male personage as the restrainer. So that would be in verse 7 in the second clause “only he who now letteth will let”. So how about NASB.

3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it (day of the LORD) will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself (man of lawlessness) above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he (man of lawlessness) takes his (man of lawlessness) seat in the temple of God, displaying himself (man of lawlessness) as being God. 5 Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things ? 6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he (man of lawlessness) will be revealed. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work ; only he (restrainer) who now restrains will do so until he (man of lawlessness) is taken out of the way. 8Then 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 ; 9 that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders,

So now take this, and insert your assertions that you have been making for this entire thread. For instance, the revealing of the man of sin is not particularly hinged upon the ceasing of the restrainer, but the man of sin is certainly revealed when the restrainer ceases restraining. Also, the “he” in the latter portion of verse 7 comes out from the middle of something. Seeing that “he” as the man of sin would explain that “he” comes out from the middle of the restraining which has been holding him back.

Even though I’m using a translation (whether ESV or KJV), I’m certainly thinking in terms of the ideas that you have been writing about. It’s slowly sinking in. But do you think this idea of the man of sin being the “he” in the latter part of verse 7 holds weight? I don’t think it’s an issue of ESV versus KJV or even the original in my opinion.

Have fun and stay busy - Luke 19:13

-The Orange Mailman
User avatar
The Orange Mailman
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:45 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Sun Jul 17, 2011 7:17 pm

benny balerio wrote:

I think that the reason why many here will attempt to refute that the Holy Spirit is the Restrainer is because,....it reveals a pre-trib rapture and destroys their views that are contrary to a pre-trib rapture.


mark s wrote:

Benny, I tend to agree with you that some people may find it difficult to separate doctrines when studying them. We oftentimes realize the implications of various views as we are considering them, and this can, imo, influence our thinking. We have to guard against that.



Hi mark and benny,

I would just like to say that my understanding of scripture does not in any way affect my view of the rapture.

In fact, as I have been saying all along, my hope is in a pre-trib rapture.

My view of the rapture, however, is obviously not based on popular teachings.

So, my hope in a pre-trib rapture is not hinged on whether 2 Thessalonians 2 is referring to the Holy Spirit, or not.

On the contrary, my hope for a pre-trib rapture is actually based on what the scripture REALLY does say, or maybe I should say, on what it does NOT say.

Because, as I have pointed out before, in the original text of 2 Thessalonians 2, it does not say the words “that day shall not come” in verse 3; or the words “will letteth” in verse 7.

See verses 3 and 7:

2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;


2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth [will let], until he be taken out of the way.


So, to me, this leaves open a window of opportunity for a pre-trib rapture……..or maybe I should say, at least a possibility for a pre-trib rapture…………………The trib, of course, being the 3 ½ years that we know, FOR CERTAIN, to be the time of trouble such as never was before, no, nor ever shall be.


Matthew 24:15-21

King James Version (KJV)

15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

16Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

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


Daniel 12:1-3

King James Version (KJV)

Daniel 12

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

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

3And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby Mrs. B on Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:14 pm

The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit......Not Michael the Archangel


Jesus said go to Jerusalem and wait for the Promise of the Father....

The Promise of the Father?
The Holy Spirit was poured out on the Day of Penticost....about 2000 years ago...
The Holy Spirit living in the Believer is the Restrainer.
When Our Sins are full.......what restrains the devil.....?

The Christian, the Believer, the Born Again of God Believers....Those Anointed with the Spirit of God...

What happens when sins, unbelief, false teaching and false preachers, false prophets become more popular then the Truth....????
This is the Falling Away from the Truth......and the A/c spirit takes over what is called the Church.....This is the Falling away from the Truth of the Gospel.....we believe false teaching and doctrine......we open the door for the devil to move into the Temple of God and deceive the many......

Without the Holy Spirit living in you the Believer you can easly be deceived......The Holy Spirit bares Witness to you the Believer that which is True........Then you know that you know.....The Spirit of Truth leades you and guides you....and you are not deceived.......Jesus said...If it were possible even the elect would be deceived.......The Holy Spirit living in the Believer is the Restrainer.......not Michael...

Judgment comes when sins preveals.....The Flood came when the sins were full only 8 people were saved....Sodom and Gomoro was destroyed when Abraham pleaded with God....if there are 50, 40, 30, 10 righous....God would not destroy
Sodom.....when ther sins were full...then Judgment comes.....So when the Church Falls Away from Truth....the Restrainer
the witness for Truth....Then Judgment comes....

Jesus warn....Not to be deceived....be a seeker of Truth...line up with Truth....Hunger for Truth...Seek Truth

Jesus is Truth...The Way
Our Bodies are the Temple of the Holy Ghost......when we follow a false christ, false doctron......this is the falling away...being deceived....walking by our natural mind and not the Mind of Christ...Lead by the Holy Spirit...


Mrs. B
Mrs. B
 
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:19 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby mark s on Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:03 pm

watching wrote:
mark s wrote:

Benny, I tend to agree with you that some people may find it difficult to separate doctrines when studying them. We oftentimes realize the implications of various views as we are considering them, and this can, imo, influence our thinking. We have to guard against that.



