The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, Not Michael the Archangel

[watching]

You are converting ancient Koine Greek to English, then arguing the English idioms.

That might be true, but the point is, that Paul used an expression of DOUBLE OWNERSHIP in terms of the revealing of the man of sin, for some reason.

Because he didn't just say, "............unto the revealing of him in his time," but rather, "............unto the revealing of him in the time of himSELF."

This is an expression of double ownership, by the man of sin, concerning the time of his revealing.

So, this must have been done for a reason, regardless of whether this might be an idiom in the English, or not.

Why not just say, "so that he will not be revealed before his time," or "so that he will be revealed at the appointed time," if that is what Paul meant?

It seems that it would have been just as easy to say that.

So, why call it, "the time of himSELF" or more precisely, "in the HIMSELF'S time" or as we would say, "in HIMSELF'S time?"

Well, maybe, we wouldn't say it that way, but that is how that would actually translate.

So, why call it, "himself's time" rather than just, "his time?"

In any case, there must be some reason for why Paul stated it that way.

Wouldn't you say?

[Douggg]

So, are you saying that the anti-Christ will simply just be a man that will be born sometime in history, who will somehow manage to take over the world, without there being any premeditation involved BY ANYONE OR ANYTHING, and the system that will be in place for him to do that, will have occurred BY ACCIDENT?

I am saying that the day the Antichrist man will be born is set by God because God is the creator.

Because that is certainly not impression, that I get, based on what the apostle, John, had to say about the anti-Christ.

1 John 4:3
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

Explain what you believe the spirit of antichrist and the mystery of iniquity are. "anti" meaning "against" and "in lieu of".

When the Antichrist's own time in history does come, he will be revealed as the man of sin by going into the temple of God and declares that he is God. Even so, at that particular point in history, there would be a great falling away first. The great falling away is during the first three and half years (nominally) of the Antichrist's time.

So, are you saying that the anti-Christ will be revealed three and half years before he is revealed?

The revealing in both verse 3 and verse 6 has to do with revealing him as the man of sin.

3Let 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;

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

The Antichrist is revealed as the man of sin when he goes into the temple and declares that he is God. But as a false messiah to the Jews, he confirms the Mt. Sinai covenant in Daniel 9:26-27, 3 1/2 years earlier.

Thus, people will believe that he is the messiah and not Jesus - which is the great falling away - that precedes him going into the temple and declaring himself to be God.

Doug L.

[watching]

I am saying that the day the Antichrist man will be born is set by God because God is the creator.

Hi Douggg,

Of course God has providence over everything, because he is God, but that doesn't mean that He doesn't give everyone, including, Satan, freewill.

Explain what you believe the spirit of antichrist and the mystery of iniquity are. "anti" meaning "against" and "in lieu of".

That's easy, Christ.

The Antichrist is revealed as the man of sin when he goes into the temple and declares that he is God. But as a false messiah to the Jews, he confirms the Mt. Sinai covenant in Daniel 9:26-27, 3 1/2 years earlier.

I don't want to derail this thread, but if the part, in Daniel 9:27, about confirming the covenant, were about the anti-Christ, then wouldn't that reveal him?

Besides that, I don't think anyone can CONFIRM the Mt. Sinai covenant, other than God (God/Jesus/Holy Spirit).

[Douggg]

Explain what you believe the spirit of antichrist and the mystery of iniquity are. "anti" meaning "against" and "in lieu of".

That's easy, Christ.

Hi watching, then would not the spirit of antichrist mean being against the truth that Jesus is the messiah? Thus, someone having that spirit, since in their view Jesus is not the messiah, then someone else must be - that is the "in lieu of" part. Right now, the "in lieu of" part has not be fulfilled because the Antichrist man has not arrived as the false messiah.

The Antichrist is revealed as the man of sin when he goes into the temple and declares that he is God. But as a false messiah to the Jews, he confirms the Mt. Sinai covenant in Daniel 9:26-27, 3 1/2 years earlier.

I don't want to derail this thread, but if the part, in Daniel 9:27, about confirming the covenant, were about the anti-Christ, then wouldn't that reveal him.

Yes, it would reveal that the Antichrist for who he is - if there wasn't a requirement in the bible that the Mt. Sinai covenant, the law, be confirmed every 7 years. So, as the messiah, he will have a biblical basis for setting the 7 year cycle active again.

Besides that, I don't think anyone can CONFIRM the Mt. Sinai covenant, other than God (God/Jesus/Holy Spirit).

The requirement that the Mt. Sinai covenant be confirmed every seven years is right in the bible. I asked the administrator of the Judaism Messiah Truth countermissionary site if this requirement is being done. He said no, because it has to be done from the Temple Mount, the place of God's choosing.

Deuteronomy 31:10And Moses commanded them, saying, At the end of every seven years, in the solemnity of the year of release, in the feast of tabernacles, 11When all Israel is come to appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose, thou shalt read this law before all Israel in their hearing.

[benny balerio]

And, in fact, the phenomena prophesied, specifically, “the moon became blood”, cannot occur if the sun is actually darkened. If the sun were not emitting light, the moon would not either, of any color. The moon appears red during a lunar eclipse because the sun’s light is still reaching it. If the sun were to be darkened, none of the sun’s light would reach the moon, and it would not have any light at all.

Hi Mark, I think throw the science book out the window during the great tribulation period. Is there light in heaven where God dwells? God does not need a sun to produce light for a red moon. The powers of heaven will be shaken. God created the universe and He can remove stars, moons, at His will.

That's what Revelation 6, the 6th seal is all about. The second heaven is going to be removed. The second heaven is the home place of Satan and the demons. They are going to be kicked out from the second heaven down to earth because near the end of the 7 years, the universe, the second heaven, which being their abode, is going to be removed. Those UFO's are nothing more than fallen angels.

One might argue that God is not bound by physical laws, and I would of course agree. However, even so, a blood moon is emitting light. Zechariah prophesies there will not be light.

And praise God for that, that we are counting on Him, or else there would not be anything such as the resurrection or rapture.

Zechariah 14:
6And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:
7But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.

The sixth seal does not occur at the end of Daniels 70th week,..but does occur slightly prior to Daniels 70th week.
Do not forget,..the sixth seal is broken up into segments.
Also Matthew 24;30 we see all the tribes mourning,... verses,.....revelation 6;15Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains.

Again we see in revelation 6;14The sky receded like a scroll, rolling up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. ....verses......Matthew 24;29 No mention of the sky or heavens splitting apart like a scroll......only a shaking of the heavens is mentioned.

Also when the Lord is returning to the earth,..we see that the Sun is still in the heavens.

It would seem that the stars that are falling to the earth in revelation 6;13 are meteors and not asteroids.

It seems to me that you are trying to claim that revelation 6;12 through 17 are to occur when the Lord returns to fight at armageddon.
There are too many differences of description in revelation 6;12-17 and the return of the Lord.
1.The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red
verse the difference of "“‘the sun will be darkened,and the moon will not give its light;(No light=no red appearance)

2.It is obvious the earthquakes from revelation 6;14 are not the same as the earthquake in revelation 16;20
in revelation 6;15Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man ........" 16They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us "
verses the difference of:......"revelation 16;20Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found"
This occurs "Before" the appearance of the Lord returning.

3.15Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. 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! 17For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”...........verses in comparison of:......."And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army."

4.“Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!(The Father and the Lamb are in view here).........in comparison too:....."revelation 19;11I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. 12His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 13He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. 14The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. 15Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.”a He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. 16On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:

king of kings and lord of lords. .................."only the Lord Jesus is in view here as He is returning with His armies"





In revelation 6;16-17....I suspect that the earth dwellers were allowed to get a glimpse into heaven just as Stephen had as he was dying.

[Douggg]

It seems to me that you are trying to claim that revelation 6;12 through 17 are to occur when the Lord returns to fight at armageddon.

Actually, benny, I am pinpointing Revelation 6:12 through 17 to take place 45 days before Jesus returns to the Mount of Olives. That the world will see Jesus before the throne of God in heaven (the Sign of the Son of Man in heaven in Matthew 24 that precedes His coming), and that is why the kings of the earth assemble together at Armageddon to make war on him. Revelation 19:19 says that they have gathered together for the express purpose to make war on Him. I think we are agreeing on that part in Revelation 19:19

I get the 45 days from Daniel 12. Those who remain faithful 1335 days from the time the abomination of desolation is setup to be worshiped will be blessed - which will take place on the Day that Jesus returns. That means day 2520 - 1335 days = day 1185 that the AOD will be setup to be worshiped. Add the 1290 days to that and it comes out to day
2475. Which is the day when Revelation 6:12-17 takes place, 45 days before Jesus returns to the Mt. of Olives. During that 45 days, expecting Jesus to come down from heaven to execute judgment on them, the kings of the earth have their armies of the world assemble at Armageddon to try and stop Jesus from returning. Keep in mind that there will be Satan and the cast down angels and demons involved as well. So it will be an awesome event, which we have no comparison to. I pretty sure that Satan is going to be exposed on the Temple mount on that day visible to all, when Jesus descends from heaven to the Mt. of Olives.

There are too many differences of description in revelation 6;12-17 and the return of the Lord.
1.The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red
verse the difference of "“‘the sun will be darkened,and the moon will not give its light;(No light=no red appearance)

It is basically the same. Those who claim a blood red moon (which I am not making that claim) eclipse is because the moon doesn't give its light. Personally, I think that the moon turning red as blood will be much more intense than a blood red moon eclipse. Either way the moon does not give its light.

The parting of the universe, and the sign of the Son of Man in heaven, and the return of the Lord are all tied together, over compressed period of time. It appears to me that the darkening of the Sun takes place near evening (the start of a Jewish day), then when the moon rises, it turns red as blood, then the stars appear to fall from their place, then the universe rolls back parts like a scroll, and the world see the majesty of heaven (the third heaven where God's throne is) and there will be Jesus. His actually descent would be 45 days later, giving the armies of the world time to gather together to try and stop him, as insane as their thinking will be.

2.It is obvious the earthquakes from revelation 6;14 are not the same as the earthquake in revelation 16;20
in revelation 6;15Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man ........" 16They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us "
verses the difference of:......"revelation 16;20Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found"
This occurs "Before" the appearance of the Lord returning.

What are you calling "the appearance of the Lord returning" ? Descending from heaven with his heavenly army of saints? There has to be some reason that the kings of the earth assemble at Armageddon to make war on Jesus. What is that reason to you, benny?

I think the earthquakes in Revelation 6 and 16 take place "before' Jesus descends from heaven with his army of saints. Are they the same earthquake? Probably not.

3.15Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. 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! 17For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”...........verses in comparison of:......."And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army."

Well, what would be the reason that they have gathered together to fight Jesus? It takes time to gather a army together, right? I am saying that they are shakened to the core when the heavens part, and they see Jesus before the throne. And it takes Satan, the Antichrist, and the False Prophet to convince them their recourse is to militarily try to stop Jesus (why do the heathen rage and imagine a vain thing Psalms 2).

In revelation 6;16-17....I suspect that the earth dwellers were allowed to get a glimpse into heaven just as Stephen had as he was dying.

Revelation 6:12-14 is more than a glimpse. Revelation 6:16-17 is a result of Revelation 6:12-14. The Day of the Lord and the wrath of the Lamb has arrived.

It will strike mortal fear into the hearts of those who have been persecuting the tribulation saints. And those who have worshiped the Antichrist and blasphemed the one true God.

To them, who have endured the persecution of the Antichrist and the judgments upon the earth, they will mourn because all their trials will be near an end when the heavens part and they see Jesus before the throne of God who they have committed to.

Doug L.

[benny balerio]

It seems to me that you are trying to claim that revelation 6;12 through 17 are to occur when the Lord returns to fight at armageddon.

Actually, benny, I am pinpointing Revelation 6:12 through 17 to take place 45 days before Jesus returns to the Mount of Olives. That the world will see Jesus before the throne of God in heaven (the Sign of the Son of Man in heaven in Matthew 24 that precedes His coming), and that is why the kings of the earth assemble together at Armageddon to make war on him. Revelation 19:19 says that they have gathered together for the express purpose to make war on Him. I think we are agreeing on that part in Revelation 19:19

I get the 45 days from Daniel 12. Those who remain faithful 1335 days from the time the abomination of desolation is setup to be worshiped will be blessed - which will take place on the Day that Jesus returns. That means day 2520 - 1335 days = day 1185 that the AOD will be setup to be worshiped. Add the 1290 days to that and it comes out to day
2475. Which is the day when Revelation 6:12-17 takes place, 45 days before Jesus returns to the Mt. of Olives. During that 45 days, expecting Jesus to come down from heaven to execute judgment on them, the kings of the earth have their armies of the world assemble at Armageddon to try and stop Jesus from returning. Keep in mind that there will be Satan and the cast down angels and demons involved as well. So it will be an awesome event, which we have no comparison to. I pretty sure that Satan is going to be exposed on the Temple mount on that day visible to all, when Jesus descends from heaven to the Mt. of Olives.

There are too many differences of description in revelation 6;12-17 and the return of the Lord.
1.The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red
verse the difference of "“‘the sun will be darkened,and the moon will not give its light;(No light=no red appearance)

It is basically the same. Those who claim a blood red moon (which I am not making that claim) eclipse is because the moon doesn't give its light. Personally, I think that the moon turning red as blood will be much more intense than a blood red moon eclipse. Either way the moon does not give its light.

The parting of the universe, and the sign of the Son of Man in heaven, and the return of the Lord are all tied together, over compressed period of time. It appears to me that the darkening of the Sun takes place near evening (the start of a Jewish day), then when the moon rises, it turns red as blood, then the stars appear to fall from their place, then the universe rolls back parts like a scroll, and the world see the majesty of heaven (the third heaven where God's throne is) and there will be Jesus. His actually descent would be 45 days later, giving the armies of the world time to gather together to try and stop him, as insane as their thinking will be.

2.It is obvious the earthquakes from revelation 6;14 are not the same as the earthquake in revelation 16;20
in revelation 6;15Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man ........" 16They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us "
verses the difference of:......"revelation 16;20Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found"
This occurs "Before" the appearance of the Lord returning.

What are you calling "the appearance of the Lord returning" ? Descending from heaven with his heavenly army of saints? There has to be some reason that the kings of the earth assemble at Armageddon to make war on Jesus. What is that reason to you, benny?

I think the earthquakes in Revelation 6 and 16 take place "before' Jesus descends from heaven with his army of saints. Are they the same earthquake? Probably not.

3.15Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. 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! 17For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”...........verses in comparison of:......."And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army."

Well, what would be the reason that they have gathered together to fight Jesus? It takes time to gather a army together, right? I am saying that they are shakened to the core when the heavens part, and they see Jesus before the throne. And it takes Satan, the Antichrist, and the False Prophet to convince them their recourse is to militarily try to stop Jesus (why do the heathen rage and imagine a vain thing Psalms 2).

In revelation 6;16-17....I suspect that the earth dwellers were allowed to get a glimpse into heaven just as Stephen had as he was dying.

Revelation 6:12-14 is more than a glimpse. Revelation 6:16-17 is a result of Revelation 6:12-14. The Day of the Lord and the wrath of the Lamb has arrived.

It will strike mortal fear into the hearts of those who have been persecuting the tribulation saints. And those who have worshiped the Antichrist and blasphemed the one true God.

To them, who have endured the persecution of the Antichrist and the judgments upon the earth, they will mourn because all their trials will be near an end when the heavens part and they see Jesus before the throne of God who they have committed to.

Doug L.

Sorry that I did not respond to this sooner, but I was without internet for a few months.
In responce, my question to you is:Are you suggesting that the sixth seal occurs after the distress of those days?
Also,revelation 16 does not indicate that that armies of the world coward and hide in the rocks at the sign of the Son of Man.
Psalms 2;
1Why do the nations conspirea

and the peoples plot in vain?

2The kings of the earth take their stand

and the rulers gather together

against the Lord

and against his Anointed One.b

3“Let us break their chains,” they say,

“and throw off their fetters.”


Again,....according to Joel 2;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.
And that Matthew 24 has it that the sun was darkened and the moon did not give its light "after" the great tribulation.
I see here two different descriptions.

In revelation 16;10 reads the following:
10The fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom was plunged into darkness. Men gnawed their tongues in agony 11and cursed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, but they refused to repent of what they had done.
I believe that the fifth angel pours out Gods bowl of wrath prior to the seventh angels pouring out.
My point here is that I believe that the bowl wrath judgements 1thru 7 are all judgements consisting of Gods Wrath,and that the world was very much aware that the Wrath of God was being activated prior to the great earthquake of revelation 16;20.
But in revelation 6;12-14 are the events that cause the world to realize that the Wrath of God has been activated.
Once revelation 6;15-17 has come to pass, then afterwards,the 144,000 from the 12 tribes of Israel are sealed.
I believe that the earthquake of revelation 16;20 renovates the whole earth.

[watching]

Hi Benny,

I'm glad you brought this thread back up.

I'm also glad I'm not the only one who thinks about old threads.

Actually this not in response to what you just said.

But, I had, actually, been wanting to comment about something that I couldn't figure out at the time of this thread.

However, I think I was able to figure it out later.

From what I remember, I was having a problem, at the time, trying to figure out what "ek mesou genitai" (out of the middle OF he becomes) was referring to.

Or more specifically, I couldn't figure out, the middle OF WHAT?

For anyone that doesn't remember (which is probably everyone, by now), here is what I had said about how
2 Thessalonians 2:7 reads in Greek.

2:7 τὸ (the) γὰρ (for) μυστήριον (mystery) ἤδη (is already) ἐνεργεῖται (at work) τῆς (of) ἀνομίας (iniquity) μόνον (only) ὁ (the) κατέχων (one who holds) ἄρτι (now) ἕως (until) ἐκ (out of) μέσου (the middle of) γένηται (he becomes).

And here is how this would read in English:

For the mystery is already at work of iniquity: only the one who holds now until out of the middle of (?) he becomes.

Anyway, back when I was trying to translate this verse, at the time that this thread was in progress, I couldn't figure out what "the middle of" was referring to.

At the time I thought that maybe there was a word missing or something, because "middle of" when it's in the possessive form, (as is the case with the word "mesou" in 2 Thessalonians 2:7) has to refer to the middle of something.