Hi mark and benny,

I would just like to say that my understanding of scripture does not in any way affect my view of the rapture.

In fact, as I have been saying all along, my hope is in a pre-trib rapture.

My view of the rapture, however, is obviously not based on popular teachings.

So, my hope in a pre-trib rapture is not hinged on whether 2 Thessalonians 2 is referring to the Holy Spirit, or not.


Hi watching,

I didn't mean this directed at anyone in particular, or even about any particular topic. Just a general statement, something to watch out for.

Love in Christ,
Mark
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby morpheus on Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:17 pm

Mrs. B,

We agree with most of what you say. It is the few things we disagree upon that we would love to see Scripture support.

watching,

I think we all agree that the first place we should go to understand 2 Thess 2 is the rest of the passage itself. But 2 Thess 2 does not name the restrainer by name so we have to look elsewhere for data to provide more detail - if such detail exists. If it did name the restrainer by name in 2 Thess 2, I doubt we would have this thread in the first place.

I am actually fine with not putting a name on the restrainer with absolute certainty. I do think I know who the restrainer is. But one way or another, it does not change any important prophecy doctrine for me. I do not use this conclusion as a premise for another syllogism. Whether human government, the HS, or Michael I do not see any contradiction to my overall understanding of eschatology.

I build my eschatology on the major prophetic passages using the major events. I then interpret the minor details in light of the major data. The only reason why I get involved in a discussion like this is because I see people building their main eschatology conclusions on minor data like this and then trying to twist all the major data around to fit their theories.

For example, the main prophecy passages in Scripture with timing and sequence data are Daniel, the Olivet DIscourse, and Revelation. Other passages have detail but not much sequence data - words like "then", "after this", "but before all this." To determine the timing of the rapture, you need passages with timing words. As far as I know, the pre-trib position does not claim any of Daniel, the Olivet DIscourse, or Revelation as proof for their conclusion. They instead resort to "the HS as restrainer" type proofs.

In contrast, I build my timing of the rapture on Daniel, the Olivet Discourse, and Rev. I think the rapture/resurrection is clearly mentioned in all three. Daniel 12:1-2, Matthew 24:29-31, and Rev 7:9-14 and Rev 14:14-16. Once I have this data in place, I then pursue to minor questions like who is the restrainer. So really who is the restrainer is not a major issue for me. But I think it is for pre-tribbers. It is one of their main supports for their position.

If any pre-tribber does support their conclusion from Daniel, the Olivet Discourse, and Revelation, I'd love to hear it. Just name the verses so I can look them up.
morpheus
 
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:30 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby benny balerio on Mon Jul 18, 2011 7:46 am

morpheus wrote:benny,

you wrote...

The bride is removed slightly prior to the Day of the Lord(1 Thessalonians 1;10)
The Day of the Lord begins with Ezekiel 38;18-20,...which occurs slightly prior to the beginning of Daniels 70th week.
In Genesis 6:3 it is declared that the Spirit of God was restraining sin in the days of Noah.
But in those days,..the Holy Spirit was not indwelling the believer.
So who was it that was restraining evil prior to the Day of Pentecost?...the answer is that it was the Holy Spirit who is omnipresent.
So!......If the Holy Spirit is omnipresent,..then why did the Lord send the Comforter?...is not the Comforter the Holy Spirit? How can you send someone who is already omnipresent?
The reason the Lord sent the Comforter was that He would indwell believers.
The Holy Spirit will not indwell a man unless he sincerely asks and Believes Jesus as his Lord and Savior.
The Holy Spirit will "only" seal a "true" believer with the promise of redemption.(God does not break promises)
And the result of being sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise is..."SAVED BY GRACE"

But those who enter Daniels 70th week and come to Jesus During those days,...Their salvation is conditional,...they must endure unto the end, and the same shall be saved.These are saved by faith that must be evidenced by their works of faith,...meaning that these were not saved by grace,...that these were not sealed of the Holy Spirit of promise when they first believed.
The reason why is because the Comforter no longer functions the same way as He did during the Church age,..Fore He was taken out of the way,..and since it is that the Holy spirit Indwells believers in the Church age,...then they too were caught up!(Taken out of the way)
The Holy Spirit did not indwell believers prior to the Day of Pentecost,..and as we can see,..the Holy Spirit will not be indwelling those who are left behind when the Rapture occurs.


I have no problem with the bride being removed at the start of the DOTL. We agree there.

But saying Ex 38 starts the DOTL which starts the 70th week - I think not. Here is passage you referred to.

18 This is what will happen in that day: When Gog attacks the land of Israel, my hot anger will be aroused, declares the Sovereign LORD. 19 In my zeal and fiery wrath I declare that at that time there shall be a great earthquake in the land of Israel. 20 The fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, the beasts of the field, every creature that moves along the ground, and all the people on the face of the earth will tremble at my presence. The mountains will be overturned, the cliffs will crumble and every wall will fall to the ground.


Where exactly in this passage do you find this starts of anything? I see "in that day" but not "at the start of that day." I do not see it at all. Instead what about these verses.