And at the time, I couldn't figure out what.

Then one day, some time after this thread had become old news, it finally dawned on me.

However, I didn't try to comment on it, because I couldn't remember what the name of the thread was, by then. Plus I didn't think anyone would be interested any more at that point (which may very well still be the case).

But, nevertheless, what happened was, I was thinking about this thread one day, and I thought to myself.......if I had said what the above translation says, but in the way Greek is spoken today (which is quite different from the Koine Greek).....what would I mean?

And then it immediately dawned on me, that I would have been referring to what I had just mentioned.

In other words, I would have been referring to the mystery of iniquity.

So, basically, what I'm trying to say is, that it seems to me that the sentence should read as follows:

For the mystery of iniquity is already at work: only he who now holds [will hold] until out of it's middle he becomes.

So, the next question is...........

The middle of what exactly? The middle of the mystery? Or the middle of the iniquity?

Well, there's a way to solve that dilemma, as well.

Because the word "mesou" is in the neuter gender.

See link below:

http://www.laparola.net/greco/parola.php?p=%CE%BC%E1%BD%B3%CF%83%CE%BF%CF%82

So, it can't be referring to the iniquity, because iniquity is in the feminine gender, and the genders would have to match.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G458&t=KJV

In other words, if it were referring to the iniquity, then "mesou" (the middle of) would have been rendered in the femine gender, which would be pronounced "mesies" (I can't copy and paste the word, but it looks something like this: "mesns.") See link below:

http://www.laparola.net/greco/parola.php?p=%CE%BC%E1%BD%B3%CF%83%CE%BF%CF%82

Therefore, it has to be referring to the "mystery." Because "mystery" is in the neuter gender, just like the word "mesou."

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3466&t=KJV

So, here's how I would translate the sentence, at this point:

For the mystery is already at work of iniquity: only he who now holds [will hold] until out of it's middle/midst (the mystery's) he becomes.

So, the focus is on the "mystery."

Also, the fact that the focus is on the "mystery" is further reinforced by the way this sentence was worded in the Greek.

In the Greek it doesn't say "for the mystery of iniquity is already at work......" ("τὸ γὰρ μυστήριον τῆς ἀνομίας ἤδη ἐνεργεῖται....")

But rather, "for the mystery is already at work of iniquity....." ("τὸ γὰρ μυστήριον ἤδη ἐνεργεῖται τῆς ἀνομίας....")

As you can see, this is actually a rather peculiar word order.

But the fact that the focus is on the "mystery," however, explains the reason for the word order.

To see what is meant by mystery, see definition here:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex ... 3466&t=KJV

But remember, this is speaking of the mystery of iniquity.

So, the point is.........

.....this is what the "katexwn" is either being "taken out of" or "coming into existence from."

To be more specific, he is not being taken out of (or coming into being from) the "iniquity."

But, rather, he is being taken out of (or coming into being from) the "mystery" of iniquity.

So, in light of the above, what makes mores sense?

Is this talking about the Holy Spirit, or the man of sin, or Michael the Archangel?

[benny balerio]

Hi Benny,

I'm glad you brought this thread back up.

I'm also glad I'm not the only one who thinks about old threads.

Actually this not in response to what you just said.

But, I had, actually, been wanting to comment about something that I couldn't figure out at the time of this thread.

However, I think I was able to figure it out later.

From what I remember, I was having a problem, at the time, trying to figure out what "ek mesou genitai" (out of the middle OF he becomes) was referring to.

Or more specifically, I couldn't figure out, the middle OF WHAT?

For anyone that doesn't remember (which is probably everyone, by now), here is what I had said about how
2 Thessalonians 2:7 reads in Greek.

2:7 τὸ (the) γὰρ (for) μυστήριον (mystery) ἤδη (is already) ἐνεργεῖται (at work) τῆς (of) ἀνομίας (iniquity) μόνον (only) ὁ (the) κατέχων (one who holds) ἄρτι (now) ἕως (until) ἐκ (out of) μέσου (the middle of) γένηται (he becomes).

And here is how this would read in English:

For the mystery is already at work of iniquity: only the one who holds now until out of the middle of (?) he becomes.

Anyway, back when I was trying to translate this verse, at the time that this thread was in progress, I couldn't figure out what "the middle of" was referring to.

At the time I thought that maybe there was a word missing or something, because "middle of" when it's in the possessive form, (as is the case with the word "mesou" in 2 Thessalonians 2:7) has to refer to the middle of something.

And at the time, I couldn't figure out what.

Then one day, some time after this thread had become old news, it finally dawned on me.

However, I didn't try to comment on it, because I couldn't remember what the name of the thread was, by then. Plus I didn't think anyone would be interested any more at that point (which may very well still be the case).

But, nevertheless, what happened was, I was thinking about this thread one day, and I thought to myself.......if I had said what the above translation says, but in the way Greek is spoken today (which is quite different from the Koine Greek).....what would I mean?

And then it immediately dawned on me, that I would have been referring to what I had just mentioned.

In other words, I would have been referring to the mystery of iniquity.

So, basically, what I'm trying to say is, that it seems to me that the sentence should read as follows:

For the mystery of iniquity is already at work: only he who now holds [will hold] until out of it's middle he becomes.

So, the next question is...........

The middle of what exactly? The middle of the mystery? Or the middle of the iniquity?

Well, there's a way to solve that dilemma, as well.

Because the word "mesou" is in the neuter gender.

See link below:

http://www.laparola.net/greco/parola.php?p=%CE%BC%E1%BD%B3%CF%83%CE%BF%CF%82

So, it can't be referring to the iniquity, because iniquity is in the feminine gender, and the genders would have to match.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G458&t=KJV

In other words, if it were referring to the iniquity, then "mesou" (the middle of) would have been rendered in the femine gender, which would be pronounced "mesies" (I can't copy and paste the word, but it looks something like this: "mesns.") See link below:

http://www.laparola.net/greco/parola.php?p=%CE%BC%E1%BD%B3%CF%83%CE%BF%CF%82

Therefore, it has to be referring to the "mystery." Because "mystery" is in the neuter gender, just like the word "mesou."

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3466&t=KJV

So, here's how I would translate the sentence, at this point:

For the mystery is already at work of iniquity: only he who now holds [will hold] until out of it's middle/midst (the mystery's) he becomes.

So, the focus is on the "mystery."

Also, the fact that the focus is on the "mystery" is further reinforced by the way this sentence was worded in the Greek.

In the Greek it doesn't say "for the mystery of iniquity is already at work......" ("τὸ γὰρ μυστήριον τῆς ἀνομίας ἤδη ἐνεργεῖται....")

But rather, "for the mystery is already at work of iniquity....." ("τὸ γὰρ μυστήριον ἤδη ἐνεργεῖται τῆς ἀνομίας....")

As you can see, this is actually a rather peculiar word order.

But the fact that the focus is on the "mystery," however, explains the reason for the word order.

To see what is meant by mystery, see definition here:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex ... 3466&t=KJV

But remember, this is speaking of the mystery of iniquity.

So, the point is.........

.....this is what the "katexwn" is either being "taken out of" or "coming into existence from."

To be more specific, he is not being taken out of (or coming into being from) the "iniquity."

But, rather, he is being taken out of (or coming into being from) the "mystery" of iniquity.

So, in light of the above, what makes mores sense?

Is this talking about the Holy Spirit, or the man of sin, or Michael the Archangel?

John 15:5
I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.
If it had not been for the Lord, we could not of our ownselves restrain the sin in our lives.
One person said..."I am not going to start going to church until I quit doing this and quit doing that"....Without Jesus you can do nothing,..it is not in your own power.

John 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John 14:17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John 14:26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

1 John 4:4
You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.

Acts 4:31
After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.

When the "Fullness of the Gentiles" have come in,the church age will be over, and the Holy Spirit which restraineth sin, will be taken out of the way.He takes the christians who are filled with the Holy Spirit with Him when He is taken out of the way.

[watching]

Hi Benny,

I don't doubt that the Holy Spirit restrains sin.

I just doubt that that is what 2 Thessalonians 2:7 is talking about.

I guess there is no harm in believing that the Holy Spirit is what is "taken out of the way."

The harm only comes when one teaches that in order to negate or switch the order of verse 3.

(Just to be clear, I'm not referring to you when I say that. I'm referring to the prominent "teachers" of Bible Prophecy, who teach people like you and me.)

[benny balerio]

Hi Benny,

I don't doubt that the Holy Spirit restrains sin.

I just doubt that that is what 2 Thessalonians 2:7 is talking about.

I guess there is no harm in believing that the Holy Spirit is what is "taken out of the way."

The harm only comes when one teaches that in order to negate or switch the order of verse 3.

(Just to be clear, I'm not referring to you when I say that. I'm referring to the prominent "teachers" of Bible Prophecy, who teach people like you and me.)

Hope this helps


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prewratho ... sage/15836

[Exit40]

HI Watching. I remember well that post, it has stuck with me as I have tried to figure it out also. I have been coming to a conclusion of sorts that what he becomes out of the middle of is the apostacy, the falling away.

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;

When 'he' is taken out of the way, or lets, and I really don't know who this is, then the lie of satan flourishes, with the help of strong delusion.

2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be ****** who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

For true believers I suppose it will be a mystery of how anyone can believe this bunk coming from this apostate liar, the son of perdition.

God Bless You

David

PS. Welcome back Benny !

[Mrs. B]

The Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, not Michael the Archangel...

Jesus is God manifested in the Flesh......Jesus said If you have seen me, you have seen the Father...
I and My Father are one......
Jesus has manifested the Father.....in the Flesh, Spirit, and soul or as man...

So in this end time.......satan, will be manifested in the flesh......
Daniel 8:9.....And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed excedding great, toward the south and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land..
10...And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped uppon them.
11...Yea, he magnified himself even (against) to the prince of the host, and by him....
the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down....
12...And An (Or, the host was given over for the transgression against the daily sacrifice)by reason of Transgression,. and
it CAST DOWN The TRUTH to the ground; and it practised, and prospered....

Untruth will be more popular then the Truth......the a/c spirit and false teaching will become more populara then the Truth...The Truth is cast down and Untruth becomes more popular...

The a/c will wax great and magnifiy himself against Jesus....and by the (deception the false christ satan) will cause the Daily Sacrifice to be taken away...(the doors to salvation will be closed)

The Daily Sacrifice is Jesus......He is daily or ever present....without Jesus Blood there is no salvation....
Example...
the ten virgins.....5 wise and five foolish.....
Jesus said to the foolish....the door is shut...
The door to salvation will be closed because of sin....false teaching and false believing
IThe Church does not save you.......Jesus saves us.....You Must Know HIm...
Jesus said...I never knew you....depart from me....ye workers of iniquity.....We must Be Born Again of the Water and of the Spirit......A New Birth John 3:3


Mrs. B

[watching]

Hi Benny and Exit 40,

I've been really busy today, so I haven't really had a chance to reply, until now.

Anyway, these are my thoughts.

First of all, Benny, I would just like to say, that I would be interested in seeing some examples of the phrase "ἐκ μέσου γένηται" (ek mesou genitai) "out of the middle he becomes" in other writings.

This is a very odd way to say "taken out of the way," imo, no matter what language someone is speaking.

For instance, if you wanted to say that someone was taken out of the way, in English, would you say, "Out of the middle he became?"

As for the Greek, I have not seen that phrase anywhere in the New Testament, or in the LXX.

So, if there are other writings out there, that have that phrase in them, I would definitely like to see them.

In any case, if Paul wanted to say that someone was "taken" out of the way, why not say it the way that it is normally said and use the word "αἴρω" (airo) for "taken?"

[url]http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G142&t=KJV[/ur]

So, this is not just a matter of looking up words in the dictionary and trying to put them together.

It's a matter of what these words mean, and how they are usually constructed in a sentence.

I will concede, however, that it is possible that this sentence could be understood in at least two different ways, and may, therefore, be ambiguous.

We already know how this verse has been translated in the KJV, but let me just try to explain my logic.

The word "γένηται" basically means "to be made," "to come to be," or "to become," etc.

It's actually related to the word "γέννησις" (gennesis), which means "birth" and also happens to be where we get the
word "Genesis" from.

To verify this just follow the trail of the Root Word (Etymology) in the following link.......

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex ... 1083&t=KJV

......and it will eventually bring you to the word "γίνομαι" (ginomai), which is the root form of the word "genitai."

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1096&t=KJV

Now, as for the word "μέσου" (mesou), as I have said before, whenever a word ends in "ou" that means that it is in, what I would call, the possessive form (I don't know what the technical term is), but it means that it belongs to
something or someone, or that someone or something belongs to it.

However, from what I'm understanding, it can also, apparently, stand alone, as seems to be the case the following verse:

Colossians 2:14

King James Version

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us which was contrary to us and took it out of the way nailing it to his cross

εξαλειψας το καθ ημων χειρογραφον τοις δογμασιν ο ην υπεναντιον ημιν και αυτο ηρκεν εκ του μεσου προσηλωσας αυτο τω σταυρω

Actually, if the above sentence were translated word for word, it would probably read more like this:

Blotting out the against us handwriting of ordinances which was contrary to us and this he lifted out of the middle nailing it to the cross

So, in the above verse, the word "mesou" is apparently speaking about the middle, in general. So even though it is in, what I would call, the possessive form, it apparently just has possession of itself.

Therefore, another way to translate the above verse, would be as follows:

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us which was contrary to us and this he lifted out of what belongs to the middle nailing it to his cross

So, even though "mesou" is in, what I call, the possessive form, it can, apparently, stand alone without creating any problems.

Or it may just be that "ek tou mesou" just happens to be the way, the opposite of "in the middle" (eis to meson) is expressed.

In any case, that still doesn't explain why Paul would use the phrase "out of the middle he becomes" in order to say "taken out of the way."

That's just a very odd way to say that.

Then, there's also the matter that, in the phrase "ek mesou genitai," the word "mesou" is not preceded by an article.

That may not be a big deal, I will admit that sometimes the articles are left off, for whatever reason.

But, then again, could it be that the article was left off, because the article has already been given?

And if "ek mesou," does per chance happen to be referring to something that has already been mentioned, then the only thing that it could be referring to is "the mystery" because "the mystery" happens to be in the neuter gender. And the genders always have to match. So "mystery" would be the only match.

So, if "mesou" were, in fact, referring to something that had already been mentioned, then it wouldn't be necessary to have to repeat the article again.

In other words, it wouldn't be necessary to say, ek "tou" mesou.

Not only that, but, think about it, if the phrase "ek tou mesou" is an expression that means "out of the middle," referring to the middle itself, then if one wanted to refer to the middle of something that was previously mentioned, rather than to the middle itself, then repeating the article would confuse the reader into thinking that the middle itself is what was being referred to, rather than the middle of what was just mentioned.

So, if someone is talking about the middle of something that was just mentioned, and not just the middle itself, then it would seem that they would have to leave the article off, in order to make it clear that the "middle" is referring to something that was just previously mentioned, and not to "the middle" itself. Otherwise the article would not only be repeated, but would also draw emphasis on the middle itself, rather than the middle of what the author was actually referring to.

Okay, now I'm even getting myself cross-eyed, at this point.

So, let me just put it this way.

I think that either "ek mesou" is referring to the middle itself (in other words, the middle in general), and Paul
just simply left off the article, which would have been the article "tou" if it had been included.

Or, Paul purposely left off the article "tou" because to include the article again, would make it appear as if he were referring to the middle itself, and not to the middle of what he had just previously mentioned .

Otherwise, the only way to make that clear would be to mention the word "mystery" again, which would be redundant.

In other words, if Paul were referring to the middle of the "mystery," rather than just to the middle in general, then the only other way to say it would be as follows:

For the mystery is already at work of iniquity: only he who holds now [will hold] until out of the middle of the mystery
he becomes.

So, as you can see that would be redundant.

And if the phrase "ek tou mesou" refers to the middle in general (as in Colossians 2:14), then what other way would
there be for Paul to say it, without sounding redundant?

So, for this reason, I think that it's at least possible that "ek mesou" (the middle OF) may possibly be referring to the "mystery" that was just mentioned, rather than to the middle itself.

So,if nothing else, it seems to me that this phrase can be taken in at least two different ways.

Which, again, still doesn't explain why Paul would use the phrase "out of the middle he becomes" to say "taken out of the way," when that is such an odd way to phrase it.

In fact, I think, just the wording alone, would cause me to question whether the King James, or any other translation, is in fact, what Paul was trying to convey.

Now, getting back to the word "genitai" (the root form of which is "ginomai").....

There are actually 44 verses that use this exact form of the word "ginomai." (see link below)

http://www.laparola.net/greco/index.php?TrovaVers=1&TrovaVers_Esp=%CE%B3%E1%BD%B3%CE%BD%CE%B7%CF%84%CE%B1%CE%B9/%CE%B3%E1%BD%B7%CE%BD%CE%BF%CE%BC%CE%B1%CE%B9

As it turns out, I only had to look at the first four before I found a verse that is very similar to the
structure of the verse in 2 Thessalonians 2:7.....

And that would be Matthew 21:19.

Here is the verse in the KJV:

Matthew 21:19

King James Version (KJV)

19And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away.

The resemblance to the structure of certain words or phrases in 2 Thessalonians 2:7 may not be immediately obvious, but notice how this was written in the Greek.

21:19 καὶ (and) ἰδὼν (seeing) συκῆν (fig tree) μίαν (one) ἐπὶ (upon) τῆς (the) ὁδοῦ (road) ἠλθεν (he came) ἐπ᾽ (upon) αὐτήν (it), καὶ (and) οὐδὲν (nothing) εὗρεν (he found) ἐν (in) αὐτῇ (it) εἰ μὴ (except) φύλλα (leaves) μόνον (only) καὶ (and) λέγει (said) αὐτῇ (to it) Μηκέτι (no longer) ἐκ (out of) σοῦ (you) καρπὸς (fruit) γένηται (should be made) εἰς (unto) τὸν (the) αἰῶνα (age/forever) καὶ (and) ἐξηράνθη (it dried up) παραχρῆμα (instantly) ἡ (the) συκῆ (fig tree)

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Mat&c=21&v=19&t=KJV#conc/19

And now here is how this would read in English:

And seeing a fig tree upon the road he came upon it and found nothing but only leaves and said to it no longer out of you fruit should be made unto forever.