30 I will show wonders in the heavens
and on the earth,
blood and fire and billows of smoke.
31 The sun will be turned to darkness
and the moon to blood
before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD.


You should know where this passage is from. (If not, you need to read the whole Bible first, then reexamine your eschatology.) So your proof verses do not say anything about what starts the DOTL. The one I quoted does. We can link that up in the Olivet Discourse to see when the sun and moon go dark and therefore where the DOTL begins. Seeing this is well after the AoD, I think you have a massive problem. In fact in Rev 6 where the sun and moon go dark we read this:

12 I watched as he opened the sixth seal. There was a great earthquake. The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red, 13 and the stars in the sky fell to earth, as figs drop from a fig tree when shaken by a strong wind. 14 The heavens receded like a scroll being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place.

15 Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and everyone else, both slave and free, hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. 16 They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us[f] from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 For the great day of their[g] wrath has come, and who can withstand it?”


Sun and moon go dark and - the DOTL starts. This is after the five seals which match up with the Olivet Discourse. In fact, this sixth seal matches up too. And right after this sixth seal - why that matches up to. The Sign of the Son of Man coming in clouds and the angel gathering the elect.

So I have to say your proof falls apart at step two. The only other point you back with Scripture is point 3. But that is talking pre-Flood, pre-Israel. That is pretty far removed from end-times. The Bible says Michael is the one who now stands for Israel. Michael appears in many end-times passages. The HS does not. So I think going back to Genesis 6 is a far stretch. It is not totally wrong to do so, but you must go with the later info and more clear scriptures.

Seeing you have a mistake at point 2 and inferior proof at step 3, I think I have adequately responded. After that, all your points don't mention Scripture. That usually is a very bad sign.


No Morpheus,...I can see that you do not realize your mistakes in the interpretation here.
Allow me to reveal your mistakes.
Revelation 6:12
I watched as he opened the sixth seal. There was a great earthquake. The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red.

The only place in the bible that matches the scripture is Joel 2;31The sun will be turned to darkness
and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.
(The day of the Lord is the First Half and......The Great and dreadful Day of the Lord Begins at the A.O.D. in which the Lord Jesus distinguishes it from the first half by calling it The Great Tribulation.)

Joel chapter two describes the Ezekiel 38 attempted invasion.
Joel chapter three describes the Armageddon campaign.

There are too many differences of description in revelation 12-17 and the return of the Lord.
The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red
verse's the difference of Matthew 24;29 "“‘the sun will be darkened,and the moon will not give its light;(No light=no red appearance)

Isaiah tells us that in that day, not before the day, men will hide in holes of the rocks and caves.10 They are hiding from the terror of the LORD when He arises to shake the earth mightily. Their hiding is not anticipatory, but reactionary. In other words, the events of the sixth seal are part of the Day of the Lord.
Those with faith in Christ desire His presence and seek His face. (Ps. 17:15; Pr. 8:7; Isa. 45:19; Isa. 58:2; 65:1; Jer. 29:13; Amos 5:4).

revelation 6;17 is not a description of anticipation.....that would go against scripture.....it is that the Lord comes as a thief in the night to the unbelievers,...and the Bride will not be hiding from the Lord.16They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!
Revelation 6:16–17 is a summary statement of all the previous seal judgments.
Revelation 6:15–17 is an overall report of the human response to God’s judgment as administered through all six seal judgments.The controlling verb in verse 17, “is come” (êlthen), “is aorist indicative, referring to a previous arrival of the wrath, not something that is about to take place

All the seal judgements are active throughout all of Daniels 70th week.(This can easily be proven, an example is revelation 16;5-7)

The Ezekiel 38 prophecy cannot be scripturally and logicly placed inside of Daniels 70th week and this arguement has already been debated here.

Genesis 6:3, where God said,”My Spirit will not always strive with man.” This word comes from the Hebrew word which means to govern or rule, in whatever realm. One of the responsibilities of government is to restrain lawlessness, thus the Spirit of God is said to restrain lawlessness. Thus, as the Holy Spirit restrains lawlessnes in the world, the only one who has authority to remove that restraint is God. The Holy Spirit restrains sin in Christians (Rom 8:2 and others). The man of sin is literally the man of lawlessness, and will be the epitome of human lawlessness. Lawlessness that was already at work is being restrained until the ultimate expression of the lawlessness is revealed at the right time. God’s Holy Spirit has the function of restraining humanity’s lawlessness, and the AC is the ultimate expression of that lawlessness, it is apparently the Holy Spirit that prevents the AC from being revealed.

Daniel 12;1

At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise

The restrainer restrains “lawlessness,” globally, while Michael restrains enemy attacks against one nation, Israel.

Michael cannot be everywhere globally to restrain evil,..only the Holy spirit can do this.
User avatar
benny balerio
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 10:00 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Mon Jul 18, 2011 8:49 am

Orange Mailman wrote:For instance, the revealing of the man of sin is not particularly hinged upon the ceasing of the restrainer, but the man of sin is certainly revealed when the restrainer ceases restraining.