So, based on the way the word "ek" and the word "genitai" were used in the sentence above, what seems more reasonable when you compare this to 2 Thessalonians 2:7.

Does it seem more reasonable to translate "ek mesou genitai" as "taken out of the way?"

Or does it seem more reasonable to translate it as "out of the middle he becomes" ( i.e. ".....is made/comes into being")?

[benny balerio]

Hi Benny and Exit 40,

I've been really busy today, so I haven't really had a chance to reply, until now.

Anyway, these are my thoughts.

First of all, Benny, I would just like to say, that I would be interested in seeing some examples of the phrase "ἐκ μέσου γένηται" (ek mesou genitai) "out of the middle he becomes" in other writings.

This is a very odd way to say "taken out of the way," imo, no matter what language someone is speaking.

For instance, if you wanted to say that someone was taken out of the way, in English, would you say, "Out of the middle he became?"

As for the Greek, I have not seen that phrase anywhere in the New Testament, or in the LXX.

So, if there are other writings out there, that have that phrase in them, I would definitely like to see them.

In any case, if Paul wanted to say that someone was "taken" out of the way, why not say it the way that it is normally said and use the word "αἴρω" (airo) for "taken?"

[url]http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G142&t=KJV[/ur]

So, this is not just a matter of looking up words in the dictionary and trying to put them together.

It's a matter of what these words mean, and how they are usually constructed in a sentence.

I will concede, however, that it is possible that this sentence could be understood in at least two different ways, and may, therefore, be ambiguous.

We already know how this verse has been translated in the KJV, but let me just try to explain my logic.

The word "γένηται" basically means "to be made," "to come to be," or "to become," etc.

It's actually related to the word "γέννησις" (gennesis), which means "birth" and also happens to be where we get the
word "Genesis" from.

To verify this just follow the trail of the Root Word (Etymology) in the following link.......

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex ... 1083&t=KJV

......and it will eventually bring you to the word "γίνομαι" (ginomai), which is the root form of the word "genitai."

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/Lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1096&t=KJV

Now, as for the word "μέσου" (mesou), as I have said before, whenever a word ends in "ou" that means that it is in, what I would call, the possessive form (I don't know what the technical term is), but it means that it belongs to
something or someone, or that someone or something belongs to it.

However, from what I'm understanding, it can also, apparently, stand alone, as seems to be the case the following verse:

Colossians 2:14

King James Version

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us which was contrary to us and took it out of the way nailing it to his cross

εξαλειψας το καθ ημων χειρογραφον τοις δογμασιν ο ην υπεναντιον ημιν και αυτο ηρκεν εκ του μεσου προσηλωσας αυτο τω σταυρω

Actually, if the above sentence were translated word for word, it would probably read more like this:

Blotting out the against us handwriting of ordinances which was contrary to us and this he lifted out of the middle nailing it to the cross

So, in the above verse, the word "mesou" is apparently speaking about the middle, in general. So even though it is in, what I would call, the possessive form, it apparently just has possession of itself.

Therefore, another way to translate the above verse, would be as follows:

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us which was contrary to us and this he lifted out of what belongs to the middle nailing it to his cross

So, even though "mesou" is in, what I call, the possessive form, it can, apparently, stand alone without creating any problems.

Or it may just be that "ek tou mesou" just happens to be the way, the opposite of "in the middle" (eis to meson) is expressed.

In any case, that still doesn't explain why Paul would use the phrase "out of the middle he becomes" in order to say "taken out of the way."

That's just a very odd way to say that.

Then, there's also the matter that, in the phrase "ek mesou genitai," the word "mesou" is not preceded by an article.

That may not be a big deal, I will admit that sometimes the articles are left off, for whatever reason.

But, then again, could it be that the article was left off, because the article has already been given?

And if "ek mesou," does per chance happen to be referring to something that has already been mentioned, then the only thing that it could be referring to is "the mystery" because "the mystery" happens to be in the neuter gender. And the genders always have to match. So "mystery" would be the only match.

So, if "mesou" were, in fact, referring to something that had already been mentioned, then it wouldn't be necessary to have to repeat the article again.

In other words, it wouldn't be necessary to say, ek "tou" mesou.

Not only that, but, think about it, if the phrase "ek tou mesou" is an expression that means "out of the middle," referring to the middle itself, then if one wanted to refer to the middle of something that was previously mentioned, rather than to the middle itself, then repeating the article would confuse the reader into thinking that the middle itself is what was being referred to, rather than the middle of what was just mentioned.

So, if someone is talking about the middle of something that was just mentioned, and not just the middle itself, then it would seem that they would have to leave the article off, in order to make it clear that the "middle" is referring to something that was just previously mentioned, and not to "the middle" itself. Otherwise the article would not only be repeated, but would also draw emphasis on the middle itself, rather than the middle of what the author was actually referring to.

Okay, now I'm even getting myself cross-eyed, at this point.

So, let me just put it this way.

I think that either "ek mesou" is referring to the middle itself (in other words, the middle in general), and Paul
just simply left off the article, which would have been the article "tou" if it had been included.

Or, Paul purposely left off the article "tou" because to include the article again, would make it appear as if he were referring to the middle itself, and not to the middle of what he had just previously mentioned .

Otherwise, the only way to make that clear would be to mention the word "mystery" again, which would be redundant.

In other words, if Paul were referring to the middle of the "mystery," rather than just to the middle in general, then the only other way to say it would be as follows:

For the mystery is already at work of iniquity: only he who holds now [will hold] until out of the middle of the mystery
he becomes.

So, as you can see that would be redundant.

And if the phrase "ek tou mesou" refers to the middle in general (as in Colossians 2:14), then what other way would
there be for Paul to say it, without sounding redundant?

So, for this reason, I think that it's at least possible that "ek mesou" (the middle OF) may possibly be referring to the "mystery" that was just mentioned, rather than to the middle itself.

So,if nothing else, it seems to me that this phrase can be taken in at least two different ways.

Which, again, still doesn't explain why Paul would use the phrase "out of the middle he becomes" to say "taken out of the way," when that is such an odd way to phrase it.

In fact, I think, just the wording alone, would cause me to question whether the King James, or any other translation, is in fact, what Paul was trying to convey.

Now, getting back to the word "genitai" (the root form of which is "ginomai").....

There are actually 44 verses that use this exact form of the word "ginomai." (see link below)

http://www.laparola.net/greco/index.php?TrovaVers=1&TrovaVers_Esp=%CE%B3%E1%BD%B3%CE%BD%CE%B7%CF%84%CE%B1%CE%B9/%CE%B3%E1%BD%B7%CE%BD%CE%BF%CE%BC%CE%B1%CE%B9

As it turns out, I only had to look at the first four before I found a verse that is very similar to the
structure of the verse in 2 Thessalonians 2:7.....

And that would be Matthew 21:19.

Here is the verse in the KJV:

Matthew 21:19

King James Version (KJV)

19And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away.

The resemblance to the structure of certain words or phrases in 2 Thessalonians 2:7 may not be immediately obvious, but notice how this was written in the Greek.

21:19 καὶ (and) ἰδὼν (seeing) συκῆν (fig tree) μίαν (one) ἐπὶ (upon) τῆς (the) ὁδοῦ (road) ἠλθεν (he came) ἐπ᾽ (upon) αὐτήν (it), καὶ (and) οὐδὲν (nothing) εὗρεν (he found) ἐν (in) αὐτῇ (it) εἰ μὴ (except) φύλλα (leaves) μόνον (only) καὶ (and) λέγει (said) αὐτῇ (to it) Μηκέτι (no longer) ἐκ (out of) σοῦ (you) καρπὸς (fruit) γένηται (should be made) εἰς (unto) τὸν (the) αἰῶνα (age/forever) καὶ (and) ἐξηράνθη (it dried up) παραχρῆμα (instantly) ἡ (the) συκῆ (fig tree)

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Mat&c=21&v=19&t=KJV#conc/19

And now here is how this would read in English:

And seeing a fig tree upon the road he came upon it and found nothing but only leaves and said to it no longer out of you fruit should be made unto forever.

So, based on the way the word "ek" and the word "genitai" were used in the sentence above, what seems more reasonable when you compare this to 2 Thessalonians 2:7.

Does it seem more reasonable to translate "ek mesou genitai" as "taken out of the way?"

Or does it seem more reasonable to translate it as "out of the middle he becomes" ( i.e. ".....is made/comes into being")?

Some object to this being the Holy Spirit on the grounds that to katechon in 2 Thessalonians 2:6 is neuter ("what is holding back"). But this is no problem for two reasons: (a) The neuter is sometimes used of the Holy Spirit (John i14:26; 15:26; 16:13-14). (b) In 2 Thessalonians 2:7 the words are masculine: ho katechōn , the one who . . . holds it back. How does He do it? Through Christians, whom He indwells and through whom He works in society to hold back the swelling tide of lawless living. How will He be taken out of the way? When the church leaves the earth in the Rapture, the Holy Spirit will be taken out of the way in the sense that His unique lawlessness-restraining ministry through God's people will be removed (Gen. 6:3). The removal of the Restrainer at the time of the Rapture must obviously precede the day of the Lord. Paul's reasoning is thus a strong argument for the pretribulational Rapture: the Thessalonians were not in the Great Tribulation because the Rapture had not yet occurred.
http://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/ ... pture.html

Once again Hope this helps

[watching]

Hi Benny,

You know, the more I think about this the more convinced I become that there is NO WAY that 2 Thessalonians 2:7 can be be talking about the Holy Spirit, or 2 Thessalonians 2:6, for that matter (at least not according to the typical pre-trib rapture teaching.

Because, aside from everything else that I have discovered about how these verses were written in the original language, and, as a result, from the way I'm understanding it......

.....which, btw, I wish others could understand what I am trying to explain, because it makes perfect sense to me......

....but, aside from that, think about this, Benny......

.....imagine that the rapture has occurred, according to the typical pre-trib teaching, which is the teaching that there
will be a rapture of the saints, and then the anti-Christ will sign a "seven year peace treaty" and then the tribulation will begin, and continue for seven years until Jesus comes back at the end of seven years, at His second coming......

.....okay......that's the typical pre-trib view, right?

So, let's say hypothetically that the rapture happens tomorrow, followed by the anti-Christ signing a "seven year peace treaty."

Now, as you can imagine, there may be some people who had heard the gospel prior to the rapture but didn't believe.

However, the fact that the rapture happened, may very well actually be what was needed, to cause some of these people to believe.

Now, let's say one of those people starts reading the Bible (such as the part played by Kirk Cameron in the Left Behind movie, if I'm remembering correctly) and then he starts to realize what just happened.

Why would Paul not want people to listen to Kirk Cameron?

Why would Paul warn people not to be deceived by anyone telling them that the day of the Lord and our gathering unto Him had come, if not, the falling away, and the man of sin being revealed as described in 2 Thessalonians 2: 3-8 FIRST, if the gathering had in fact already occurred, and the events in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-8 were destined to be fulfilled 3 1/2 years later?

Why would Paul not want people to know that?

Why would Paul not want people to believe the truth?

Besides that, Paul not only said to not to let any one deceive you by word, or by spirit, but he also said to not be deceived BY EVEN AN EPISTLE THAT IS SUPPOSEDLY WRITTEN BY PAUL HIMSELF, that the day of the Lord had come, if not FIRST the apostasy and the man of sin being revealed.

So, why would Paul contradict himself, IN HIS OWN EPISTLE, by saying, in one breath, not to believe anyone if they tell you that the day of the Lord has come, and then in the same breath, a little later, in the VERY SAME EPISTLE, say, in a veiled way, no less (by arbitrarily and for no apparent reason, changing the gender, of what is supposedly the Holy Spirit, even though the Holy Spirit is not even mentioned, and by doing so, imply that the day of the Lord and our gathering together unto Him, WILL, in fact occur, and not just prior to the falling away and the revealing of the man of sin, as described in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-8, but 3 1/2 years prior to that, no less, EVEN THOUGH PAUL, HIMSELF, HAD SAID IN THE VERY SAME EPISTLE, NOT TO BE DECEIVED BY ANYONE IF THEY TRY TO TELL YOU THAT THE DAY OF THE LORD AND OUR GATHERING TOGETHER UNTO HIM HAS HAPPENED, IF NOT FIRST THE FALLING AWAY AND THE MAN OF SIN BEING REVEALED?

So, why would Paul warn the readers of his epistle (2 Thessalonians 2) not to be deceived by anyone telling them that something had happened, if it actually had, in fact, happened/will happen?

Why would Paul not want people to believe the truth?

(This is a rhetorical question, obviously, for anyone that may not understand my sarcasm. )

[benny balerio]

Hi Benny,

You know, the more I think about this the more convinced I become that there is NO WAY that 2 Thessalonians 2:7 can be be talking about the Holy Spirit, or 2 Thessalonians 2:6, for that matter (at least not according to the typical pre-trib rapture teaching.

Because, aside from everything else that I have discovered about how these verses were written in the original language, and, as a result, from the way I'm understanding it......

.....which, btw, I wish others could understand what I am trying to explain, because it makes perfect sense to me......

....but, aside from that, think about this, Benny......

.....imagine that the rapture has occurred, according to the typical pre-trib teaching, which is the teaching that there
will be a rapture of the saints, and then the anti-Christ will sign a "seven year peace treaty" and then the tribulation will begin, and continue for seven years until Jesus comes back at the end of seven years, at His second coming......

.....okay......that's the typical pre-trib view, right?

So, let's say hypothetically that the rapture happens tomorrow, followed by the anti-Christ signing a "seven year peace treaty."

Now, as you can imagine, there may be some people who had heard the gospel prior to the rapture but didn't believe.

However, the fact that the rapture happened, may very well actually be what was needed, to cause some of these people to believe.

Now, let's say one of those people starts reading the Bible (such as the part played by Kirk Cameron in the Left Behind movie, if I'm remembering correctly) and then he starts to realize what just happened.

Why would Paul not want people to listen to Kirk Cameron?

Why would Paul warn people not to be deceived by anyone telling them that the day of the Lord and our gathering unto Him had come, if not, the falling away, and the man of sin being revealed as described in 2 Thessalonians 2: 3-8 FIRST, if the gathering had in fact already occurred, and the events in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-8 were destined to be fulfilled 3 1/2 years later?

Why would Paul not want people to know that?

Why would Paul not want people to believe the truth?

Besides that, Paul not only said to not to let any one deceive you by word, or by spirit, but he also said to not be deceived BY EVEN AN EPISTLE THAT IS SUPPOSEDLY WRITTEN BY PAUL HIMSELF, that the day of the Lord had come, if not FIRST the apostasy and the man of sin being revealed.

So, why would Paul contradict himself, IN HIS OWN EPISTLE, by saying, in one breath, not to believe anyone if they tell you that the day of the Lord has come, and then in the same breath, a little later, in the VERY SAME EPISTLE, say, in a veiled way, no less (by arbitrarily and for no apparent reason, changing the gender, of what is supposedly the Holy Spirit, even though the Holy Spirit is not even mentioned, and by doing so, imply that the day of the Lord and our gathering together unto Him, WILL, in fact occur, and not just prior to the falling away and the revealing of the man of sin, as described in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-8, but 3 1/2 years prior to that, no less, EVEN THOUGH PAUL, HIMSELF, HAD SAID IN THE VERY SAME EPISTLE, NOT TO BE DECEIVED BY ANYONE IF THEY TRY TO TELL YOU THAT THE DAY OF THE LORD AND OUR GATHERING TOGETHER UNTO HIM HAS HAPPENED, IF NOT FIRST THE FALLING AWAY AND THE MAN OF SIN BEING REVEALED?

So, why would Paul warn the readers of his epistle (2 Thessalonians 2) not to be deceived by anyone telling them that something had happened, if it actually had, in fact, happened/will happen?

Why would Paul not want people to believe the truth?

(This is a rhetorical question, obviously, for anyone that may not understand my sarcasm. )

When the Day of the Lord begins,...the world will be keenly aware that it has begun(revelation 6;12 thru 17.

You quote:
.....imagine that the rapture has occurred, according to the typical pre-trib teaching, which is the teaching that there
will be a rapture of the saints, and then the anti-Christ will sign a "seven year peace treaty" and then the tribulation will begin, and continue for seven years until Jesus comes back at the end of seven years, at His second coming......

.....okay......that's the typical pre-trib view, right?

My Reply:
Just for the record,...I believe that the rapture will occur just before Psalms 83/Isaiah 17;1 war breaks out in the middle east, which means we could very well leave this earth at any day now.Then after this war,...the world will be crying "Peace and Safety".....During those days Israel will be dwelling carelessly in peace,...and then the prophecy of Ezekiel 38 will come to pass,..and shortly afterward, the last week of Daniels 70th week will begin.
I believe that the Ezekiel 38 prophecy and revelation 6;12 thru 17 prophecy are one and the same events.

I believe that the Apostasy is occuring at this very moment.Revelation 7;9 reveals an opposite of a great falling away.
So,...once the rapture occurs, and sometime after Ezekiel 38 occurs, then the identity of the anti-christ will be known by many, which I am certain the two witnesses and the 144,000 anointed Jews will be keenly aware of.
But!...Most of Israel will not realize the true identity of the anti-christ, not until the A.O.D. comes to pass.

The Holy Spirit indwells the Believer in Christ Jesus today,......and when the rapture occurs, He will take the Bride with Him.

[watching]

Hi Benny, or anyone else who might be interested,

I have been doing a little more research on the phrase, "ek mesou genitai" and, for one thing, I was able to find the following link, which gives a very similar explantion to what I have been trying to say all along.

Maybe this link will explain it a little better, than I have, so that it makes sense.

Here is the link:

http://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_study/RP355-9-2Thessalonians2v7.htm


However, I still feel that "mesou" might actually be referring back to the word "mystery."

In fact, I feel that I have come to understand more about the phrase "ek mesou genitai," than I did in my prior posts.

But, I don't want to keep boring everyone with my Greek analysis, unless there is someone out there who is truly interested.

I would, however, love to share my findings, if there is anyone out there who is interested. Because, to me, it feels as though I have solved a puzzle. The only problem, however, is that I don't have an answer key, to know if my answer is correct.

That's why I wanted to present my findings, for other to consider, as well. And to see if it makes sense to anyone else, besides me.

Anyway, like I said, I feel as though I have come to understand the structure of this verse/phrase a little more, since my last post. So, if anyone is interested in hearing my explanation, please let me know.

[Exit40]

Hi watching. Don't keep us in suspense, post it. I would love to hear it, probably many others too.

I like that site you provided, thanks for the link.

God Bless You

David

[watching]

Hi Exit 40,

Thanks for being interested.

Okay, to begin with, there are a few things I would like to explain.

As I have pointed out before, when a word ends in "-ou" that is a way of showing possession in the Greek.

We do that in the English by adding "apostrophe s" ('s) to the end of a word. However, in Greek it's done a little differently.

For example, in English, if I wanted to say, "the book belongs to the boy," I would say, that is "the boy's book."

However, in Greek there is a different mindset. In Greek the way that I would express, "the book belongs to the boy," is by saying, that is "the book of the boy."

Okay, that's the first thing that needs to be understood.

Next, the word "ek" means either "out" or "from." It does not actually mean "out of" even though you see it defined that way in the definition:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1537&t=KJV

That's because............and, here is where it get's tricky.........

......the reason "ek" can mean "out of" is because the "OF" part is incorporated into the next word.

This is what I was having a problem understanding.

This is why I couldn't understand why "mesou" was written in, what I call, the possessive form.

That's because I never really thought about what the logistics, or the grammar of it, was.

I only knew what it meant.

So, basically, when the text says, "ek mesou genitai," it doesn't actually translate as:

ek (out of) mesou (the middle) genitai (he becomes)

It actually translates as:

ek (out/from) mesou (OFmiddle/middle OF) genitai (he becomes).

So, the reason "mesou" is written in the possessive form, is because the "OF" part is incorporated into the word, by way of it's conjugation.

Earlier in this thread, if you recall, I had brought up Colossions 2:14.

However, now that I understand the logistics of how the grammar works a little better, I would like to re-translate that verse, once again. Because, by doing so, I think it will help to illustrate, my next point.

So, here is the verse:

Colossians 2:14

King James Version (KJV)

14Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

2:14 ἐξαλείψας τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμῶν χειρόγραφον τοῖς δόγμασιν ὃ ἦν ὑπεναντίον ἡμῖν καὶ αὐτὸ ἦρκεν ἐκ τοῦ μέσου προσηλώσας αὐτὸ τῷ σταυρῷ

And here is how the part in question translates:

καὶ (and) αὐτὸ (it) ἦρκεν (he lifted) ἐκ (out) τοῦ (the) μέσου (OF middle)

So, basically, in English, it translates as follows:

and it he lifted out the OF MIDDLE

I realize this sounds awkward in English, but that is how the above verse would have been expressed in the Koine Greek.

Now, what I would like to point out, next, is that in this sentence there is the article "tou" in between the words "ek" and "mesou."

This, I think, makes a difference in the meaning of the sentence.

Let me try to explain why.

As I pointed out earlier "ek" can mean "out" or it can mean "from."

The inclusion or exclusion of the article, I think, in many cases, is what may be what determines whether the word "ek" was meant to mean "out" or whether it was meant to mean "from."

To illustrate what I mean by this, let me show you another example of a phrase, from another verse in scripture, which is very similar to the phrase in 2 Thessalonians 2:7.

And that would be Luke 3:22

Here is the verse:

Luke 3:22

King James Version (KJV)

22And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

3:22 καὶ καταβῆναι τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον σωματικῷ εἴδει ὡσεὶ περιστερὰν ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν καὶ φωνὴν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ γενέσθαι λέγουσαν, Σὺ εἶ ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός ἐν σοὶ ἠυδόκησα

And here is the part in question:

(btw, "ἐξ" is just another way to say "ἐκ" and "γενέσθαι" is yet another form of the root word "γίνομαι")

ἐξ (out) οὐρανοῦ (of heaven) γενέσθαι (came)

So, as you can see, in this instance "out of heaven" basically means "from heaven." It doesn't mean the voice was "taken away" from heaven. It just means that the voice "came" from heaven.

Now, as you can see, there is no article in the above example.

I think the reason for that is because, even though heaven is a noun, there is no way that heaven can be referring to something else besides heaven, so there really isn't a need for the inclusion of the article, although it could still be included without changing the meaning.

In other words, it could have said, "ek tou ouranou genesthai" (from the heaven came) and the meaning would not have changed.

However, with the word "midst" you could be talking about the "midst, itself" or you could be talking about the "midst of something else."

And this is where I think the importance of the word "tou" comes in.

As I pointed out earlier, in Colossians 2:14 the midst, itself, was being referred to. That's why it said "ek tou mesou." Including the article in this case, makes it clear, that the "midst" itself, is what is being referred to.

However, as I have pointed out, much earlier in this thread..........

.......in the numerous examples in scripture, where the phrase "ek mesou" was used (without the article "τοῦ"), it was always in reference to "out of" or "from" the "midst OF" something else.

See concordance here:

http://concordances.org/greek/mesou_3319.htm

This is what I suspect is the reason for why there is no article between the word "ek" and the word "mesou" in 2 Thessalonians 2:7.........because I think it may very well be possible that the "midst" or the "middle" may be referring to the "midst" of something else.

Because, not only would repeating the article be redundant, but it would also confuse the reader as to what "midst" is
actually referring to. Because, as I said, to say, "ek tou mesou," would clearly be referring to the midst itself.

That's why I think the midst that is being referred to in 2 Thessalonians 2:7 is the "midst" of something else, namely, "the mystery." And that's because "mystery" is the word that matches the gender of "mesou." And the genders always have to match.

That's how I know that it can't be referring to the "midst of the iniquity" because "iniquity" (anomia) is a femine gendered word; and "mesou" is neutral. If it had been referring to the "inquity" (anomia), then "mesos" (the root word of mesou) would have had to have been rendered in the femine form.

So "mesou" has to be referring to "the mystery." Either that, or it is just referring to the midst, itself, and Paul just simply left off the article, because it was not necessary. I can't be 100% sure.

BUT, if "mesou" is referring to the "midst" of the "mystery."

Then, it would pretty much be the same as saying the following:

For the mystery already is at work of iniquity only he who holds now....until from [it's] midst he becomes.

Here is the translation again, so you can see what I mean:

2:7 τὸ (the) γὰρ (for) μυστήριον (mystery) ἤδη (already) ἐνεργεῖται (is at work) τῆς (of) ἀνομίας (iniquity) μόνον (only) ὁ (he) κατέχων (who holds) ἄρτι (now) ἕως (until) ἐκ (from) μέσου (midst OF) γένηται (he becomes).

And here is just the English:

For the mystery already is at work of iniquity only he who holds now....until ....FROM MIDST OF HE BECOMES.

In other words, "......until..... from it's midst he becomes."

Anyway, I hope this makes sense.

Let me know what you think.

[Exit40]

Hi watching. I am going back a bit in this chapter to explain a couple things to myself. See if I am correct here.

2Th 2:6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. ESV

So we know that what restrains him is a ' what ', here used relatively to ' that which ', which must have been already explained, or spoken of. That appears to be here...

2Th 2:3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, ESV

The rebellion is also known as the falling away or the apostasy. So the ' what ' restraining him now, as so far explained, is 'that which ', the rebellion, has to happen first, so that he may be revealed in his time, the son of destruction. Here is the definition of time used here, that is ' his '.

kairos
Part of Speech
masculine noun
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) due measure
2) a measure of time, a larger or smaller portion of time, hence:
a) a fixed and definite time, the time when things are brought to crisis, the decisive epoch waited for
b) opportune or seasonable time
c) the right time
d) a limited period of time
e) to what time brings, the state of the times, the things and events of time

Man I can see how confusing this is trying to nail something down in Greek scholar fashion, of which I am not.
Trying not to get lost here, I'll continue.

2Th 2:7 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.

This is what has confused me, that this was explained in vs 6 as the ' what ', the rebellion, is in fact a ' what ' and in vs 7 it is explained as a ' he '. But, ' he who now ' is the word ' arti '. Here is the definition...

arti
Part of Speech
adverb
Root Word (Etymology)
From a derivative of αἴρω (G142) (cf ἄρτος (G740)) through the idea of suspension
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) just now, this moment
2) now at this time, at this very time, this moment

There is no ' he ' in this definition, only the moment of time that is now, meaning right now. And it is right now that which ( the rebellion which must come first )restrains, or holds back. Here is the definition of the next word restrains...

katechō
Part of Speech
verb
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) to hold back, detain, retain
a) from going away
b) to restrain, hinder (the course or progress of)
1) that which hinders, Antichrist from making his appearance
2) to check a ship's headway i.e. to hold or head the ship
c) to hold fast, keep secure, keep firm possession of
2) to get possession of, take
b) to possess

Interesting now is, regarding the AC making his appearance, ' that which ' hinders, which has already been stated as the rebellion must happen first. Now I am not trying to add to or take away anything from The Word, just trying to examine and explain it. So let me try to reformulate what this verse is apparently trying to say, with the addition of your research, and some parenthesized comments...

'For the mystery ( an unknown thing that causes ) of the rebellion is already at work. Only now that which ( the rebellion, which must come first ) restrains it ( the mystery ) will do so until out of the middle of it ( the Mystery ) he becomes. '

Guess we better look at the word mystery to see what it means...

mystērion
Part of Speech
neuter noun
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) hidden thing, secret, mystery
a) generally mysteries, religious secrets, confided only to the initiated and not to ordinary mortals
b) a hidden or secret thing, not obvious to the understanding
c) a hidden purpose or counsel
1) secret will
a) of men
b) of God: the secret counsels which govern God in dealing with the righteous, which are hidden from ungodly and wicked men but plain to the godly
2) in rabbinic writings, it denotes the mystic or hidden sense
a) of an OT saying
b) of an image or form seen in a vision
c) of a dream

Nothing in particular tips me off here, except maybe the the secret will of ( possibly evil ) men. But this following gives us a better idea...

2Th 2:9 The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders,
2Th 2:10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
2Th 2:11 Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false,
2Th 2:12 in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

So is the mystery the activity of satan ? The power and false signs and wonders, the wicked deception ? Working secretly with the will of evil men ? Maybe...

Hope I didn't mess this up too bad. What say you ?

God Bless You

David

[watching]

This is what has confused me, that this was explained in vs 6 as the ' what ', the rebellion, is in fact a ' what ' and in vs 7 it is explained as a ' he '.

Hi David,

Let me try to explain.

First we need to go back to 2 Thessalonians 2 verse 3:

2 Thessalonians 2:3

King James Version (KJV)

3Let 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;

As you can see there are two (2) things holding back.

In case you are wondering what they are holding back, that is explained in verses 1 and 2:

2 Thessalonians 2:1-2

King James Version (KJV)

1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

So the two things that are holding back are:

1) the falling away ("apostasia," which means a rebellion or a revolt)

2) that the man of sin be revealed

So, one is a "what" and the other is a "he."

Here is a little more information about the "he" who is holding. (see verses 4 and 5)

2 Thessalonians 2:4-5

King James Version (KJV)

4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

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

Now, let's take a look at verse 6:

2 Thessalonians 2:6

King James Version (KJV)

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

As you have already stated, the "what" that is holding back is the rebellion (apostasia).

But, let me show you how this was written in the Greek so you can understand why verse 6 is referring to
a "what."

2:6 καὶ (and) νῦν (now) τὸ (the) κατέχον (thing that is holding) οἴδατε (you have seen) εἰς (unto) τὸ (the) ἀποκαλυφθῆναι (revealing) αὐτὸν (of him) ἐν (in) τῷ (the) ἑαυτοῦ (his own) καιρῷ (time).

Now just the English:

and now the thing that is holding you have seen (you have come to know) unto the revealing of him in his own time

As you can see from the Greek version above, the word "katechon" is preceded by the article "τὸ ."

The article "τὸ" is a neuter gender article, so it is basically used for "things" rather than people.

Also the word "κατέχον" is spelled with a little "o" (omicron). And "-ον" ("-on") at the end of a word refers to a thing, rather than a person. (see gender in the following link)
[url]http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=kate%2Fxon&la=greek&prior=kai\[/url]

However, let's take a look at verse 7:

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.

Now, let's take a look at the Greek:

2:7 τὸ (the) γὰρ (for) μυστήριον (mystery) ἤδη (already) ἐνεργεῖται (is at work) τῆς (of) ἀνομίας (iniquity) μόνον (only) ὁ (the) κατέχων (he who holds) ἄρτι (now) ἕως (until) ἐκ (from) μέσου (middle of) γένηται (he becomes)

Now, just the English:

for the mystery already is at work of iniquity only the he who holds now until from middle of he becomes

So, as you can see from the Greek above, the word "katechwn" in this case, is preceded by the article "ὁ."

The article "ὁ" is a masculine gendered article, and it is generally used for a "people" (in the masculine gender), rather than "things."

Also, the word "κατέχων" is spelled with a big "o" ("ω"), the Greek letter Omega, and "-ων" is used at the end of a word , when the the word refers to a person, rather than a thing. (see gender in the following link)
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=kate%2Fxwn&la=greek&prior=y

So, in verse 3, there were two things that were holding. One was a "what" and the other was a "he."

Then in verse 6, you have a "what" that is holding.

And in verse 7, you have a "he" that is holding.

So is the mystery the activity of satan ? The power and false signs and wonders, the wicked deception ? Working secretly with the will of evil men ? Maybe...

Yes, I would think it would be all of the above.

Case in point...........

Here are a couple of videos, I recently came across. But before I post the links, let me just make a disclaimer, by stating, that the opinions in the following videos, are not my own, since I do not know who will ultimately fill the position, of the "goal" of the "mystery" of iniquity.

However, I do believe that there is a "secret" goal, and I think that we all know what that goal is by now. So, maybe it's not so secret anymore.

But, in any case, the scripture tells us that the "mystery" of iniquity was already at work, at least from the time that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians 2. However, it is my suspicion that the "mystery" has existed ever since the first attempt of the "secret" goal was thwarted by God, a long time ago.

In case you don't know what I'm talking about, you can read about it in Genesis 11.

Here is the link:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+11&version=KJV

Anyway, so here are a couple of videos of what may be a prime example of the "mystery" "at work."

(Btw, my post was not in any way influenced by these videos, I just happened to come across them recently....actually, I saw one of them yesterday and the other one today.)

Anyway here are the links:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMyDsaBmiYI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJMlIZVVoFY

And here's another video that also comes to mind:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utYcFf93Srs&feature=related

[Exit40]

Hi Watching. Well, you are a good Greek scholar in my opinion. You have explained a lot which is very helpful with these passages that are so often misunderstood, especially by me. I think you have pretty much nailed it down.

Re God thwarting the mystery, the first thing that came to mind was the great flood. Gen 11 is a great example of this though.

Thanks for the help Bro.

God Bless You

David

[watching]

Hi Exit 40,

I was just editing my post a little bit.

You're welcome.

However, I'm not a "bro."

(I hate it when people call me that on the internet.)

[Exit40]

However, I'm not a "bro."

(I hate it when people call me that on the internet.)

OOPS ! Sorry Sis. Please forgive me as I am internet gender challenged. However it should be noted, my handicap and error have not affected my gratitude.

God Bless You Sis

David

[watching]

My Reply:
Just for the record,...I believe that the rapture will occur just before Psalms 83/Isaiah 17;1 war breaks out in the middle east, which means we could very well leave this earth at any day now.Then after this war,...the world will be crying "Peace and Safety".....During those days Israel will be dwelling carelessly in peace,...and then the prophecy of Ezekiel 38 will come to pass,..and shortly afterward, the last week of Daniels 70th week will begin.
I believe that the Ezekiel 38 prophecy and revelation 6;12 thru 17 prophecy are one and the same events.

I believe that the Apostasy is occuring at this very moment.Revelation 7;9 reveals an opposite of a great falling away.
So,...once the rapture occurs, and sometime after Ezekiel 38 occurs, then the identity of the anti-christ will be known by many, which I am certain the two witnesses and the 144,000 anointed Jews will be keenly aware of.
But!...Most of Israel will not realize the true identity of the anti-christ, not until the A.O.D. comes to pass.

The Holy Spirit indwells the Believer in Christ Jesus today,......and when the rapture occurs, He will take the Bride with Him.

Hi Benny,

At the risk of sounding like a flipflopper, which maybe I am, I just want to say that, although, I definitely do not believe that 2 Thessalonians 2:7 is referring to the Holy Spirit.

I am always open to the possibility of a pre-trib rapture........just not according to the typical pre-trib rapture teaching, however.

But, having said that, I just want to say, that the only way that I can see, that if there is a "rapture" of sorts,
prior to the falling away (rebellion) and the revealing of the man of sin, then it must be that this particular "rapture" is not considered, or is not the same thing, as "our gathering unto the Lord," or as the "day of the Lord."

In fact, that is the only way that I can see how it may be possible that a "pre-trib" rapture of sorts could occurr prior to the falling away, and the revealing of the man of sin.

In other words, it would have to be, what I have always been open to, and that is a "first fruits rapture" as opposed to the "gathering" (main harvest) of the wheat.

Although, I just do not know if a first fruits rapture would be the first fruit of the wheat harvest, or not. Because it seems to me that the first fruit of the wheat harvest had already been fulfilled on Pentecost.

So, then it would have to be the first fruits of another harvest. Possibly, the Fall harvest of the "ingathering" (Feast of Tabernacles). Although, there is no Feast Day (Appointment Day), for the "first fruit" of the "in gathering".

But, then again, if there is no appointment date set for such an event, then maybe that would explain
why no one can know the day or the hour.

Anyway, this is just a thought. Because, as I said, I'm always open to the possiblity that the Lord could return at
any moment.

Although, I do, however, find it hard to imagine, how any rapture would not cause sudden destruction, in and of itself. But, then again, it could be that even if there is destruction in the aftermath, it could be that it is still
not the beginning of what the scripture calls, "the day of the Lord."

So, the only thing that I can come up with, is that maybe it's possible that Paul wrote the above, as a consolation for anyone that may have missed the "first" rapture. And to let them know that no matter what may happen, or may have happened, prior to the abomination of desolation, that there is still hope that we did not actually miss "our gathering together unto the Lord" and that "the day of the Lord," regardless of whatever destruction there may be, at the time, has not yet come.