Hi Orange Mailman,

The whole point is that THERE IS NO CEASING of the “restrainer,” as you call it, IN ORDER FOR THE REVEALING OF THE MAN OF SIN TO OCCUR.

THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT!!!

Look at verse 6 again:

2:6 καὶ νῦν τὸ κατέχον οἴδατε εἰς τὸ ἀποκαλυφθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ ἑαυτοῦ καιρῷ

καὶ (and) νῦν (now) τὸ κατέχον (the thing that is holding) οἴδατε (you have perceived) εἰς (unto) τὸ (the) ἀποκαλυφθῆναι (to be revealed) αὐτὸν (him) ἐν (in) τῷ (the) ἑαυτοῦ (his own) καιρῷ (time)

The way this would read in English is as follows:

And now the thing that is holding you have perceived UNTO the revealing of him in his own time.

So, why do you think it says UNTO rather than UNTIL?

I must admit, this had me stumped for a while, as well.

I kept wanting to say, UNTIL, because that is what sounded more natural, to me.

BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT THE TEXT SAYS!!!

The Greek word that was used was the word εἰς.

See definition here:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1519&t=KJV

The Greek word for “until,” would be ἕως.

See definition here:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G2193&t=KJV

So, why do you think the word “UNTO” was used, rather than the word “UNTIL?”

I had to think about this, as well.

Until I realized that the reason the text does NOT say…………….

And now the thing that is holding you have perceived “UNTIL” the revealing of him in his own time.

…………..is because the thing that is holding DOES NOT CEASE in order for the man of sin to be revealed, which is what the word “until” would imply.

On the contrary, however, the thing that is holding, IS HOLDING........UNTO……INTO…..TOWARDS…..the revealing of the man of sin.

If the thing that is holding were to CEASE……….IN ORDER FOR THE MAN OF SIN TO BE REVEALED……….then the word, ἕως, which means, UNTIL, would have been used, rather than the word εἰς, which means, UNTO…………BUT IT WAS NOT!!!!

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT!!!!

THIS IS WHY LITTLE WORDS MATTER!!!!!

Now, to see how this fits into the scripture, we have to do a little back tracking.

You have to first look at what Paul said in verse 3. And you also have to use your knowledge of what you know about Michael, because that would be helpful, as well.

So, in verse 3, Paul is saying, to not be deceived that the day of the Lord has come, if two things do not happen first.

Those two things are the following:

1) The apostasy
2) That the man of sin might be revealed

Now, you have to remember what we said about the word “apostasy.”

Apostasy means DEFECTION, or REVOLT.

See definition here:

http://strongsnumbers.com/greek/646.htm

So, THE apostasy, means THE defection, or THE revolt.

So, the first thing that is holding, is THE APOSTASY.

Now, let me ask you...........

What is being HELD BACK, based on anything that Paul has said in 2 Thessalonians 2?

The only thing that I see as being held back, based on anything that Paul has said in 2 Thessalonians 2, is the day of the Lord; because Paul said to not be deceived that the day of the Lord has come, unless two things happen first.

So, now that we have the background information, let’s try to apply WHAT WE KNOW, to what Paul is saying in verse 6.

Here is the literal translation of verse 6 again:

And now the thing that is holding you have perceived UNTO the revealing of him in his own time.

So, let’s apply WHAT WE KNOW, to that verse.

And now the thing (the apostasy) that is holding (the day of the Lord) you have perceived (the apostasy........) UNTO the revealing of him in his own time.

(The apostasy/rebellion is UNTO the revealing of him in his own time..........Therefore this clause could be placed right next to "the thing that is holding," if it were not set apart, by what we would have put in commas, which is the clause, "you have perceived.")

And here is verse 7:

2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth [will let], until he be taken out of the way.


So, now, can you understand WHY it says UNTO rather than UNTIL?

Because, let’s face it, “UNTIL,” would sound a lot more natural to say.

But the reason it does NOT say “UNTIL,” rather than “UNTO,” is because the revolt DOES NOT CEASE, in order for the man of sin to be revealed.

On the contrary, THE REVOLT IS WHAT LEADS “INTO” “UNTO” “TOWARDS” the revealing of the man of sin.

SO, IT WOULD NOT BE ACCURATE FOR PAUL TO SAY “UNTIL.”

BECAUSE “UNTIL” WOULD IMPLY THAT ONE ENDS, IN ORDER FOR THE OTHER TO BEGIN.

BUT THAT IS CLEARLY NOT THE CASE!!!!!

Because, as we know, the revolt is what will lead “INTO” “UNTO” “TOWARDS” the revealing of the man of sin.

The revolt DOES NOT CEASE and then, later, the man of sin is revealed. The man of sin is revealed WHEN the revolt occurs.

So, that is why Paul says εἰς (UNTO) rather than ἕως (UNTIL).

Because, otherwise, the apostasy would appear to be “RESTRAINING” the revealing of the man of sin.............but that is CLEARLY NOT THE CASE..........because the revealing of the man of sin IS NOT WHAT IS BEING RESTRAINED!!!!!

Furthermore, the apostasy is DEFINITELY NOT “RESTRAINING” the revealing of the man of the man of sin.

On the contrary, the apostasy is WHAT WILL BRING ABOUT the revealing of the man of sin.

So, THE APOSTASY……………TOWARDS THE REVEALING OF THE MAN OF SIN, is the FIRST THING that is "restraining" (KEEPING) the day of the Lord from happening.

And the SECOND THING that is "restraining" (KEEPING) the day of the Lord from occurring is, THAT THE MAN OF SIN MIGHT BE REVEALED. (So, the second “thing” is a “he.”)

Now look at the literal translations of verses 3, 6, and 7, again, AND SEE IF THEY MAKE MORE SENSE TO YOU, NOW:

2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin might be revealed, the son of perdition;................


.........2Th 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth UNTO the revealing of him in his own time.

2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth [will let], until he be taken out of the way (………….until out of the middle he becomes).


So, now. do you understand the significance, of the difference, between little words, such εἰς or ἕως?

So, as as you can see, there is no need to INTRODUCE anything into this passage, THAT IS NOT ALREADY THERE.

It’s just a matter of UNDERSTANDING, what is already in the passage.
Last edited by watching on Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby mark s on Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:13 am

Hi watching,

Thank you for emphasizing the use of eis here.

Personally, I see it as indicating the goal of the restraining. The thing the restraining is "towards" is that the man of sin be revealed at the time appointed for him, "his own time". To prevent him from being revealed early, there is a restraining going on.

Love in Christ,
Mark
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby benny balerio on Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:38 am

Departure and The Restrainer
Since pretribulationists believe that the restrainer mentioned in verses 6 and 7 is the Holy Spirit and teaches a pre-trib rapture, then it should not be surprising to see that there is a similar progression of thought in the progression of verse 3. Allan MacRae, president of Faith Theological Seminary in a letter to Schuyler English has said the following concerning this matter:


I wonder if you have noticed the striking parallel between this verse and verses 7-8, a little further down. According to your suggestion verse 3 mentions the departure of the church as coming first, and then tells of the revealing of the man of sin. In verses 7 and 8 we find the identical sequence. Verse 7 tells of the removal of the Church; verse 8 says: "And then shall that Wicked be revealed." Thus close examination of the passage shows an inner unity and coherence, if we take the word apostasia in its general sense of "departure," while a superficial examination would easily lead to an erroneous interpretation as "falling away" because of the proximity of the mention of the man of sin.[11]


Kenneth Wuest, a Greek scholar from Moody Bible Institute added the following contextual support to taking apostasia as a physical departure:


But then hee apostasia of which Paul is speaking, precedes the revelation of Antichrist in his true identity, and is to katechon that which holds back his revelation (2:6). The hee apostasia, therefore, cannot be either a general apostasy in Christendom which does precede the coming of Antichrist, nor can it be the particular apostasy which is the result of his activities in making himself the alone object of worship. Furthermore, that which holds back his revelation (vs. 3) is vitally connected with hoo katechoon (vs. 7), He who holds back the same event. The latter is, in my opinion, the Holy Spirit and His activities in the Church. All of which means that I am driven to the inescapable conclusion that the hee apostasia (vs. 3) refers to the Rapture of the Church which precedes the Day of the Lord, and holds back the revelation of the Man of Sin who ushers in the world-aspect of that period.[12]


Conclusion
The fact that apostasia most likely has the meaning of physical departure is a clear support for pretribulationism. If this is true, (Dr. Tim LaHaye and I believe that it is), then it means that a clear prophetic sequence is laid out by Paul early in his Apostolic ministry. Paul teaches in 2 Thessalonians 2 that the rapture will occur first, before the Day of the Lord commences. It is not until after the beginning of the Day of the Lord that the Antichrist is released, resulting in the events described by him in chapter 2 of 2 Thessalonians. This is the only interpretation that provides hope for a discomforted people. Maranatha!
http://www.raptureready.com/featured/ic ... ns2_3.html
P.S. permission is given to post this.
http://www.raptureready.com/
User avatar
benny balerio
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 10:00 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Mon Jul 18, 2011 9:42 am

mark s wrote:Thank you for emphasizing the use of eis here.

Personally, I see it as indicating the goal of the restraining. The thing the restraining is "towards" is that the man of sin be revealed at the time appointed for him, "his own time".


Exactly!

mark s wrote:To prevent him from being revealed early, there is a restraining going on.


:humm:
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby mark s on Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:39 am

watching wrote:
mark s wrote:Thank you for emphasizing the use of eis here.

Personally, I see it as indicating the goal of the restraining. The thing the restraining is "towards" is that the man of sin be revealed at the time appointed for him, "his own time".


Exactly!

mark s wrote:To prevent him from being revealed early, there is a restraining going on.


:humm:


Just another way of saying the same thing.
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby morpheus on Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:41 am

benny,

I think your logic is so whacked out I do not even know where to begin. I will touch a few things though.

I disagree that there is a significant difference between the Scripture passages where the sun and moon go dark. How exact do the words have to be to match? Have you ever seen a lunar eclipse? Usually during a total lunar eclipse, the moon does go red before and afterwards. It also depends on your location on earth whether the moon goes totally dark or whether is just gets red and darkens.