I realize this is all just speculation. But I just wanted to point out the above in all fairness. Because, there still are a lot of things that just don't seem to add up for me. And I agree with what you and Douggg have said, in another thread, about how there seem to be at least two completely different scenarios being described in terms of the return of the Lord.

[benny balerio]

My Reply:
Just for the record,...I believe that the rapture will occur just before Psalms 83/Isaiah 17;1 war breaks out in the middle east, which means we could very well leave this earth at any day now.Then after this war,...the world will be crying "Peace and Safety".....During those days Israel will be dwelling carelessly in peace,...and then the prophecy of Ezekiel 38 will come to pass,..and shortly afterward, the last week of Daniels 70th week will begin.
I believe that the Ezekiel 38 prophecy and revelation 6;12 thru 17 prophecy are one and the same events.

I believe that the Apostasy is occuring at this very moment.Revelation 7;9 reveals an opposite of a great falling away.
So,...once the rapture occurs, and sometime after Ezekiel 38 occurs, then the identity of the anti-christ will be known by many, which I am certain the two witnesses and the 144,000 anointed Jews will be keenly aware of.
But!...Most of Israel will not realize the true identity of the anti-christ, not until the A.O.D. comes to pass.

The Holy Spirit indwells the Believer in Christ Jesus today,......and when the rapture occurs, He will take the Bride with Him.

Hi Benny,

At the risk of sounding like a flipflopper, which maybe I am, I just want to say that, although, I definitely do not believe that 2 Thessalonians 2:7 is referring to the Holy Spirit.

I am always open to the possibility of a pre-trib rapture........just not according to the typical pre-trib rapture teaching, however.

But, having said that, I just want to say, that the only way that I can see, that if there is a "rapture" of sorts,
prior to the falling away (rebellion) and the revealing of the man of sin, then it must be that this particular "rapture" is not considered, or is not the same thing, as "our gathering unto the Lord," or as the "day of the Lord."

In fact, that is the only way that I can see how it may be possible that a "pre-trib" rapture of sorts could occurr prior to the falling away, and the revealing of the man of sin.

In other words, it would have to be, what I have always been open to, and that is a "first fruits rapture" as opposed to the "gathering" (main harvest) of the wheat.

Although, I just do not know if a first fruits rapture would be the first fruit of the wheat harvest, or not. Because it seems to me that the first fruit of the wheat harvest had already been fulfilled on Pentecost.

So, then it would have to be the first fruits of another harvest. Possibly, the Fall harvest of the "ingathering" (Feast of Tabernacles). Although, there is no Feast Day (Appointment Day), for the "first fruit" of the "in gathering".

But, then again, if there is no appointment date set for such an event, then maybe that would explain
why no one can know the day or the hour.

Anyway, this is just a thought. Because, as I said, I'm always open to the possiblity that the Lord could return at
any moment.

Although, I do, however, find it hard to imagine, how any rapture would not cause sudden destruction, in and of itself. But, then again, it could be that even if there is destruction in the aftermath, it could be that it is still
not the beginning of what the scripture calls, "the day of the Lord."

So, the only thing that I can come up with, is that maybe it's possible that Paul wrote the above, as a consolation for anyone that may have missed the "first" rapture. And to let them know that no matter what may happen, or may have happened, prior to the abomination of desolation, that there is still hope that we did not actually miss "our gathering together unto the Lord" and that "the day of the Lord," regardless of whatever destruction there may be, at the time, has not yet come.

I realize this is all just speculation. But I just wanted to point out the above in all fairness. Because, there still are a lot of things that just don't seem to add up for me. And I agree with what you and Douggg have said, in another thread, about how there seem to be at least two completely different scenarios being described in terms of the return of the Lord.

The rapture is to occurr before the Day of the Lord begins.
The Day of the Lord is the Wrath of God.
With that in mind,...read 1 thessalonians 1;10.........(and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead--Jesus, who rescues us from the coming wrath.)

The "Rebellion" is the "Falling Away"
These are those who were never truely saved.."LORD LORD"..anybody can claim to be a christian.
This falling away is occurring at this very moment.One must come to the Lord with all their heart, mind, and soul.
One cannot sit on the fence and play both sides.
Even the devils believe that Jesus is Lord and they tremble!
But once you truely believe,....one cannot help but jump for joy in their heart.one cannot keep their mouth shut about Jesus the Christ.And the moment you first believed, you were sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise unto the Day of redemption.....In other words....You were saved by grace....once this happens,...you are a new creature in Christ Jesus,..old things have passed away and all things have new.This does not mean that you will not mess up from time to time,...some born again christians do fall into the ways of their old self,..but the differance this time is that the Holy Spirit is burning their conscience,...they cannot enjoy the sins that they are committing, in the same way prior to being born again.
There are those who go to the alter and ask the Lord into their heart,...but it was an emotional moment, but were not sincere,..there was no sign of true repentance and today we see some that leave the alter with no change,..and then some of these play church for social reasons.

This Gift of being sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise unto the day of redemption was not enjoyed by anyone prior to the Cross of Calvary.Only the Bride during this church age has these privileges.

Now let me ask you a simple question:
What constitutes...The revealing of the man of sin,..in other words,..what event reveals the man of sin as you understand it to mean?

[watching]

The "Rebellion" is the "Falling Away"

Hi Benny,

I believe that the "apostasia" refers to an actual revolt or rebellion (that would obviously, be against God), and I believe it would to have to have a defining moment.

As for the "bride," I realize that there is a popular teaching that the entire bride will be raptured all at the same time. I don't know if that is true, or not. (I guess that's for another debate.)

But, if the bride is raptured all at one once, then the "gathering" in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2, would have to be referring to the rapture of the bride.......or else, what else could "our gathering together unto Him" be referring to?

Furthermore, Paul said to not be deceived that the Day of the Lord and our gathering together unto Him, has come, if not first the "apostasia" and the revealing of the man of sin.

Now let me ask you a simple question:
What constitutes...The revealing of the man of sin,..in other words,..what event reveals the man of sin as you understand it to mean?

I've been meaning to discuss this issue in shorttribber's thread entitled, "Christ could come "at any moment" IF."

I will try to answer that question there, so as not to derail this thread.

Here is a link:

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=62961

[benny balerio]

The "Rebellion" is the "Falling Away"

Hi Benny,

I believe that the "apostasia" refers to an actual revolt or rebellion (that would obviously, be against God), and I believe it would to have to have a defining moment.

As for the "bride," I realize that there is a popular teaching that the entire bride will be raptured all at the same time. I don't know if that is true, or not. (I guess that's for another debate.)

But, if the bride is raptured all at one once, then the "gathering" in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2, would have to be referring to the rapture of the bride.......or else, what else could "our gathering together unto Him" be referring to?

Furthermore, Paul said to not be deceived that the Day of the Lord and our gathering together unto Him, has come, if not first the "apostasia" and the revealing of the man of sin.

Now let me ask you a simple question:
What constitutes...The revealing of the man of sin,..in other words,..what event reveals the man of sin as you understand it to mean?

I've been meaning to discuss this issue in shorttribber's thread entitled, "Christ could come "at any moment" IF."

I will try to answer that question there, so as not to derail this thread.

Here is a link:

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=62961

AH!....now you are beginning to understand.
Now,...answer the question here...that I asked you ...believe me..you will not be derailing anything.
It's about two fold meanings.
Answer my question and then I will explain.

[watching]

Hi Benny,

I answered it in the other thread.

It is not necessary for a temple to be rebuilt IMO....we are the Temple of God, that we do know already........I could be wrong, but I do not believe there will be a "Tribulation Temple" ever built.

Hi shorttribber,

I agree with you, in that I don't believe that it's necessary for a temple to be rebuilt, either.

However, when I first started posting at FP, I was open to the idea that 2 Thessalonians 2:4 could be referring
to rebuilt Jewish temple, on the temple mount, but I always felt that there was no way one could possibly be certain based on the way the verse was written.

However, after having been in a very lengthy discussion concerning 2 Thessalonians 2:4, some time ago, which, btw, I would like to thank lambslave, ampersand, Mrs. B, and others, who have helped me to come to the understanding that I currently have. But, in any case, I have since become convinced that there is no possible way, that I can see, for how 2 Thessalonians 2:4 could be referring to an earthly, humanly re-built Jewish temple, especially not one that does not acknowledge the once and for all sacrifice that was made by Christ, when He died on the cross for all of our sins.....or any other humanly built temple, or edifice, for that matter. Because, I just don't see how the scripture could possibly refer to such a building, as "the temple of God."

Acts 7:48

King James Version (KJV)

48Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,

Acts 17:24

King James Version (KJV)

24God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;

So, at this point in time, I can only see three possibilities for what the "temple of God" in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 could be, possibly, be referring to.

However, as I said before, this was not always the case. Because, as always, my views have changed and evolved as I have come to learn more, and understand more about the scriptures.

So, at this point, I can only see three, likely, or maybe I should say, not so likely, possibilities. But before I say what they are, let me just say that, based on the way I'm understanding the scriptures, "sitting in the temple of God" is not something that has to happen, based on the way that 2 Thessalonians 2:4 was written. I can explain why I say that later, in a separate post, if anyone is interested, but for now, I just want to get my point across.

So, anyway, as I said, I can only see three possibilities, at this point. And the one that I feel is the most likely, is that the "temple of God" might be referring to the temple of God in heaven. But remember, as I said, sitting in the temple of God is not something that the scriptures say WILL happen. In order for me to explain that, I would have to get into the translation, which I'm willing to do at a later point if anyone is interested.

But, in any case, the reason I think the temple of God in heaven, could be a possibility, is based on Daniel 8:9-11.

Daniel 8:9-11

King James Version (KJV)

9And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

10And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.

11Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of the sanctuary was cast down.

And based on Revelation 12.

See Revelation 12 here:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=revelation%2012&version=KJV

The second possibility that I see, is that perhaps the temple of God that is referred to in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, is what the scriptures refer to, as the temple of God, in the New Testament (aside from the temple of God in heaven, of course), and that would be the following:

1 Corinthians 3:16

King James Version (KJV)

16Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

1 Corinthians 6:19

King James Version (KJV)

19What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

2 Corinthians 6:16

King James Version (KJV)

16And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Ephesians 2:13-22

King James Version (KJV)

13But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.

14For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

15Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

16And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

17And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.

18For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

19Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

20And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

21In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:

22In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

If you're wondering, at this point, how the man of sin can "sit" in the temple of God, if the temple of God is referring to our bodies, I can elaborate on how, I think, that might be, in a separate post.

But for now, I just want to get to what I think could be a third possibility.

Actually, the third possibility that I see happens to be the most far-fetched of the three. But, with today's technology,
I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility.

In any case, the only thing that I see as a third possibility is, that perhaps the "temple of God" is referring to the Lord's body when He was on earth.

But, like I said, I know this is far-fetched, but if someone were able to extract the DNA from the shroud of Turin, and actually use it to recreate the Lord's body, for the man of sin to inhabit, then I think that would definitely be an abomination of the most extreme level.

In any case, whatever 2 Thessalonians 2:4 might be referring to, I believe that it is, most likely , in some way, tied with the casting out of Satan, and the abomination of desolation.

I, also, nevertheless, believe that the event of 2 Thessalonians 2:4, whatever it may be, will be what reveals the man of sin.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-8

King James Version (KJV)

3Let 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;

4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

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

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

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

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:

[benny balerio]

Hi Benny,

I answered it in the other thread.

So basicly you are refusing to answer it here.

Then I'll answer it for you my friend.

Double meaning:....Revealing of the man of sin,.........When the Rapture occurs,...the two witnesses, the 144,000 anointed,and many who were aware of the prophecy of Daniel 9;27..as in many who were left behind at the rapture,..will recognize who the anti-christ is at the very beginning of Daniels 70th week.But a great majority of the israel will not recognize the anti-christ,that is, not until the Abomination of Desolation.In other words, the revealing basicly occurrs twice here.

The Falling away means departure,...I believe it too has a double meaning.
One a departure of the faith and the other a departure to be with the Lord as in rapture of the Bride.But regardless how one interprets the Falling away...2 Thessalonians 2:7 backs the view that when the Holy Spirit is taken out of the way,...then and only then can the man of sin be revealed. Before the King James translation of 1611 it was translated departure because it’s derived from a root word that can mean departure.
Again,...The Old Testiment saints did not have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
But the Indwelling of the Bride began at Pentecost,..and the Lord is clear that He will never leave us.So when the Holy Spirit is taken out of the way,..He will take us to the many mansions of heaven.Since it is that when He is taken out of the way,..that the "Fulness of the Gentiles had come to pass.
Once this occurs,...The age of grace will have come to an end, and those left behind must provide evidence of their faith by works in which must endure until the end.The Holy Spirit was taken out of the way, but is still omnipresent in the world,..He will still influence man on the earth as He did before the Cross of Calvary.
The Lord said the He must return to the Father or the Comfortor cannot come.
One would ask..."Why would the Lord Jesus say something like this,..when we all know that The Comfortor(Holy Spirit is Omnipresent?)
The reason He said that is because the Holy Spirit had a special task,...And Something new began on the day of Pentecost...Which is ...the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Believer......."Greater is He that is in you than he that is in the world.
And being that He will never leave or forsake the Believer in Christ Jesus,..when He is taken out of the way,..then it is at that moment in the twinkling of an eye we the Bride of Jesus Christ will be taken with Him.

[watching]

So basicly you are refusing to answer it here.

Then I'll answer it for you my friend.

Hi Benny,

I'm not refusing to answer it here.

I had just finished posting it on the other thread, before I had seen your post last night.

But I will copy and paste it into my post above, so that it can be included in this thread as well.

I didn't think about doing that last night until I had already logged off my computer.

************************************************************************************************************************************************

Double meaning:....Revealing of the man of sin,.........When the Rapture occurs,...the two witnesses, the 144,000 anointed,and many who were aware of the prophecy of Daniel 9;27..as in many who were left behind at the rapture,..will recognize who the anti-christ is at the very beginning of Daniels 70th week.But a great majority of the israel will not recognize the anti-christ,that is, not until the Abomination of Desolation.In other words, the revealing basicly occurrs twice here.

First of all, I don't believe that the "he" in Daniel 9:27 is referring to the anti-Christ.

But, besides that, I don't think it's very likely that anyone left behind would be aware of the popular "teaching" that the "he" in Daniel 9:27 actually refers to the anti-Christ, even though the anti-Christ was never previously mentioned, prior to verse 27, and that the covenant refers to a "seven year peace treaty with Israel," let alone know anything else about the book of Daniel. Because, for one thing, they probably weren't into listening to Bible "teachers" or into reading the Bible, for that matter. However, if they happened to suspect that the rapture occurred and wanted to start reading the scriptures, the chances are that they probably wouldn't start by reading the book of Daniel. They probably would start by reading the book of Matthew, or the book of Revelation, or maybe even the book of Genesis. Usually people start at the beginning of a book, or at the end, if they are anxious to see how everything will turn out.

The Falling away means departure,...I believe it too has a double meaning.
One a departure of the faith and the other a departure to be with the Lord as in rapture of the Bride.But regardless how one interprets the Falling away...2 Thessalonians 2:7 backs the view that when the Holy Spirit is taken out of the way,...then and only then can the man of sin be revealed. Before the King James translation of 1611 it was translated departure because it’s derived from a root word that can mean departure.

I don't believe that apostasia means departure.

Apostasia means either a revolt or a rebellion. It's also the word from which we get the word "apostasy," which means a departure from the truth, not a physical departure.

However, I'm not sure if "apostasia" was ever used to mean, what the current term "apostasy" means today (which is a departure from the truth), back in ancient times. Because, I'm not sure if "apostasy" was even an issue back then, when the truth was being made known, but even if it was, then that definitely couldn't be what Paul was talking about, because it was already happening. So why would Paul say that it wouldn't happen, until something happens that was already happening? That doesn't make any sense. In any case, there seems to be much more evidence, from what I have seen, that "apostasy" was used to mean "a revolt" or "a rebellion," during the time that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians 2:7, and not "apostasy" as we know the term today. But, I definitely do not believe that "apostasia" was ever used to mean a "physical" departure. There is NO EVIDENCE, ANYWHERE, that I have seen, that it ever meant that. And I don't believe that Paul was speaking in some secret code, making up words, that no one has ever used in that way before, or since. Sorry, but I just don't believe that, any more than I believe that Paul was using some secret code to refer to the Holy Spirit (even though it was not previously mentioned, prior to verse 7), by changing the gender back and forth, as a hint, or as a secret code.

So, anyway, let me just ask you a question, Benny.

If the Holy Spirit departs during the tribulation, then what are those who are sealed, so they won't get hurt during the tribulation, sealed with?

[benny balerio]

So basicly you are refusing to answer it here.

Then I'll answer it for you my friend.

Hi Benny,

I'm not refusing to answer it here.

I had just finished posting it on the other thread, before I had seen your post last night.

But I will copy and paste it into my post above, so that it can be included in this thread as well.

I didn't think about doing that last night until I had already logged off my computer.

************************************************************************************************************************************************

Double meaning:....Revealing of the man of sin,.........When the Rapture occurs,...the two witnesses, the 144,000 anointed,and many who were aware of the prophecy of Daniel 9;27..as in many who were left behind at the rapture,..will recognize who the anti-christ is at the very beginning of Daniels 70th week.But a great majority of the israel will not recognize the anti-christ,that is, not until the Abomination of Desolation.In other words, the revealing basicly occurrs twice here.

First of all, I don't believe that the "he" in Daniel 9:27 is referring to the anti-Christ.

But, besides that, I don't think it's very likely that anyone left behind would be aware of the popular "teaching" that the "he" in Daniel 9:27 actually refers to the anti-Christ, even though the anti-Christ was never previously mentioned, prior to verse 27, and that the covenant refers to a "seven year peace treaty with Israel," let alone know anything else about the book of Daniel. Because, for one thing, they probably weren't into listening to Bible "teachers" or into reading the Bible, for that matter. However, if they happened to suspect that the rapture occurred and wanted to start reading the scriptures, the chances are that they probably wouldn't start by reading the book of Daniel. They probably would start by reading the book of Matthew, or the book of Revelation, or maybe even the book of Genesis. Usually people start at the beginning of a book, or at the end, if they are anxious to see how everything will turn out.