To say there is a difference between the moon going black and the moon going red does not match what happens in real life. So your saying the passages do not match up begs the questions how dark does the moon have to get to be totally dark, what location are we going to use for a reference, is the moon going red part of a total lunar eclipse or just something before and after? What about a partial lunar eclipse? Does that count?

This is the same mistake used on many of the second coming/rapture passages. Each passage is a little different but some people use these small differences to say they are not the same event. Some of us say they are the same event but the small differences are just because they have a little different perspective.

I guess I would ask this question. Are the four gospels about one Jesus or four? At least John is very different from the first three gospels. Does John talk about a different Jesus? I am guessing everybody would agree the similarities between the gospels are just too great to say they talk about a different Jesus. There is only one Jesus.

Yet when it comes to prophecy, some people see the little differences and say they are all different events. One prominent pre-trib author even when so far as to say there are four different sun and moon going dark events in prophecy. These people ignore the great similarities and only see tiny differences. I think these people are not consistent in their hermeneutics. To be consistent they should say there was four different guys named Jesus.

But even more, I think there is objective proof how we handle situations like this. There is a area of math called statistics that handles this type of situation. Unfortunately most people have never studied this. I really think this gets to the heart of the eschatology issue. Similarities verses differences. What is significant? Some people yes; others say no. Very few theologians have ever studied higher math that could help.

Same too that many theologians have never studied logic. If they have, most of their logic experience is not is real world situations. For example, I spent 10 years as a computer programmer. That's over 20,000 hours of doing logic. If I made mistakes, of which I made plenty, I got real world feedback. I had to consistently test and prove my logic worked. Even so much as a colon verses a semicolon would crash the program. But those were the easy mistakes to find. It was the complex mistakes in well over a million lines of code that were tough to find. They did not crash the program but slowly corrupted data over years. Or they worked fine for 999 out of 1000 situations. But when you hit that 1 in a 1000 case, they did not work. Sometimes there wasn't even much evidence of a mistake. They were the hard bugs to track down.

When I see many theologians do eschatology I just laugh at how they would do as a programmer. I serious consider making my older children doing computer programming just as a training ground to help their Bible study. I even bet a few people here are computer programmers and can vouch for the importance of what I say. I'm sure some mathematicians would say the same bout their work.

So, if people see differences where I see similarities, what can I say? We all have difference experiences and knowledge that form our thinking. Some people obviously are way better than others in some areas. Here on this forum all are welcome to participate. Some are experts in language, some in logic, some in keeping the peace. All are needed.

But if people see differences where I see similarities, some see a red moon and dark moon being totally different, then there is not much more to say. They are going to keep the same logic in all other areas. There is not much left to discuss. I mean there is a lot to discuss; it is just we don't agree on the same toolset by which to solve problems.
morpheus
 
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:30 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Mon Jul 18, 2011 11:02 am

mark s wrote:
watching wrote:
mark s wrote:Thank you for emphasizing the use of eis here.

Personally, I see it as indicating the goal of the restraining. The thing the restraining is "towards" is that the man of sin be revealed at the time appointed for him, "his own time".


Exactly!

mark s wrote:To prevent him from being revealed early, there is a restraining going on.


:humm:


Just another way of saying the same thing.


That is not saying the same thing!!!

If you are preventing someone from being revealed early, then how can they possibly be revealed IN THEIR OWN TIME????

To, say, that his (the man of sin's) own time, is the "appointed time" would be acceptable, because God has providence over everything, and God knows when everything will occur.

But to say, that someone is being RESTRAINED, so that they can be revealed IN THEIR OWN TIME........as long as it's NOT TOO EARLY...........does not make any sense!!!!!

How can someone be revealed in their OWN TIME, if they are being RESTRAINED, so that they can be revealed in SOMEONE ELSE' OWN TIME?????

:humm: :idgi6: :dunno:
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby mark s on Mon Jul 18, 2011 11:32 am

Hi watching,

What I'm seeing is "in his own time" = "the time appointed for him".
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby benny balerio on Mon Jul 18, 2011 11:47 am

morpheus wrote:benny,

I think your logic is so whacked out I do not even know where to begin. I will touch a few things though.

I disagree that there is a significant difference between the Scripture passages where the sun and moon go dark. How exact do the words have to be to match? Have you ever seen a lunar eclipse? Usually during a total lunar eclipse, the moon does go red before and afterwards. It also depends on your location on earth whether the moon goes totally dark or whether is just gets red and darkens.

To say there is a difference between the moon going black and the moon going red does not match what happens in real life. So your saying the passages do not match up begs the questions how dark does the moon have to get to be totally dark, what location are we going to use for a reference, is the moon going red part of a total lunar eclipse or just something before and after? What about a partial lunar eclipse? Does that count?

This is the same mistake used on many of the second coming/rapture passages. Each passage is a little different but some people use these small differences to say they are not the same event. Some of us say they are the same event but the small differences are just because they have a little different perspective.

I guess I would ask this question. Are the four gospels about one Jesus or four? At least John is very different from the first three gospels. Does John talk about a different Jesus? I am guessing everybody would agree the similarities between the gospels are just too great to say they talk about a different Jesus. There is only one Jesus.