The Falling away means departure,...I believe it too has a double meaning.
One a departure of the faith and the other a departure to be with the Lord as in rapture of the Bride.But regardless how one interprets the Falling away...2 Thessalonians 2:7 backs the view that when the Holy Spirit is taken out of the way,...then and only then can the man of sin be revealed. Before the King James translation of 1611 it was translated departure because it’s derived from a root word that can mean departure.

I don't believe that apostasia means departure.

Apostasia means either a revolt or a rebellion. It's also the word from which we get the word "apostasy," which means a departure from the truth, not a physical departure.

However, I'm not sure if "apostasia" was ever used to mean, what the current term "apostasy" means today (which is a departure from the truth), back in ancient times. Because, I'm not sure if "apostasy" was even an issue back then, when the truth was being made known, but even if it was, then that definitely couldn't be what Paul was talking about, because it was already happening. So why would Paul say that it wouldn't happen, until something happens that was already happening? That doesn't make any sense. In any case, there seems to be much more evidence, from what I have seen, that "apostasy" was used to mean "a revolt" or "a rebellion," during the time that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians 2:7, and not "apostasy" as we know the term today. But, I definitely do not believe that "apostasia" was ever used to mean a "physical" departure. There is NO EVIDENCE, ANYWHERE, that I have seen, that it ever meant that. And I don't believe that Paul was speaking in some secret code, making up words, that no one has ever used in that way before, or since. Sorry, but I just don't believe that, any more than I believe that Paul was using some secret code to refer to the Holy Spirit (even though it was not previously mentioned, prior to verse 7), by changing the gender back and forth, as a hint, or as a secret code.

So, anyway, let me just ask you a question, Benny.

If the Holy Spirit departs during the tribulation, then what are those who are sealed, so they won't get hurt during the tribulation, sealed with?

You Quote:
But, besides that, I don't think it's very likely that anyone left behind would be aware of the popular "teaching" that the "he" in Daniel 9:27 actually refers to the anti-Christ, even though the anti-Christ was never previously mentioned, prior to verse 27, and that the covenant refers to a "seven year peace treaty with Israel," let alone know anything else about the book of Daniel. Because, for one thing, they probably weren't into listening to Bible "teachers" or into reading the Bible, for that matter. However, if they happened to suspect that the rapture occurred and wanted to start reading the scriptures, the chances are that they probably wouldn't start by reading the book of Daniel. They probably would start by reading the book of Matthew, or the book of Revelation, or maybe even the book of Genesis. Usually people start at the beginning of a book, or at the end, if they are anxious to see how everything will turn out.

My Reply:
Just because one read the Daniel 9;27 prophecy on the internet or read this information in a book does not mean that they were a christian.And again,..you really do not know how one was introduced to Christ Jesus ,..hmmm, I wonder how many secular people are reading on this forum in the last few years.Your arguement is weak at best here.Please do not take my last statement personal,..I am only stating what I see here,..We are all seeking the truth here, so let us all grow in knowledge and wisdom in the Lord.
I also highly doubt that these books would be burned overnight once Daniels 70th week has begun.
Again,..you incorrectly stated that the anti-christ is not alluded to and prior to daniel 9;27.
But I will begin another topic targeting this topic.


You Quote:
I don't believe that apostasia means departure.

Apostasia means either a revolt or a rebellion. It's also the word from which we get the word "apostasy," which means a departure from the truth, not a physical departure.

However, I'm not sure if "apostasia" was ever used to mean, what the current term "apostasy" means today (which is a departure from the truth), back in ancient times. Because, I'm not sure if "apostasy" was even an issue back then, when the truth was being made known, but even if it was, then that definitely couldn't be what Paul was talking about, because it was already happening. So why would Paul say that it wouldn't happen, until something happens that was already happening? That doesn't make any sense. In any case, there seems to be much more evidence, from what I have seen, that "apostasy" was used to mean "a revolt" or "a rebellion," during the time that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians 2:7, and not "apostasy" as we know the term today. But, I definitely do not believe that "apostasia" was ever used to mean a "physical" departure. There is NO EVIDENCE, ANYWHERE, that I have seen, that it ever meant that. And I don't believe that Paul was speaking in some secret code, making up words, that no one has ever used in that way before, or since. Sorry, but I just don't believe that, any more than I believe that Paul was using some secret code to refer to the Holy Spirit (even though it was not previously mentioned, prior to verse 7), by changing the gender back and forth, as a hint, or as a secret code.

My Reply:
No Paul was not speaking in some secret code.
You see the double meaning I see it in the scriptures,...such as in comparison, as one see the "Trinity" in the scriptures, even though the word trinity is not written in the bible.
To cut thru all the chase,..there are several ways to reveal that the Bride is caught up to meet the Lord in the air prior to the reveaing of the man of sin.
It seems to me that you are claiming that the man of sin must be revealed first before the rapture can occur,...if so,..then your view would make the "Thief in the night" scripture null and void.

So to cut thru all the chase,..allow me to ask you a question:..."Do you agree that the Day of the Lord is the same as the Wrath of God?

You Quote:
So, anyway, let me just ask you a question, Benny.

If the Holy Spirit departs during the tribulation, then what are those who are sealed, so they won't get hurt during the tribulation, sealed with?[/quote]

My Reply:
The Holy Spirit does not Depart in the sense that He no longer is omnipresent in the world.But the Holy Spirit is taken out of the way..in other words< His special task here on earth that began on the Day of Pentecost has come to an end.
The 144,000 Jews from the twelve tribes are sealed by what seems to be the four or five angels(based on the wording here) ,...the bible never comes right out and says it is the seal of the Holy Spirit,..but that it is the seal of God...But I believe it is a seal by and through the Holy Spirit,...A mark of ownership,..The first meaning of the word “sphragizo” is to “stamp with a mark which indicates private ownership.Again you must remember,...the HolY spirit will interact with mankind in the same way as He did prior to the Cross of Calvary.
In Ezekiel’s time, an angel was commanded to mark God’s people, and to slay all those who did not have that mark in their forehead (Ezekiel 9:4-6)

[watching]

Hi Benny,

"Apostasia" means "defection" "apostasy" "revolt."

See Strong's definiton here:

http://concordances.org/greek/646.htm

And "defection" means "desertion from allegiance, loyalty, duty, or the like; apostasy: "

See definition here:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/defection

Now, getting back to the word "apostasia"

646 apostasía (from 868 /aphístēmi, "leave, depart," which is derived from 575 /apó, "away from" and 2476 /histémi, "stand") – properly, departure (implying desertion); apostasy – literally, "a leaving, from a previous standin

As you can see, "apostasia" is made up of the words "away from" and "stand."

So, if I am no longer loyal to you, then obviously I will most likely stand away from you, if not literally, then at least figuratively.

But, that does not mean that I am going to disappear from the face of the earth. It just means that I am not going to be on your side any more.

But, let's say that "apostasia" is to be taken literally, as in a literal "departure" (standing away from), as well as a figurative departure. Although a figurative departure is basically what the word means, it can also involve a physical departure, as in the sentence example given in the definition above.

I will quote the sample sentence that was given in the definition for "defection" here:

His defection to East Germany was regarded as treasonable.

So, even if one takes the word "apostasia" as a LITERAL DEPARTURE.

How could that possibly apply to the Holy Spirit?

How could the Holy Spirit possibly "defect" from the earth, when the Holy Spirit was never loyal to the earth to begin with?

And the Holy Spirit most certainly would not defect from God, obviously, since THE HOLY SPIRIT IS GOD.

So, either way, "apostasia" cannot be referring to the Holy Spirit.

[benny balerio]

Hi Benny,

"Apostasia" means "defection" "apostasy" "revolt."

See Strong's definiton here:

http://concordances.org/greek/646.htm

And "defection" means "desertion from allegiance, loyalty, duty, or the like; apostasy: "

See definition here:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/defection

Now, getting back to the word "apostasia"

646 apostasía (from 868 /aphístēmi, "leave, depart," which is derived from 575 /apó, "away from" and 2476 /histémi, "stand") – properly, departure (implying desertion); apostasy – literally, "a leaving, from a previous standin

As you can see, "apostasia" is made up of the words "away from" and "stand."

So, if I am no longer loyal to you, then obviously I will most likely stand away from you, if not literally, then at least figuratively.

But, that does not mean that I am going to disappear from the face of the earth. It just means that I am not going to be on your side any more.

But, let's say that "apostasia" is to be taken literally, as in a literal "departure" (standing away from), as well as a figurative departure. Although a figurative departure is basically what the word means, it can also involve a physical departure, as in the sentence example given in the definition above.

I will quote the sample sentence that was given in the definition for "defection" here:

His defection to East Germany was regarded as treasonable.

So, even if one takes the word "apostasia" as a LITERAL DEPARTURE.

How could that possibly apply to the Holy Spirit?

How could the Holy Spirit possibly "defect" from the earth, when the Holy Spirit was never loyal to the earth to begin with?

And the Holy Spirit most certainly would not defect from God, obviously, since THE HOLY SPIRIT IS GOD.

So, either way, "apostasia" cannot be referring to the Holy Spirit.

You are not telling me anything that I am not already aware of.
If you read my earlier post,..you will see that I never refuted that apostasy is interpreted as a falling away.
I am pointing out that there seems to be a double meaning here.
First of all 2 Thessalonians 2;1Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, 2not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come............Is about our gathering unto Him.
and 2 thessalonians 2;7For 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.So obviously there is a rapture of the Bride too.
One cannot deny that a Falling away is not occurring today From the Faith.
The falling away also means departure.
Now once the rapture occurs in a pre-trib setting,...shortly thereafter Daniels 70th week will begin,...and the bible is very clear in revelation 7;9 that a multitude that no man could number were standing before the Son of Man.....This is obvious not a great falling away.

I am not sure what your stance is in the 70th week,...But I believe that there will be a first and second half of Daniels 70th week,...with that said,..again,..I ask you,..Do you agree that the Day of the Lord is the same meaning as the Wrath of God?

[watching]

Hi Benny,

The falling away also means departure.

That's the part I disagree with.

In a literal sense, "apostasia" may mean "to stand away from." But the deeper meaning means "to defect," in other words, change sides, or loyalties.

I just can't accept that "apostasia" means a "departure" as in a "disappearance from the earth" unless you can show me an example where the word "apostasia" was ever used that way before in the past.

If it has a double meaning in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, then the two meanings must be "falling away" and "rebellion."

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;

But I am much more inclined to believe that it is referring to a rebellion/revolt/defection (from God), than to a falling away. Because a falling away from the truth has no defining moment. Since a falling away from the truth has been happening probably since Paul's day.

I am not sure what your stance is in the 70th week,...But I believe that there will be a first and second half of Daniels 70th week,

I believe that too, except I believe that the first half has already been fulfilled.

Do you agree that the Day of the Lord is the same meaning as the Wrath of God?

I'm not sure if the day of the Lord is limited to the day of the Lord's wrath, or not.

Although it does seem that most verses that use the expression "the day of the Lord" are referring to the wrath of God, I'm not sure if that is always be the case.

Because, what about 2 Corinthians 1:14, for example?

2 Corinthians 1:14

King James Version (KJV)

14As also ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your rejoicing, even as ye also are our's in the day of the Lord Jesus.

That doesn't appear to be speaking about God's wrath.

So, I can't really be sure.

[MarkT]

I am pointing out that there seems to be a double meaning here.

No, apostesia means departure from the law; not a physical departure as you're trying to set it. The word comes to us as apostacy. It still means departure from morals, or the law. The proof of the invalidity of your "double meaning" occurs within 2Th 2.

First fact: v.1: Jesus comes and we are gathered to him. The Day of the Lord, or the Day of the Christ is when He returns. Following the gathering of the Elect is when the Wrath of God begins as Revelation shows with the first Trumpet coming after the Great Multitude arrive in Heaven out of the Great Tribulation.

Second fact: v.3: That Day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the Man of Lawlessness is revealed.

So logically, as set in the text with Paul's ordering using the word "until," the order is:

1. The rebellion occurs,
2. The Man of Lawlessness is revealed,
3. Jesus comes,
4. and we are gathered up.

So, we cannot be gathered before the Man of Lawlessness is revealed since that event precedes Christ's return and we are not gathered up until He comes.

This then matches what Jesus said in the Olivet Discourse: that the midpoint abomination happens first (Man of Lawlessness revealed), the Great Tribulation happens (matching Revelation 7), and then the Day of the Lord comes (v.29 - sun/moon/star event) and Jesus comes and we are gathered up.

[Douggg]

Sorry that I did not respond to this sooner, but I was without internet for a few months.
In responce, my question to you is:Are you suggesting that the sixth seal occurs after the distress of those days?
Also,revelation 16 does not indicate that that armies of the world coward and hide in the rocks at the sign of the Son of Man.

In the text of Revelation, it does not say that the world cowers and hides at the sign of the Son of Man. Revelation 6 takes place between the lines. Precisely, the upheaval of the cosmos and the sign of the Son of Man in heaven takes place here:

12And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.

Revelation 6, the parting of the heavens and the world sees Jesus before the throne of God, sickle in hand.

13And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.

14For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

Near the end of the 7 years, the world will become disillusioned with the Antichrist's beast claim to be God because he is unable to stop the judgments that the true God is pouring out on the rebellious inhabitants of the earth. In addition, it is problably likely as God's judgments take their toll, that the Antichrist beast will funnel dwindling resources to his EU ten king revived roman empire group, leaving the rest of the world to suffer even more. Which causes him to be attacked in Daniel 11, from the south, north, and eventually the east.

In Daniel 11, it is the news from the east that alarms him. That takes us to Revelation 16:12 above, the Eurphrates drying up making way for the kings of the east. In Daniel 11, it doesn't say that he actually engages the armies from the east. But apparently, they will cross the Euphrates, gathering all nations of the world into middle east. At that precise moment, Revelation 6 takes place. It will terrify the evil men of the world. So it will take the convincing of the Antichrist beast, False Prophet, and Satan to make war on Jesus. Which is Revelation 16:13-14.

Revelation 16:16 And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.

The he is the Antichrist beast.

So, everything before Revelation 16:13, is before the heavens part and the world seeing Jesus before the throne of God in heaven, sickle in hand. Revelation 14:14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.

The wrath of God in the bowls before Revelation 16:13, is in Revelation 14:15-16.

15And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.
16And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.

In Revelation 14:17-20, is the gathering of the nations at Armageddon and their moving down to surround Jerusalem to stop Jesus from returning, and to kill all the Jews there. Where there will be a bloodbath of those armies in the valley of Jehosophat.

17And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.
18And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.
19And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
20And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs

Again,....according to Joel 2;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.
And that Matthew 24 has it that the sun was darkened and the moon did not give its light "after" the great tribulation.
I see here two different descriptions.

The great and dreadful day of the Lord is the day that Jesus returns, the wrath of the Lamb. I interpret "after" in Matthew 24 to mean at the end of the great tribulation. Technically speaking there is the great earthquake and hail in the 7th bowl, which follows the Antichrist's/false prophet's/Satan's call for the kings of the earth to fight Jesus. Keep in mind, they will have 45 days to assemble themselves. Where during that 45 days, the great earthquake and hail takes place, cannot be pinpointed. It could be concurrent with the day that Jesus actually descends down to the Mt. of Olives.

In revelation 16;10 reads the following:
10The fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom was plunged into darkness. Men gnawed their tongues in agony 11and cursed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, but they refused to repent of what they had done.
I believe that the fifth angel pours out Gods bowl of wrath prior to the seventh angels pouring out.
My point here is that I believe that the bowl wrath judgements 1thru 7 are all judgements consisting of Gods Wrath,and that the world was very much aware that the Wrath of God was being activated prior to the great earthquake of revelation 16;20.
But in revelation 6;12-14 are the events that cause the world to realize that the Wrath of God has been activated.
Once revelation 6;15-17 has come to pass, then afterwards,the 144,000 from the 12 tribes of Israel are sealed.
I believe that the earthquake of revelation 16;20 renovates the whole earth.

Benny, the drying up of the Euphrates in Revelation 16:12 and the kings of the east moving into the middle east is the last event right before Revelation 6 takes place. Revelation 16:13 is the reaction to the terror that will grip the evil men of the world when Revelation 6 takes place.

Bowl 7 is after Revelation 16:13 and the gathering of the armies to Armageddon. Whether the great earthquake and the hail take place on the very day that Jesus descends to the Mt. of Olives is not for certain.

Doug

[watching]

Hi Benny,

I know I've said this before, but I just want to make it clear, that I am not opposed to a pre-trib rapture.....I just don't believe in it according to the way it is usually taught.

In any case, this may actually be where the importance of the words "syllego" (collect) versus "synago" (gather) comes in.

Because, for example, if someone has, let's say a wheat field. And it is obviously not time for harvest yet. However, there may be some ripe wheat stalks here and there.

Well, it only makes sense that the farmer would most likely go around the wheat field and pick out (syllego) some of the wheat that has already become ripe and use it for his family (at least that's what I would do if I were a farmer). However, according to Leviticus 23, it would be used for the following:

Leviticus 23:15-21

King James Version (KJV)

15And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete:

16Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD.

17Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals; they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven; they are the firstfruits unto the LORD.

18And ye shall offer with the bread seven lambs without blemish of the first year, and one young bullock, and two rams: they shall be for a burnt offering unto the LORD, with their meat offering, and their drink offerings, even an offering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the LORD.

19Then ye shall sacrifice one kid of the goats for a sin offering, and two lambs of the first year for a sacrifice of peace offerings.

20And the priest shall wave them with the bread of the firstfruits for a wave offering before the LORD, with the two lambs: they shall be holy to the LORD for the priest.

21And ye shall proclaim on the selfsame day, that it may be an holy convocation unto you: ye shall do no servile work therein: it shall be a statute for ever in all your dwellings throughout your generations.

Then when it's time for harvest, obviously, the tares would have to be picked out (syllego), and tied into bundles, then placed aside in order to be burned.

Then once the tares have been removed, the entire field (except for the corners, of course, according to Leviticus 23, because they are to be left for the poor), can be harvested (gathered).