Yet when it comes to prophecy, some people see the little differences and say they are all different events. One prominent pre-trib author even when so far as to say there are four different sun and moon going dark events in prophecy. These people ignore the great similarities and only see tiny differences. I think these people are not consistent in their hermeneutics. To be consistent they should say there was four different guys named Jesus.

But even more, I think there is objective proof how we handle situations like this. There is a area of math called statistics that handles this type of situation. Unfortunately most people have never studied this. I really think this gets to the heart of the eschatology issue. Similarities verses differences. What is significant? Some people yes; others say no. Very few theologians have ever studied higher math that could help.

Same too that many theologians have never studied logic. If they have, most of their logic experience is not is real world situations. For example, I spent 10 years as a computer programmer. That's over 20,000 hours of doing logic. If I made mistakes, of which I made plenty, I got real world feedback. I had to consistently test and prove my logic worked. Even so much as a colon verses a semicolon would crash the program. But those were the easy mistakes to find. It was the complex mistakes in well over a million lines of code that were tough to find. They did not crash the program but slowly corrupted data over years. Or they worked fine for 999 out of 1000 situations. But when you hit that 1 in a 1000 case, they did not work. Sometimes there wasn't even much evidence of a mistake. They were the hard bugs to track down.

When I see many theologians do eschatology I just laugh at how they would do as a programmer. I serious consider making my older children doing computer programming just as a training ground to help their Bible study. I even bet a few people here are computer programmers and can vouch for the importance of what I say. I'm sure some mathematicians would say the same bout their work.

So, if people see differences where I see similarities, what can I say? We all have difference experiences and knowledge that form our thinking. Some people obviously are way better than others in some areas. Here on this forum all are welcome to participate. Some are experts in language, some in logic, some in keeping the peace. All are needed.

But if people see differences where I see similarities, some see a red moon and dark moon being totally different, then there is not much more to say. They are going to keep the same logic in all other areas. There is not much left to discuss. I mean there is a lot to discuss; it is just we don't agree on the same toolset by which to solve problems.



You Quote:
benny,

I think your logic is so whacked out I do not even know where to begin. I will touch a few things though.

I disagree that there is a significant difference between the Scripture passages where the sun and moon go dark. How exact do the words have to be to match? Have you ever seen a lunar eclipse? Usually during a total lunar eclipse, the moon does go red before and afterwards. It also depends on your location on earth whether the moon goes totally dark or whether is just gets red and darkens.

To say there is a difference between the moon going black and the moon going red does not match what happens in real life. So your saying the passages do not match up begs the questions how dark does the moon have to get to be totally dark, what location are we going to use for a reference, is the moon going red part of a total lunar eclipse or just something before and after? What about a partial lunar eclipse? Does that count?

This is the same mistake used on many of the second coming/rapture passages. Each passage is a little different but some people use these small differences to say they are not the same event. Some of us say they are the same event but the small differences are just because they have a little different perspective.

I guess I would ask this question. Are the four gospels about one Jesus or four? At least John is very different from the first three gospels. Does John talk about a different Jesus? I am guessing everybody would agree the similarities between the gospels are just too great to say they talk about a different Jesus. There is only one Jesus.

Yet when it comes to prophecy, some people see the little differences and say they are all different events. One prominent pre-trib author even when so far as to say there are four different sun and moon going dark events in prophecy. These people ignore the great similarities and only see tiny differences. I think these people are not consistent in their hermeneutics. To be consistent they should say there was four different guys named Jesus.

My Reply:
No Morpheus,......What you seem to refuse to acknowledge, is that anytime there is a word change of description,..there is a reason for it and believe me,..the Holy Spirit does not make mistakes.
Obviously,..you are not aware that the four gospels had different groups of people in mind.
Brother Mark S. posted a topic pointing this out and I believe that he did an excellent job in presenting this fact in which I am in agreement with.
Allow me to post that link pertaining to his post.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=33426

Basicly,..you are trying to claim that Matthew 24;29 are the same as Joel 2;31
First of all...Matthew 24;29 occurs "29“Immediately after the distress of those days"
And as soon as ..."the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’
Then!....."30“At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory

Now to point something out.
there is a time limit for when one can make a descision to come to Jesus.
If one has enter the Bowl judgements without coming to Jesus in their heart and evidencing their faith by works before the bowl judgements,..then it is too late!
In Joel 2;32And everyone who calls

on the name of the Lord will be saved;

for on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem

there will be deliverance,

as the Lord has said,

among the survivors

whom the Lord calls.

Joel 2;32 will not fit scripturally into the time frame of Matthew 24;29

Joel 2;32 must occur before it is too late,..because here we see that Joel 32 suggests that the invitation to come to the Lord is still open,...but one must also keep in mind that these are not saved by grace as we today are,..but instead these must evidence their faith by works.
So as I pointed out earlier,..anytime there is a word change,..there is definately a reason for it.