Leviticus 23:22

King James Version (KJV)

22And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am the LORD your God.

So, the point is......

I don't know for sure if there will be a first fruits rapture (because I don't know anything for sure), but the scripture does talk about first fruit.

And if there is a first fruit rapture I don't know if it will be of wheat or something else.

But if there is a first fruit rapture, obviously, it would have to be "picked out" (collected) as the first ripe fruit (syllego), not "gathered" all at once (synago).

Obviously, then the gathering will be the "synagogi." Therefore, our "gathering together unto the Lord" will be our "epi-synagogi ep' auton."

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Th&c=2&v=1&t=KJV#conc/1.

But will there be any first ripe fruit, prior to that?

[benny balerio]

Hi Benny,

The falling away also means departure.

That's the part I disagree with.

In a literal sense, "apostasia" may mean "to stand away from." But the deeper meaning means "to defect," in other words, change sides, or loyalties.

I just can't accept that "apostasia" means a "departure" as in a "disappearance from the earth" unless you can show me an example where the word "apostasia" was ever used that way before in the past.

If it has a double meaning in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, then the two meanings must be "falling away" and "rebellion."

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;

But I am much more inclined to believe that it is referring to a rebellion/revolt/defection (from God), than to a falling away. Because a falling away from the truth has no defining moment. Since a falling away from the truth has been happening probably since Paul's day.

I am not sure what your stance is in the 70th week,...But I believe that there will be a first and second half of Daniels 70th week,

Do you agree that the Day of the Lord is the same meaning as the Wrath of God?

I'm not sure if the day of the Lord is limited to the day of the Lord's wrath, or not.
I believe that too, except I believe that the first half has already been fulfilled.

Although it does seem that most verses that use the expression "the day of the Lord" are referring to the wrath of God, I'm not sure if that is always be the case.

Because, what about 2 Corinthians 1:14, for example?

2 Corinthians 1:14

King James Version (KJV)

14As also ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your rejoicing, even as ye also are our's in the day of the Lord Jesus.

That doesn't appear to be speaking about God's wrath.

So, I can't really be sure.

Strong's concordance is not the final word,...if one digs deeper in their studies,..they would realize that Strong's has errors too.
Even those who translated some bibles have made errors.
Again,.....2 Thessalonians 2:1 begins by saying...."Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him,........."....It is concerning Jesus Christ and the Rapture(Our gathering together to meet Him in the air(1 Thessalonians 4;17)
2 Thessalonians 2;7 Is about the Holy spirit taken out of the way,...the antichrist cannot step forward onto the world scene, not until the Bride has been removed in which we the Bride are indwelt by the Holy Spirit,Who is promised to never leave us.
Greater is He that is in us, than he that is in the world........(Again,..the antichrist cannot come until we are gone.
I am going to give you two links,..in these,..you should come to the conclusion that strong's did mistranslate.
Again keep in mind,....2 Thessalonians 2:1 and 2 Thessalonians 2;7
http://www.watch.pair.com/TR-kjv-issues ... lling-away
http://www.bibleprophesy.org/apostasia.htm

You Quote:

I believe that too, except I believe that the first half has already been fulfilled.


My Reply:
So basicly what you are claiming here is that in Daniel 9;24 that you believe that from the command to rebuild Jerusalem unto the cutting off of the Messiah....in essense,....the 69 weeks add up to 486 1/2 years?

That is incorrect....my studies reveal that from the going forth to rebuild Jerusalem unto the cutting of Messiah added up to 483 years to the exact day.

[benny balerio]

Hi Benny,

I know I've said this before, but I just want to make it clear, that I am not opposed to a pre-trib rapture.....I just don't believe in it according to the way it is usually taught.

In any case, this may actually be where the importance of the words "syllego" (collect) versus "synago" (gather) comes in.

Because, for example, if someone has, let's say a wheat field. And it is obviously not time for harvest yet. However, there may be some ripe wheat stalks here and there.

Well, it only makes sense that the farmer would most likely go around the wheat field and pick out (syllego) some of the wheat that has already become ripe and use it for his family (at least that's what I would do if I were a farmer). However, according to Leviticus 23, it would be used for the following:

Leviticus 23:15-21

King James Version (KJV)

15And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete:

16Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD.

17Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals; they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven; they are the firstfruits unto the LORD.

18And ye shall offer with the bread seven lambs without blemish of the first year, and one young bullock, and two rams: they shall be for a burnt offering unto the LORD, with their meat offering, and their drink offerings, even an offering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the LORD.

19Then ye shall sacrifice one kid of the goats for a sin offering, and two lambs of the first year for a sacrifice of peace offerings.

20And the priest shall wave them with the bread of the firstfruits for a wave offering before the LORD, with the two lambs: they shall be holy to the LORD for the priest.

21And ye shall proclaim on the selfsame day, that it may be an holy convocation unto you: ye shall do no servile work therein: it shall be a statute for ever in all your dwellings throughout your generations.

Then when it's time for harvest, obviously, the tares would have to be picked out (syllego), and tied into bundles, then placed aside in order to be burned.

Then once the tares have been removed, the entire field (except for the corners, of course, according to Leviticus 23, because they are to be left for the poor), can be harvested (gathered).

Leviticus 23:22

King James Version (KJV)

22And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am the LORD your God.

So, the point is......

I don't know for sure if there will be a first fruits rapture (because I don't know anything for sure), but the scripture does talk about first fruit.

And if there is a first fruit rapture I don't know if it will be of wheat or something else.

But if there is a first fruit rapture, obviously, it would have to be "picked out" (collected) as the first ripe fruit (syllego), not "gathered" all at once (synago).

Obviously, then the gathering will be the "synagogi." Therefore, our "gathering together unto the Lord" will be our "epi-synagogi ep' auton."

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Th&c=2&v=1&t=KJV#conc/1.

But will there be any first ripe fruit, prior to that?

Watching,..maybe the following will help you get a grasp on your question
http://www.raptureready.com/featured/reagan/dr8.html









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

Resurrections and Judgments

How Many and When?

by Dr. David R. Reagan




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

My boyhood church always taught that there would be one resurrection and one judgment. Everyone who had ever lived would be resurrected at one time, and all of us — the just and the unjust — would be judged at the same time. The sheep would be separated from the goats at the Great White Throne Judgment pictured in Revelation 20:11-15.

But this concept is all wrong. The Bible reveals that there will be more than one resurrection and more than one judgment.

Multiple Resurrections
Concerning resurrection, Jesus clearly taught that there would be more than one resurrection. In John 5:29 He refers to a "resurrection of life" and a "resurrection of judgment." The apostle Paul confirmed this concept in his defense before Felix when he stated that he believed the teaching of the prophets "that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked" (Acts 24:15).

Of course, it could be argued that the two resurrections referred to in these scriptures will occur at the same time. Thus, because they will happen simultaneously, there is, in effect, only one resurrection. However, the Scriptures establish the fact that the resurrection of the righteous will occur in stages.

In other words, the Bible does not teach one resurrection or even two resurrections in number. Rather, it teaches that there will be two resurrections in type which will be conducted in stages, resulting in several resurrections — at least four, to be specific.



The Resurrection of the Just
That the resurrection of the righteous will occur in stages is clearly taught in 1 Corinthians 15:20-24. In fact, the first stage of the resurrection of the righteous has already happened, for verse 20 says that "Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep."

Verses 22 and 23 go on to explain that all who have died in Christ shall be made alive, "but each in his own order: Christ, the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming."

The imagery of the harvest that is used in these verses is a key to understanding the first resurrection — the resurrection of the righteous.

The Harvest Imagery
In Bible times the harvest was conducted in three stages. It began with the gathering of the first fruits which were offered as a sacrifice of thanksgiving to God.

It proceeded with the general harvest. But not all was taken in this harvest. Some of the crop was left in the field to be gathered by the poor and the needy. This was called the gleanings (Leviticus 19:9-10).

Using this imagery, the Bible presents the resurrection of Jesus as the "first fruits" of the resurrection of the righteous. The gathering of the Church Age saints, living and dead, at the appearing of the Lord (the Rapture) is thus the general harvest stage of the resurrection of the righteous (John 14:1-3 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18).

But there is a third and final stage to this resurrection of the righteous. It is the gleanings, and it occurs at the end of the Tribulation when the Lord's Second Coming takes place. At that time two final groups of the righteous will be resurrected: 1) the Tribulation martyrs (Revelation 20:4), and 2) the Old Testament saints (Dan 12:2).

Some people are startled by the thought that the Old Testament saints will not be resurrected until the end of the Tribulation. But keep in mind that the Rapture is a promise to the Church, and the Church only. Also, the book of Daniel makes it clear that the Old Testament saints will be resurrected at the end of the "time of distress" (Daniel 12:1-2).

So the first resurrection, the resurrection of the righteous, occurs in three stages, beginning with Christ, continuing with the Church at the Rapture, and culminating with the Tribulation martyrs and the Old Testament saints at the return of Jesus.

The Resurrection of the Unjust
The second type of resurrection, "the resurrection of the wicked" (Acts 24:15), will take place all at one time at the end of the millennial reign of Jesus. This is at the time of the Great White Throne Judgment, the judgment of the ****** (Revelation 20:11-15).

Every person who ever failed to relate to God in faith will be resurrected at this time, regardless of when he or she may have lived and died — whether before or after the Cross. This resurrection will also include the unjust who died during the Tribulation and the Millennium.

There will be no need for an additional resurrection of the righteous at the end of the Millennium, because all those born during that time who accept Jesus as their Savior will live to the end of the Lord's reign (Isaiah 65:19-20). "'As the lifetime of a tree, so shall be the days of My people,'. . . says the Lord" (Isaiah 65:22,25). In other words, life spans during the Millennium will be returned to what they were at the beginning of time, before the flood.

The Certainty of Judgment
Resurrection will be followed by judgment. Solomon wrote, "Fear God and keep His commandments . . . For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil" (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14).

The apostle Paul emphasized the certainty of judgment. In Romans 2:16 he wrote, "God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus." And in Romans 14:10,12 he stated, "We shall all stand before the judgment seat of God . . . So then each one of us shall give account of himself to God." The writer to the Hebrews summed it up succinctly: "It is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment" (Hebrews 9:27).

The Completed Judgment
But not all people are going to be judged at the same time. Just as there are going to be several resurrections, there are also going to be several judgments.

One judgment has already taken place. It is the judgment of believers for their sins.

This comes as a surprise to most Christians. Some find it hard to believe. I'll never forget when I realized it from my study of Scripture. I became filled with so much joy that I felt like jumping pews all day!

Let me put it to you in another way. If you are truly born again, then you will never stand before the Lord and be judged of your sins. That's because the judgment for your sins took place at the Cross.

You see, all your sins, and mine, were placed upon Jesus as He hung upon the Cross, and the wrath we deserve was poured out upon Him (2 Corinthians 5:21). He became our substitute. He took our judgment for sin (Romans 8:3 and Galatians 3:13).

If you have appropriated the blood of Jesus to your life by accepting Him as your Lord and Savior, then your sins have been forgiven. They have also been forgotten in the sense that God will never remember them against you again (Isaiah 43:25 and Hebrews 8:12).

Think of it — forgiven and forgotten! That is grace!

The Judgment of the Just
If the Redeemed will never be judged of their sins, then what will they be judged of, and when will the judgment take place?

The Bible teaches that the Redeemed will be judged of their works, not to determine their eternal destiny, but to determine their degrees of reward.

Christians do not work to be saved; they work because they are saved. In fact, the Bible says they are saved to do good works (Ephesians 2:10 and Titus 2:14). Such good works, if properly done, will be done in the power of the Holy Spirit (1 Peter 4:11) and for the glory of God (1 Corinthians 10:31).

The Significance of Spiritual Gifts
Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12 that every person who is born again receives at least one supernatural spiritual gift from the Holy Spirit. A person may receive more than one gift. And, if you are a good steward of the gifts you receive, then you may receive additional gifts as you develop spiritually (Luke 19:26).

God expects us to use our spiritual gifts to advance His kingdom. This is what the judgment of works will be all about. Each of us who are redeemed will stand before the Lord Jesus and give an accounting of how we used our gifts to advance the kingdom of God on earth.

We will be judged as to the quantity of our works (Luke 19:11-27; Romans 2:6-7). We will be judged as to the quality of our works (1 Corinthians 3:10-14). Finally, we will be judged as to the motivation of our works ( 1 Corinthians 4:5).

I can imagine some famous evangelist being brought before the Lord for judgment.

"How did you use your spiritual gifts to advance my kingdom?" asks the Lord.

"I used my gifts as a teacher and evangelist to preach the gospel to millions," replies the preacher.

"Yes," says the Lord, "you certainly did that. But, I know your heart, and thus I know your motivation. You preached not because you loved Me but because you wanted to become famous. You wanted to have your picture published on the cover of Time magazine. You accomplished that in February of 1953. Here's your picture. That's all the reward I have for you!"

And then I can imagine the Lord calling up a little old lady that no one has ever heard of.

"Dear, on the day you accepted Me as your Lord and Savior, I gave you one gift — the gift of mercy. And every time someone was ill, you were the first to offer comfort and encouragement. You were the one who organized the prayer chain. Every time someone went to the hospital, you were the first to visit them. Every time someone died, you were the one who organized the meals. And you did all of these things simply because you loved me."

The Lord will give her a crown full of so many jewels that she will have a neck ache for eternity!

Seriously, there will be degrees of rewards. They will be manifested in the crowns we receive (2 Timothy 4:7-8), the robes we wear (Revelation 19:8), and the degrees of ruling authority which we exercise with the Lord (Luke 19:11-27).

The Timing of the Judgments
When and where will the judgment of the Redeemed take place? The Bible indicates the judgment of believers who have lived and died during the Church Age will occur in Heaven before the judgment seat of Jesus, immediately following the Rapture of the Church (2 Corinthians 5:10 and Revelation 19:6-9).

Those who are saved and martyred during the Tribulation will be judged at the end of that period when they are resurrected at the Second Coming of Christ (Revelation 20:4). The Tribulation saints who live to the end of that terrible period are another group that will be judged at the Second Coming of Jesus in "the sheep and goat judgment" portrayed in Matthew 25:31-46. The Old Testament saints will also be judged at the time of the Second Coming (Ezekiel 20:34-38).

All the unrighteous who have ever lived will be resurrected and judged at the end of the millennial reign of Jesus.

The Judgment of the Unjust
The terrible judgment of the unrighteous is pictured in Revelation 20:11-15. It is called the "Great White Throne" judgment.

We are told that the wicked also will be judged of their works. But their judgment will be radically different from the judgment of the Redeemed. Whereas the Redeemed are judged of their works to determine their degrees of reward, the lost are judged of their works to determine their eternal destiny.

And since no one can be justified before God by their works (Isaiah 64:6 and Ephesians 2:8-10), all will be condemned to Hell. That's why I call this judgment "the judgment of the ******."

The unjust are also judged for another reason. There are going to be degrees of punishment (Luke 12:35-48; 20:45-47).

There is a popular myth in Christendom that says, "All sin is equal in the eyes of God." That is not true. The only way in which all sin is equal is that any sin, whether a white lie or murder, condemns us before God and necessitates a Savior.

But all sin is not equal in the eyes of God. For example, Proverbs 6:16-19 lists seven sins that the Lord particularly hates, including "hands that shed innocent blood." And the Bible makes it very clear that idolatry is a sin that is especially heinous in the eyes of God (Exodus 20:3-5).

Because God considers some sins worse than others, there will be degrees of punishment (Revelation 22:12), and these degrees will be specified at the Great White Throne judgment.

A Call to Repentance
Where do you stand with respect to the inevitable judgment which you will face before the Lord?

If you are a Christian, do you know what spiritual gifts you have been given? Are you using them to advance the Lord's kingdom? Is your motivation a love of the Lord?

If you have never confessed Jesus as your Lord and Savior, do you really want to participate in the judgment of the ******? Do you realize that the Bible says, "Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord"? That means Hitler and every vile person like him who has ever lived will one day make the confession of Jesus' lordship. You will too.

I urge you to make that confession now so that you can participate in the resurrection and judgment of the righteous. As you consider your decision, weigh carefully the following words from the book of Hebrews:

"Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him" — Hebrews 9:28

Notice carefully that this verse promises that for those who are ready for Him, Jesus will come "without reference to sin." That is a wonderful promise.

[benny balerio]

Sorry that I did not respond to this sooner, but I was without internet for a few months.
In responce, my question to you is:Are you suggesting that the sixth seal occurs after the distress of those days?
Also,revelation 16 does not indicate that that armies of the world coward and hide in the rocks at the sign of the Son of Man.

In the text of Revelation, it does not say that the world cowers and hides at the sign of the Son on Man. Revelation 6 takes place between the lines. Precisely, the upheaval of the heaven and the sign of the Son of Man in heaven takes place here:

12And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.

Revelation 6, the parting of the heavens and the world sees Jesus before the throne of God, sickle in hand.

13And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.

14For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

Near the end of the 7 years, the world will become disillusioned with the Antichrist's beast claim to be God because he is unable to stop the judgments that the true God is pouring out on the rebellious inhabitants of the earth. In addition, it is problably likely as God's judgments take their toll, that the Antichrist beast will funnel dwindling resources to his EU ten king revived roman empire group, leaving the rest of the world to suffer even more. Which causes him to be attacked in Daniel 11, from the south, north, and eventually the east.

In Daniel 11, it is the news from the east that alarms him. That takes us to Revelation 16:12 above, the Eurphrates drying up making way for the kings of the east. In Daniel 11, it doesn't say that he actually engages the armies from the east. But apparently, they will cross the Euphrates, gathering all nations of the world into middle east. At that precise moment, Revelation 6 takes place. It will terrify the evil men of the world. So it will take the convincing of the Antichrist beast, False Prophet, and Satan to make war on Jesus. Which is Revelation 16:13-14.

Revelation 16:16 And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.

The he is the Antichrist beast.

So, everything before Revelation 16:13, is before the heavens part and the world seeing Jesus before the throne of God in heaven, sickle in hand. Revelation 14:14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.

The wrath of God in the bowls before Revelation 16:13, is in Revelation 14:15-16.

15And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.
16And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.

In Revelation 14:17-20, is the gathering of the nations at Armageddon and their moving down to surround Jerusalem to stop Jesus from returning, and to kill all the Jews there. Where there will be a bloodbath of those armies in the valley of Jehosophat.

17And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.
18And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.
19And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
20And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs

Again,....according to Joel 2;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.
And that Matthew 24 has it that the sun was darkened and the moon did not give its light "after" the great tribulation.
I see here two different descriptions.

The great and dreadful day of the Lord is the day that Jesus returns, the wrath of the Lamb. I interpret "after" in Matthew 24 to mean at the end of the great tribulation. Technically speaking there is the great earthquake and hail in the 7 seal, which follows the Antichrist's/false prophet's/Satan's call for the kings of the earth to fight Jesus. Keep in mind, they will have 45 days to assemble themselves. Where during that 45 days, the great earthquake and hail takes place, cannot be pinpointed. It could be concurrent with the day that Jesus actually descends down to the Mt. of Olives.

In revelation 16;10 reads the following:
10The fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom was plunged into darkness. Men gnawed their tongues in agony 11and cursed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, but they refused to repent of what they had done.
I believe that the fifth angel pours out Gods bowl of wrath prior to the seventh angels pouring out.
My point here is that I believe that the bowl wrath judgements 1thru 7 are all judgements consisting of Gods Wrath,and that the world was very much aware that the Wrath of God was being activated prior to the great earthquake of revelation 16;20.
But in revelation 6;12-14 are the events that cause the world to realize that the Wrath of God has been activated.
Once revelation 6;15-17 has come to pass, then afterwards,the 144,000 from the 12 tribes of Israel are sealed.
I believe that the earthquake of revelation 16;20 renovates the whole earth.

Benny, the drying up of the Euphrates in Revelation 16:12 and the kings of the east moving into the middle east is the last event right before Revelation 6 takes place. Revelation 16:13 is the reaction to the terror that will grip the evil men of the world when Revelation 6 takes place.

Bowl 7 is after Revelation 16:13 and the gathering of the armies to Armageddon. Whether the great earthquake and the hail take place on the very day that Jesus descends to the Mt. of Olives is not for certain.

Doug

Sorry Doug,..But I cannot agree with your interpretation.
revelation 6;15-16 15Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. 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!

Compared to revelation 16;20Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found.

One has it the world hiding among the mountains and the other the mountains could not be found.These are two different events.


Acts 2:20
The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood,
"before" that great and notable Day of the Lord come:


Joel 2:31
The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood,
"before" the great and the terrible Day of the Lord come.

Matthew 24;29“Immediately after the distress of those days

“‘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.

Revelation 6;12 reads..." 12I 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, "
Revelation 6;17...is connected to distress prior to Matthew 24;29 in which Matthew 24;29 states:Immediately after the distress of those days.

Joel is the only prophet that made the prediction of a blood red moon. This prophecy appears nowhere else in Scripture. In the book of Revelation, we find that the sixth seal brings forth the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy. This is the pattern of scripture, that almost every judgement or event found within Revelation was also predicted by Old Testament prophets. Joel was the only prophet to predict a blood red moon, and Revelation is the only place where this prediction is shown to be fulfilled.
The Darkening of the sun and the moon turning blood red must PRECEDE the Day of the Lord, therefore the Day of the Lord must begin after the sixth seal is opened and AFTER Revelation 6:12. Revelation 6:14-17 then describes the fifth event that takes place after the sixth seal is opened, as well as mankind's reaction to it,

"And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the GREAT DAY OF HIS WRATH IS COME; and who shall be able to stand?"

This catastrophic global event is recognized by the people of the earth as the beginning of the great day of God's wrath, otherwise known as the Day of the Lord. Compare this passage with Isaiah's prophecy of the same event in 2:12,19-21,

"For the DAY OF THE LORD of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be brought low... And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth. In that day a man shall cast his idols of silver, and his idols of gold, which they made each one for himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats; To go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth."

Malachi 4:5
"See, I will send you the prophet Elijah before that great and dreadful day of the LORD comes.

We know that Ezekiel 38;18-19 begins that day of the Lord and we know that Elijah does not come before the Day of the Lord ,..but instead Elijah comes "Before the Great and terrible day of the Lord.

It is my belief that there is a reason for change in the wording of..Day of the Lord and Great and terrible Day of the Lord.
I believe that Elijah will come prior to the Great Tribulation,..in which I believe that the A.O.D. begins the Great and terrible Day of the Lord.In comparison,...The beginning of Daniels 70th week I believe is classified as The Day of the Lord.

The whole of Daniels 70th week I believe is divided into two parts,..one the Day of the Lord and the second half called the Great and terrible Day of the Lord.
Our Lord Jesus made it a point to call the second half of Daniels 70th week..."The Great Tribulation"

[watching]

Hi Benny,

I am going to give you two links,..in these,..you should come to the conclusion that strong's did mistranslate.
Again keep in mind,....2 Thessalonians 2:1 and 2 Thessalonians 2;7
http://www.watch.pair.com/TR-kjv-issues ... lling-away
http://www.bibleprophesy.org/apostasia.htm

From your link:

A textual error occurs when translators supply or omits words which are not in the Greek text with no indication, such as italics, that a word has been added, or a reference to word(s) not translated. In 2 Thessalonians 2:3, the KJV Translators failed to translate the definite article “the” – “h” – preceding the Greek word for “apostasy” in the Textus Receptus. “The apostasy” refers to a specific event at a specific point in time—the great apostasy of the Church from the faith of Jesus Christ prior to the Tribulation period. Only the Coverdale Bible and the New King James Version (NKJV) translated the definite article “the” which is in the Greek text. Bible versions which fail to translate the definite article in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, diminish the magnitude of the end time apostasy, thereby facilitating false teachings which limit the end time apostasy to the ecumenical movement. Some modern versions (NIV, RSV, NLT, CEV, Good News) mistranslate “apostasia” as rebellion, which changes the falling away from the Word of God to a revolt against man’s authority.

If you recall, in my post I had said "from God" in parenthesis. Here is what I said:

But I am much more inclined to believe that it is referring to a rebellion/revolt/defection (from God), than to a falling away. Because a falling away from the truth has no defining moment. Since a falling away from the truth has been happening probably since Paul's day.

From your other link:

Liddell and Scott and TDNT suggest that APOSTASIA is a later construction for another noun APOSTASIS. The reason I ask this is related to the argument about APOSTASIA as the Rapture in 2 Thess 2:3. Those who argue this position point to the fact that APOSTASIA did have the meaning of "spatial departure" in classical Greek. For APOSTASIA itself LSJ lists only one reference for "spatial departure," and this is from the 6th century A.D. Apparently, the argument that APOSTASIA meant "spatial departure" in the classical period comes from its association with APOSTASIS. Is APOSTASIA more than just a different way to spell APOSTASIS--I assume so. The article in TDNT also says APOSTASIA is a later construction for APOSTASIS, but in the discussion seems to suggest that have a slightly different meaning. Is it legitimate to say that the later APOSTASIA is fully equivalent to the earlier APOSTASIS?

Liddell & Scott (apostasis): --(revolt / departure)
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/le ... =&lookup=a)po/stasis

First of all, I couldn't get the link from your other link to work, so I looked up the Liddell & Scott, definition for "apostasis" on my own. And I didn't see anything in there about "spacial departure."

Here is the link:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=A%29PO%2FSTASIS

I see "departure from," but that is the same thing as defection (i.e. departure from Moses, departure from God, etc.)

But, I don't see anything in there about "spacial departure" (whatever that is).

And here is the definition for "apostasia" according to Liddell and Scott:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=A%29POSTASI%2FA

[watching]

My Reply:
So basicly what you are claiming here is that in Daniel 9;24 that you believe that from the command
to rebuild Jerusalem unto the cutting off of the Messiah....in essense,....the 69 weeks add up to
486 1/2 years?

No, I don't believe that. I believe that 69 weeks and AFTER 69 weeks add up to 486 1/2.


I actually had more to say, but my computer keeps messing up. I'm not sure what the problem is.

[Douggg]

Sorry Doug,..But I cannot agree with your interpretation.
revelation 6;15-16 15Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. 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!

Compared to revelation 16;20Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found.

One has it the world hiding among the mountains and the other the mountains could not be found.These are two different events.

Hi benny, there is not a conflict. Here's the sequence.

It is at the end of the 7 years. The kings of the north, south, and east have become disillusioned with the Antichrist's claim to be God and have moved to the middle east to destroy him.

The Euphrates river has dried up, that is in Revelation 16:12. And they have crossed, giving worry to the Antichrist beast who is engaged in battle with the kings of the north and south.

Then without warning, on day 2475 of the 2520 day 7 years, the sun turns dark and then that evening the moon turns red as blood, the stars are out and as the darkness of the universe peels back like a scroll, the stars appear to fall to the horizon.

The world will see heaven and the mighty host of angels, the throne of God, and Jesus before the throne sickle in hand.

That takes place with 45 days left before Jesus actually descends to planet earth. So the mountains are still in place for men to want them to fall on them, they will be so terrified. That will be their initial reaction.

It takes the convincing of the unholy three of the Antichrist beast, the false prophet, and Satan to convince the kings of the earth to gather their courage to fight Jesus. That takes place in Revelation 16:13-14. There is still most of the 45 days left. There has to be for it takes time for them to assemble their armies and prepare for battle. The Antichrist beast assembles them at Armageddon. Revelation 16:16. The mountains are still intact.

So, the mountains are still intact when Revelation 6 takes place, 45 days before Jesus descends to the mount of Olives.

Toward the end of the 45 days, after the armies have assembled, and perhaps on the very day that Jesus descends to the mount of Olives on day 2520, the seventh vial takes place leveling the mountains Revelation 16:20.

Do you see what I am saying as far as the sequence? There is not a conflict with the mountains still being in place when Revelation 6 takes place, which will terrify the evil men of the world to want the mountains to fall on them - 45 days before Jesus actually descends to the Mt. of Olives. It isn't until the end of the 45 days that the mountains are leveled. In between the sign of the Son of Man in heaven Revelation 6 and his actual descent coming in great power and glory is 45 days.

Mountains at the start of the 45 days, no mountains at the end.

Doug

[benny balerio]

Hi Benny,

I am going to give you two links,..in these,..you should come to the conclusion that strong's did mistranslate.
Again keep in mind,....2 Thessalonians 2:1 and 2 Thessalonians 2;7
http://www.watch.pair.com/TR-kjv-issues ... lling-away
http://www.bibleprophesy.org/apostasia.htm

From your link:

A textual error occurs when translators supply or omits words which are not in the Greek text with no indication, such as italics, that a word has been added, or a reference to word(s) not translated. In 2 Thessalonians 2:3, the KJV Translators failed to translate the definite article “the” – “h” – preceding the Greek word for “apostasy” in the Textus Receptus. “The apostasy” refers to a specific event at a specific point in time—the great apostasy of the Church from the faith of Jesus Christ prior to the Tribulation period. Only the Coverdale Bible and the New King James Version (NKJV) translated the definite article “the” which is in the Greek text. Bible versions which fail to translate the definite article in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, diminish the magnitude of the end time apostasy, thereby facilitating false teachings which limit the end time apostasy to the ecumenical movement. Some modern versions (NIV, RSV, NLT, CEV, Good News) mistranslate “apostasia” as rebellion, which changes the falling away from the Word of God to a revolt against man’s authority.

If you recall, in my post I had said "from God" in parenthesis. Here is what I said:

But I am much more inclined to believe that it is referring to a rebellion/revolt/defection (from God), than to a falling away. Because a falling away from the truth has no defining moment. Since a falling away from the truth has been happening probably since Paul's day.

From your other link:

Liddell and Scott and TDNT suggest that APOSTASIA is a later construction for another noun APOSTASIS. The reason I ask this is related to the argument about APOSTASIA as the Rapture in 2 Thess 2:3. Those who argue this position point to the fact that APOSTASIA did have the meaning of "spatial departure" in classical Greek. For APOSTASIA itself LSJ lists only one reference for "spatial departure," and this is from the 6th century A.D. Apparently, the argument that APOSTASIA meant "spatial departure" in the classical period comes from its association with APOSTASIS. Is APOSTASIA more than just a different way to spell APOSTASIS--I assume so. The article in TDNT also says APOSTASIA is a later construction for APOSTASIS, but in the discussion seems to suggest that have a slightly different meaning. Is it legitimate to say that the later APOSTASIA is fully equivalent to the earlier APOSTASIS?

Liddell & Scott (apostasis): --(revolt / departure)
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/le ... =&lookup=a)po/stasis

First of all, I couldn't get the link from your other link to work, so I looked up the Liddell & Scott, definition for "apostasis" on my own. And I didn't see anything in there about "spacial departure."

Here is the link:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=A%29PO%2FSTASIS

I see "departure from," but that is the same thing as defection (i.e. departure from Moses, departure from God, etc.)

But, I don't see anything in there about "spacial departure" (whatever that is).

And here is the definition for "apostasia" according to Liddell and Scott:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=A%29POSTASI%2FA

At the end of the article,..it is claiming the interpretation is about a rapture and not a departure from the faith.
http://www.bibleprophesy.org/apostasia.htm

There is no hint in the pauline letters of a departure from the faith,..but it does reveal a rapture.
I agree with you that this is an event and not something to be carried out over a period of time.
You have stated that you believe that it is a defection from the faith, with would mean that if it were an event of a mass exodus defection of the faith in that these were believers with an original relationship with God.
But,...that does not make sense that a event of mass exodus from the faith ....The Lord did state that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the church,...in other words a mass exodus would seem to contradict that the gates of Hell would not prevail against the church.
Besides,...The Holy Spirit has sealed the Believer unto the Day of redemption with promise.He says that He would never leave us nor forsake us.
Again,..2 Thessalonians 1through 7 suggest a rapture and not a departure of the faith
Obviously,..you have caused me to take a hard look into this, and this is what I see in these scriptures.
I through 7....There is nothing leading up to nor does it suggest a falling away from the faith.
What people today rely on is the interpretaters,..but we know that they are not above making errors.

About Daniels 70th week,..the Lord did not minister for 3 1/2 years after His Cruxifiction on the Cross(The Cutting off)
You are obviously wrong in your interpretation.

[watching]

About Daniels 70th week,..the Lord did not minister for 3 1/2 years after His Cruxifiction on the Cross(The Cutting off)
You are obviously wrong in your interpretation.

Obviously, that would be a wrong interpretation.

And that is definitely not my interpretation.

In fact, I wish you would stop putting words in my mouth.......but worse yet, misrepresenting the scriptures.

The Lord ministered for 3 1/2 years after HIS COMING.

Daniel 9:25

King James Version (KJV)

25Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

As you can see the scripture doesn't say there will be seven weeks and threescore weeks UNTO THE CUTTING OFF OF THE MESSIAH.

It say's that there will be seven weeks and threescore weeks UNTO THE MESSIAH.

Daniel 9:26

King James Version (KJV)

26And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

The scripture then goes on to say that it would be AFTER threescore and two weeks that the Messiah will be cut off.

NOT at the end of three score and two weeks, or any thing else.

Benny, you seem to be content listening to what men have to say ABOUT the scriptures, and placing that above what the scriptures say, rather than listening to what the scriptures actually say.

But I guess that's your choice, we all have freewill, Benny.

God

[benny balerio]

About Daniels 70th week,..the Lord did not minister for 3 1/2 years after His Cruxifiction on the Cross(The Cutting off)
You are obviously wrong in your interpretation.

Obviously, that would be a wrong interpretation.

And that is definitely not my interpretation.

In fact, I wish you would stop putting words in my mouth.......but worse yet, misrepresenting the scriptures.

The Lord ministered for 3 1/2 years after HIS COMING.

Daniel 9:25

King James Version (KJV)

25Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

As you can see the scripture doesn't say there will be seven weeks and threescore weeks UNTO THE CUTTING OFF OF THE MESSIAH.

It say's that there will be seven weeks and threescore weeks UNTO THE MESSIAH.

Daniel 9:26

King James Version (KJV)

26And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

The scripture then goes on to say that it would be AFTER threescore and two weeks that the Messiah will be cut off.

NOT at the end of three score and two weeks, or any thing else.

Benny, you seem to be content listening to what men have to say ABOUT the scriptures, and placing that above what the scriptures say, rather than listening to what the scriptures actually say.

But I guess that's your choice, we all have freewill, Benny.

God

I do not understand why you seem offended.
I never mentioned anything about 62 weeks.

The Following is what I originally stated and your reply:
So basicly what you are claiming here is that in Daniel 9;24 that you believe that from the command to rebuild Jerusalem unto the cutting off of the Messiah....in essense,....the 69 weeks add up to 486 1/2 years?

That is incorrect....my studies reveal that from the going forth to rebuild Jerusalem unto the cutting of Messiah added up to 483 years to the exact day.

And then you stated:
No, I don't believe that. I believe that 69 weeks and AFTER 69 weeks add up to 486 1/2.

And then you stated:
In fact, I wish you would stop putting words in my mouth.......but worse yet, misrepresenting the scriptures.

The Lord ministered for 3 1/2 years after HIS COMING

My Reply:
Watching,..I am not misrepresenting scripture as you claim,...nor can you prove this.
Watching,..do not take this personal,..we are all looking to get a handle on the scriptures.
You can sit with me and my family anytime for supper.

first of all in case you are not aware,..69 weeks add up to 483 years.."Period"!....Remember the Lord decreed 70 weeks upon the Jewish race....There remains only 7 years that are yet future that will complete the 490 year decree.

I would be quite interested to see how you came to the conclusion that 486 1/2 years had already come to pass???

I'll have to get back with you later,..my wife wants me to watch a movie with her.

[shorttribber]

I would be quite interested to see how you came to the conclusion that 486 1/2 years had already come to pass???

483 years (unto Messiah)........"came to pass"

3.5 years(Messiah's ministry)........"came to pass"


483 + 3.5= 486.5.....years........"came to pass".

Just joining in a little Watching & Benny....hope ya don't mind

[watching]

Hi Benny,

I'm not offended.

It's just that I don't seem to be getting through to you.

Maybe we could start a new thread on Daniel 9:27.

Thanks for joining the conversation, Shorttribber.

I need some help.