The Bride does not enter Daniels 70th week and Daniels 70th week is designed to bring Israel unto repentance and say the following words..."Blessed is He that comes in the name of the Lord"

The earthquake in revelation 6;12 is not the same earthquake as in revelation 16;18
also if you will take notice,.....the Sun nor the moon is not mentioned in revelation chapter 16....in which the bowl judgements occur prior to the Lord returning.
I could go on and on and reveal the differences and include proving that they occur in different time frames.

The beginning of the Joel 3 Day of the Lord and the Second Coming of Christ immediately after the Great Tribulation are not the same as those of the sixth seal. First, the cosmic disturbances of Joel 3 will occur when the armies of the nations have gathered for war in Israel. Those armies will not begin to gather for war until the sixth bowl has been poured out (Rev. 16:12-16+), long after the sixth seal—one seal, seven trumpets, and five bowls after the cosmic disturbances of the sixth seal. . . . other cosmic disturbances will occur after those of the sixth seal. A third of the sun, moon, and stars will be darkened by the fourth trumpet (Rev. 8:12+); the sun will be darkened by smoke from the abyss at the fifth trumpet (Rev. 9:1-2+); the sun will scorch people on the earth with fire and fierce heat when the fourth bowl is poured out (Rev. 16:8-9+). . . . when the cosmic disturbances of the sixth seal take place, kings, military men, and all other classes of people will run to the caves and rocks of the mountains to hide. . . . By contrast, when the cosmic disturbances immediately before the Joel 3 Day of the Lord occur after the sixth bowl, the kings and military men will not run and hide. Rather, they will remain assembled together in battle array to boldly attempt war against God, His Messiah, and the holy angels (Ps. 2:1-3; Joel 3:9-16; Zec. 12:2-9; 14:1-6, 12-14).10
User avatar
benny balerio
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 10:00 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Mon Jul 18, 2011 11:50 am

Hi mark,

Then the text would not have said, "in his OWN time."

It would have said, "in the time appointed for him."

Why would the text say one thing, if it really means something else?
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby benny balerio on Mon Jul 18, 2011 11:58 am

watching wrote:Hi mark,

Then the text would not have said, "in his OWN time."

It would have said, "in the time appointed for him."

Why would the text say one thing, if it really means something else?

Well actually,.....what you and Mark have stated here translates into the same meaning of interpretation,...so I see your argument as redundit.
User avatar
benny balerio
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 10:00 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:12 pm

Hi benny,

So, if you wanted to make an appointment with your doctor.....

And your doctor said, "you don't really need to hurry to make your next appointment, you can come in your OWN time."

Does that mean that your doctor needs to see you back in two weeks?
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby benny balerio on Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:31 pm

watching wrote:Hi benny,

So, if you wanted to make an appointment with your doctor.....

And your doctor said, "you don't really need to hurry to make your next appointment, you can come in your OWN time."

Does that mean that your doctor needs to see you back in two weeks?


The antichrist will not appear until his appointed time,..which time was fore known by the Creator before the foundations of the earth.
Many of the prophets spoke of the coming of the antichrist who were inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Daniels 70th week is designed to bring Israel into repentance,..and the antichrist is a tool used by the Lord for that purpose.
The antichrist cannot appear onto the world scene until the "Fullness of the Gentiles" has come to pass,..in which afterwards,..the Lord will deal with Israel.

In other words..the antichrist will appear at his appointed time....In his time has the same meaning.
User avatar
benny balerio
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 10:00 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:35 pm

Then how is it his OWN time?
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby benny balerio on Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:45 pm

watching wrote:Then how is it his OWN time?


Either you come to the conclusion that it means in a time appointed by the Lord for His design and purpose,...or you erroneously suggest that the antichrist chooses when he will come onto the world scene,
when he thinks it's time to do so.But then it comes back to satan,..as to when God gives permission for the Devil to influence the antichrist to make his mark on the world.
The Lord will not allow the antichrist to come on the scene not until the "Fullness of the Geniles" has come in.
Again,..the ac will appear in his appointed time.
User avatar
benny balerio
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 10:00 am

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby mark s on Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:51 pm

If I have an appointment in two weeks, I can't come in next week. I have to wait. I have a time set aside for me. That's my own time.

This is how I read it.

It seems that you are thinking that the man of sin will choose the time?

I think it's been chosen for him.
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 11494
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

Postby watching on Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:07 pm

Hi mark,
mark s wrote:If I have an appointment in two weeks, I can't come in next week. I have to wait. I have a time set aside for me. That's my own time.


Then you are not seeing your doctor in your OWN time.

You are seeing your doctor in the time that he has prescribed for you, unless your doctor were to tell you to come whenever you want. Then you would be seeing your doctor in your OWN time.

2:6 καὶ νῦν τὸ κατέχον οἴδατε εἰς τὸ ἀποκαλυφθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ ἑαυτοῦ καιρῷ


And now you know what withholdeth UNTO the revealing of him in his OWN time.

If you are seeing your doctor during the time that HE HAS ALLOTTED FOR YOU, then you are NOT seeing your doctor in YOUR OWN TIME. You are seeing your doctor in the time that he has scheduled for you.
Last edited by watching on Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
watching
 
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Prophecy Debate Area

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests