The Word of God vs. the Pre-Tribulation Rapture

[Bronzesnake]

Kraken.

 Man, you are one angry Christian!  

 I will address your questions as soon as you answer mine.

When do you believe God's wrath, in relation to the seven vails takes place?

kraken quote...

Of course I agree.

 Good, so you understand Christians are not appointed to wrath in relation to revelation. Now please tell me when you believe God's wrath takes place. If you believe the rapture takes place at His second coming, and we are not appointed to wrath, then that leaves less than a day, at best, for the sevn vials to be poured out. This does not line up with the scriptures my angry friend.

 

However, tribulation for the saints does not equal wrath for the last time.

 Ya, in your opinion. The word tribulation is used in many scriptures as an example of the persecution Christians will, and have endured. When the word tribulation is used in relation to revelation, we understand that this is a momentous occasion, a time of such persecution as has never been witnessed in the history of the world, do I need to post the verses, or will you be honest and concede they are there.
 There are also several verses which speak of "antichrist" in the bible, however, when we take the word in relation to revelation, we understand the word to be associated specifically with satan. We don't need to confuse ourselves once we understand the context with which specific words are being used.

 Tribulation is God's wrath in action, in relation to revelation.



 

Do you not agree that there will be believers on earth that will suffer tribulation at the same time the trumpet judgments take place? Who are those believers if they are not likewise beneficiaries of the promises of God?  This is at the same time when wrath is being poured out upon the earth for the sake of unbelievers.

 

 There will be many left behind, who become saved after the rapture. So, yes, there willbe believers on earth during the tribulation.

Do you not believe that the early Church suffered tribulation?  Their bodies were used as torches and they lined the roads leading into to Rome.  They were torn to pieces in the coliseum.  They were thrown in prison, persecuted and tortured, yet in their afflictions they rejoiced because they believed it was an honor to suffer for the name of Christ.  But then who is going to be suffering wrath?  Those who are doing these things to the believers will suffer God’s wrath and God’s wrath is not indiscriminate nor is it directed upon the saints.  

 You seem to be somewhat ignorant of the meaning of the word tribulation.

 Tribulation- Great affliction, trial, or distress; suffering:

 The word tribulation, is a description of the effect of God's wrath during the final seven years. The words tribulation and wrath can not be separated as though they were seperate events. In revelation, God's wrath causes tribulation.

I challenge you to try for just once to forsake all of your man made interpretations and let the Word of God speak to you.

 I issue the same challenge to you my friend.

   

I may not be going about this the correct way but it is my calling to destroy this pernicious doctrine of a pre-tribulation rapture.  IT IS NOT OUR BLEESED HOPE to be rescued from impending tribulation based on the alleged Philadelphia exception.  On the contrary, it will be a blessing to be here to the bitter end if that is God’s will.  It will be a blessing to see Israel saved and come to Christ.  I can guarantee you that if you remove the dispensational blinders you will see things in a different light that will bring a new understanding to God’s Word, both Old and New Testament.  It is my opinion that dispensational pre-tribulationism is the worst of all lies that is corrupting the evangelical Church.  It is a doctrine of utter complacency and defeatism for the Church.

 

 Your propensity for being mistaken is only outmatched by your tenancy towards arrogance my friend.

 

I would love to hear your specific interpretation of Rev 16:14-17 in the full context of the verses that accompany it concerning the final battle and especially the “it is done” quote from 16:17.  You also have failed to address the fact that the only second coming passages mentioned in scriptures that are “a surprise second coming” are those that are clearly post-tribulational.  Indeed all of the second coming verses are either post trib as to their explicit timing or neutral in the since that only out of context one can perhaps imply some other timing.

 When did I say His second coming would be a "surprise second coming"?  We know His second coming will not be a surprise, because the scriptures tell us He will return exactly seven years after satan signs the false peace deal.

 Rev 16:15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed [is] he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.  

 If you read the proceeding verses, you can understand that Jesus is warning those left behind that there will be unclean spirits spewed from the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. They will trick men with false miracles in order to get them to join the unholy alliance and fight against Jesus and His saints, who, by the way, are depicted in Rev 19:14 following Jesus from Heaven to earth. The warning applies to the unbelievers at that time, not the saved, as you will see in the bold text from Rev 16:15

 Rev 16:15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed [is] he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.  

Now please, answer the question kraken, otherwise I am through with you.

Bronzesnake.

[Bronzesnake]

Bronze: please, when you use the book of Revelation please also point out it's sister scripture in the OT.

I'm getting sick and tired of people quoting from Revelation out of thin air;
it's theologically not correct, and scripturewise it just looks plain dumb.

I know you're intelligent; please use the OT as a mirror to prove your point.

 Are you unable to understand Revelation as it stands t.b.?

 Tell you what, why don't you  use the book of Revelation and point out it's sister scripture in the OT to prove pre-trib wrong, and I will give a rebuttal.

Bronzesnake

[infotechadviser]

Revelation is in chronological order.
 The problem a lot of us have is that there seems to be several verses that are not in sequence.]

Pretty much, but some is recaps. Daniel is the key that opens up the timeline of events.

The first three chapters clearly state what they are. It is a collection of messages to the "seven churches which are in Asia". Revelation is mostly prophecy, and mostly for leading up to (and beyond) the "end-times", just like Daniel, but some of it is not, just like Daniel.

Rev 17 - 18[/u] is satan's kingdom. In these verses the mystery of evil is revealed as well as it's final destination.

This beast is much like the one shown in Daniel 7 or 8, and it shows that this succession of kingdoms on Earth are of the same spirit. The subject is clearly stated as the "Great Whore" plus a long description, but it is clearly also distinguishes it from the reign of the Beast. God puts it in the heart of the ten kings to destroy the Whore.

..we no longer have to, for example,  place the rapture in a "later" timeline because we believe it seems to occur in a later chapter in Revelation.

There is no reason--at all--to move it to before the Trib in the first place! However, the timeline of events laid out in Dan. 9 and other chapters in Daniel, and by Jesus Himself in Matthew 24, and those found in Revelation, all agree.

(A) "And he shall confirm the covenant for one week" (Dan 9:27), a seven year pact (Dan 9:27).

(B) and "when ye shall see the abomination that maketh desolate sit in the holy place"--Jesus in Matt 24:15 referrring to Daniel 9:27,  "in the midst of the week"--

(C) "for then shall be great tribulation such as was not since the beginning of the world..".

(D) then (Matthew 24:29: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days...(v.30)..then shall all the tribes of the earth..see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.."(v.31)..And he shall send his angels...and they shall gather together his elect from one end of heaven to the other.."

There are verses that go along with this sequence in II Thessalonians, Timothy, and as we can see, in Revelations. The plagues associated with the trumpets refer obviously to the Tribulation plagues, and then with the seventh trumpet you get the voice saying the kingdoms on Earth are finished, and then you have the seven vials of the wrath of God poured out upon the wicked who are still here after we are gathered together.

Now again, you have your answer, Bronzesnake you have THREE DISTINCT EVENTS: (1) the establishing of the Covenant for seven years; (2) the breaking of the covenant in the "midst of the week", which marks the beginning of the Great Tribulation, according to Jesus' words in Matt. 24; (3) the end of the Tribulation, at which time the two witnesses and the others saints are "gathered together", and the the seven vials of wrath are poured out upon the Earth; (4) the seventh vial, which is our return with Jesus at Armageddon.

There is no other way to make the pieces fit together.

We are still not appointed unto wrath, that is for the wicked left behind after the 7th trump is sounded and before and up to Armageddon.

No cushy heavenly escape for us.."..to try them and to make them white" it says in Daniel 11. Baby Christians need us more than ever during that time, God would not abandon them.

--As to what happens at death, you have the story of the beggar Lazarus and the rich man, both of whom got their rewards after death, and Jesus put them in the past tense.

You have Elijah and Moses who appeared with Jesus, Samuel speaking with Saul, and the "angel" who brought the Revelation to John, who told John he was a prophet just like John. And the multitudes of saints under the altar praying in Heaven...

[Reba]

Rev 1:1
1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
KJV

Gen 41:32

32 And for that the dream was doubled unto Pharaoh twice; it is because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass.
KJV

3 John 14

14 But I trust I shall shortly see thee, and we shall speak face to face. Peace be to thee. Our friends salute thee. Greet the friends by name.


KJV

Rev 1:3

3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.
KJV

Gen 27:41

41 And Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing wherewith his father blessed him: and Esau said in his heart, The days of mourning for my father are at hand; then will I slay my brother Jacob.
KJV

John 2:13

13 And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,
KJV

[Bronzesnake]

infotech...

(A) "And he shall confirm the covenant for one week" (Dan 9:27), a seven year pact (Dan 9:27).

So far, so good.

(B) and "when ye shall see the abomination that maketh desolate sit in the holy place"--Jesus in Matt 24:15 referrring to Daniel 9:27,  "in the midst of the week"--

Yes, that warning is to the Jews who will not be raptured because they reject Jesus.

(C) "for then shall be great tribulation such as was not since the beginning of the world..".

 Notice the term "great tribulation" is used. This makes a clear destinction from tribulation. It doesn't mean tribulation begins after satan is physically tossed down to earth, it means that things get seriously worse at that point. The begining of the final seven years, is the begining of tribulation. Once satan arrives, tribulation becomes "great tribulation" because it really heats up at that point.

Have a close look at this next verse...

  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;  

 There is a falling away before satan reveals himself. I believe this "falling away" describes the departure of the Holy Spirit through His saints being raptured out of the earth.

 I will paste an article on this (falling away) in my next post...

[Bronzesnake]

The following is taken from a post by 2nd Timothy

Rapture in 2 Thessalonians 2 “falling away”  
I’ve always suspected it, but have never pursued it. There was always in my thoughts, when I read 2 Thessalonians 2: 2-3, that the term “falling away” means more than the prophetic warning of a general departure from the faith. After all, the people of God have gone through many widespread episodes of departing from a firm stance for God’s Word and ways throughout the centuries since the establishment of the Church of Jesus Christ.

Much of the time following the first few centuries of Christianity, the church was immersed in mysticism –even occultic activities. The “Dark Ages” was a time when few Christians truly stood up for the Light found in Christ. Those who did so were often made martyrs by the most cruel methods available to the inquisitors and others. It is unlikely that a future departure from true Christian faith could far exceed some of those departures of the past. So, the prophetic alert Paul gives in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 seems to indicate not a departure from the faith, but a departure of a much more dramatic sort.

Upon close examination of a Pre-Trib newsletter I received from Dr. Tim LaHaye and Dr. Thomas Ice, the things that had been blurred for me in the 2 Thessalonians 2: 2-3 prophecy started to focus in my mind and spirit. Dr. Ice’s article on the subject gave insights that I consider Holy Spirit-inspired. The things Dr. Ice proposes, if they are the way God meant them to be interpreted, are profound, indeed!

The Scripture we will look at is 2 Thessalonians 2: 3, but we will include verses 1 and 2 leading up to the point on which we will concentrate.

“Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition” (2 Thes. 2:1-3).

Dr. Ice proposes that the “falling away” in verse 3 doesn’t mean a departure from the basic Bible doctrines. It means, instead, that the Rapture of the Church will take place. His prayerfully studied premise revolves around the word apostasia, the Greek verb translated to the KJV as the “falling away.” This verb form, in this Scripture, has most often been interpreted to mean the apostasy (inferred generally to mean a gross departure from true Christian faith) that will develop in the end time, before the “day of Christ” comes. The “day of Christ" is the time when Jesus Christ again directly intervenes –that is, directly interacts with mankind in divine judgment.

The Thessalonians were troubled about whether the things Paul addressed in his earlier epistle to them had already taken place. That is, the harpazo--the Greek verb for “caught up” of 1 Thessalonians 4:16. They were worried that they had missed it, and the apostle wanted to set their minds at ease. At the same time, Almighty God obviously wanted this great prophecy given to future generations of Christians.

Dr. Ice goes into considerable detail in putting forward biblical and historical documentation for his and Dr. LaHaye’s conclusions about what they believe is a Rapture reference, rather than a reference to a departure from the fundamentals of the faith in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

I am grateful to Dr. Ice for allowing me to use his article in addressing this topic, so crucial to the Pre-Trib Rapture viewpoint.

It’s an unusually lengthy "Nearing Midnight Update," but one I thought you, our family and friends will find interesting. Read, and prayerfully consider for yourself, this important passage, and Tommy’s take on the matter. Let the Holy Spirit speak to you, and confirm truth to your own spirit about what is meant here.  

The Meaning of Apostasia

The Greek noun apostasia is used only twice in the New Testament. In addition to 2 Thessalonians 2:3, it occurs in Acts 21:21 where, speaking of Paul, it is said, "that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake (apostasia) Moses." The word is a Greek compound of apo "from" and istemi "stand." Thus, it has the core meaning of "away from" or "departure." The Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon defines apostasia first as "defection, revolt"; then secondly as "departure, disappearance" (Henry George Liddell and Henry Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, Revised with a Supplement [1968] by Sir Henry Stuart Jones and Roderick McKenzie [Oxford, Eng.: Oxford university Press, 1940], p. 218). Gordon Lewis explains how the verb from which the noun apostasia is derived supports the basic meaning of departure in the following:  

"The verb may mean to remove spatially. There is little reason then to deny that the noun can mean such a spatial removal or departure. Since the noun is used only one other time in the New Testament of apostasy from Moses (Acts 21:21), we can hardly conclude that its Biblical meaning is necessarily determined. The verb is used fifteen times in the New Testament. Of these fifteen, only three have anything to do with a departure from the faith (Luke 8:13; 1 Tim. 4: 1; Heb 3:12). The word is used for departing from iniquity (2 Tim. 2:19), from ungodly men (I Tim. 6:5), from the temple (Luke 2:27), from the body (2 Cor. 12:, and from persons (Acts 12: 10; Luke 4:13)" (Gordon R. Lewis, "Biblical Evidence for Pretribulationism," Bibliotheca Sacra [vol. 125, no. 499; July 1968], p. 218).  

"It is with all assurance of proper exegetical study and with complete confidence in the original languages," concludes Daniel Davey, ‘that the word meaning of apostasia is defined as departure" (Daniel K. Davey, "The 'Apostesia' of II Thessalonians 2:3," Th.M. thesis, Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary, May 1982, p. 27). Paul Lee Tan adds the following:  

‘What precisely does Paul mean when he says that 'the falling away' (2:3) must come before the tribulation? The definite article 'the' denotes that this will be a definite event, an event distinct from the appearance of  the Man of Sin. The Greek word for 'falling away,' taken by itself, does not mean religious apostasy or  defection. Neither does the word mean 'to fall,' as the Greeks have another word for that. [pipto, I fall; TDI] The best translation of the word is "to depart." The apostle Paul refers here to a definite event which he calls 'the departure,' and which will occur just before the start of the tribulation. This is the rapture of the church" (Paul Lee Tan, The Interpretation of Prophecy [Winona Lake, IN: Assurance Publishers, 1974], p. 341).  So the word has the core meaning of departure and it depends upon the context to determine whether it is used to mean physical departure or an abstract departure such as departure from the faith.  

Translation History The first seven English translations of apostasia all rendered the noun as either "departure" or "departing." They are as follows: Wycliffe Bible (1384); Tyndale Bible (1526); Coverdale Bible (1535); Cranmer Bible (1539); Breeches Bible (1576); Beza Bible (1583); Geneva Bible (1608) (H. Wayne House, "Apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2:3: Apostasy or Rapture?" in Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy, eds., When the Trumpet Sounds: Today's Foremost Authorities Speak Out on End-Time Controversies [Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1995], p. 270).    

This supports the notion that the word truly means "departure." In fact, Jerome's Latin translation, known as the Vulgate from around the time of A.D. 400, renders apostasia with the word discessio, meaning "departure" (House, "Apostesia," p. 270).  

CONTINUED...

[Bronzesnake]

Apostasia part II

Why was the King James Version the first to depart from the established translation of "departure"?  

Theodore Beza, the Swiss reformer, was the first to transliterate apostasia and create a new word, rather than translate it as others had done. The translators of the King James Version were the first to introduce the new rendering of apostasia as "falling away." Most English translators have followed the KJV and Beza in departing from translating apostasia as "departure." No good reason was ever given.  

  The Use of the Article    

It is important to note that Paul uses a definite article with the noun apostasia. What does this mean? Davey notes the following: "Since the Greek language does not need an article to make the noun definite, it becomes clear that with the usage of the article reference is being made to something in particular. In 2 Thessalonians 2:3 the word apostasia is prefaced by the definite article which means that Paul is pointing to a particular type of departure  

clearly known to the Thessalonian church" (Davey, Apostesia," p. 47). Dr. Lewis provides a likely answer when he notes that the definite article serves to make a word distinct and draw attention to it. In this instance he believes that its purpose is "to denote a previous reference." "The departure previously referred to was 'our being gathered to him’ (v.1) and our being 'caught up' with the Lord and the raptured dead in the clouds (I Thess. 4:17),’ notes Dr. Lewis (Gordon R. Lewis & Bruce A. Demarest, Integrative Theology 3 vols. in 1 [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996], vol. 3, p. 420).  The  "departure" was something that Paul and his readers clearly had a mutual understanding about. Paul says in verse 5, "Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things?"    

The use of the definite article would also support the notion that Paul spoke of a clear, discernable event. A physical departure, like the rapture, would fit just such a notion. However, the New Testament teaches that apostasy had already arrived in the first century (cf. Acts 20:27-32; 1 Tim. 4:1-5; 2 Tim. 3:1-9; 2 Pet. 2:1-3; Jude 3-4, 17-21), and thus such a process would not denote a clear event as demanded by the language of this passage. Understanding departure as the rapture would satisfy the nuance of this text. E. Schuyler English explains as follows:  

"Again, how would the Thessalonians, or Christians in any century since, be qualified to recognize the apostasy when it should come, assuming, simply for the sake of this inquiry, that the Church might be on earth when it does come? There has been apostasy from God, rebellion against Him, since time began" (E. Schuyler English, Re-Thinking the Rapture ( Neptune, NJ: Loiseaux Brothers, 1954), p. 70.  

Whatever Paul is referring to in his reference to "the departure," was something that both the Thessalonian believers and he had discussed in-depth previously. When we examine Paul's first letter to the Thessalonians, he never mentions the doctrine of apostasy; however, virtually every chapter in that epistle speaks of the rapture (cf. 1:9-10; 2:19; probably 3:13; 4:13-17; 5:1-11). In these passages, Paul has used a variety of Greek terms to describe the rapture. It  should not be surprising that he uses another term to reference the rapture in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Dr. House tells us:  

"Remember, the Thessalonians had been led astray by the false teaching (2:2-3) that the Day of the Lord had already come. This was confusing because Paul offered great hope, in the first letter, of a departure to be with Christ and a rescue from God's wrath. Now a letter purporting to be from Paul seems to say that they would first have to go through the Day of the Lord. Paul then clarified his prior teaching by emphasizing that they had no need to worry. They could again be comforted because the departure he had discussed in his first letter, and in his teaching while with them, was still the truth. The departure of Christians to be with Christ, and the subsequent revelation of the lawless one, Paul argues, is proof that the Day of the Lord had not begun as they had thought. This understanding of apostasia makes much more sense than the view that they are to be comforted (v. 2) because a defection from the faith must precede the Day of the Lord. The entire second chapter (as well as I Thessalonians 4:18; 5:11) serves to comfort (see w. 2, 3, 17), supplied by a reassurance of Christ's coming as taught in his first letter " (House, "Apostesia," pp. 275-76).  

Departure and The Restrainer

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

"I wonder if you have noticed the striking parallel between this verse and verses, 7-8, a little further down. According to your suggestion verse 3 mentions the departure of the church as coming first, and then tells of the revealing of the man of sin. In verses 7 and 8 we find the identical sequence. Verse 7 tells of the removal of the Church; verse 8 says: 'And then shall that Wicked be revealed.' Thus close examination of the passage shows an inner unity and coherence, if we take the word apostasia in its general sense of 'departure,' while a superficial examination would easily lead to an erroneous interpretation as 'falling away' because of the proximity of the mention of the man of sin" (Allan A. MacRae, Letter to E. Schuyler English, published in "Let the Prophets Speak," Our Hope, [vol. LVI, num 12; June 1950], p. 725).  

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

"But then hee apostasia of which Paul is speaking, precedes the revelation of Antichrist in his true identity, and is to katechon that which holds back his revelation (2:6). The hee apostasia, therefore, cannot be either a general apostasy in Christendom which does precede the coming of Antichrist, nor can it be the particular apostasy which is the result of his activities in making himself the alone object of worship. Furthermore, that which holds back his revelation (vs, 3) is vitally connected with hoo katechoon (vs. 7), He who holds back the same event. The latter is, in my opinion, the Holy Spirit and His activities in the Church. All of which means that I am driven to the inescapable conclusion that the hee apostasia (vs. 3) refers to the Rapture of the Church which precedes the Day of the Lord, and holds back the revelation of the Man of Sin who ushers in the world-aspect of that period" (Kenneth S. Wuest, Letter to E. Schuyler English, published in "Let the Prophets Speak," Our Hope, [vol. LVI, num 12; June 1950], p. 731).  

Conclusion  

The fact that apostasia most likely has the meaning of physical departure is a clear support for pretribulationism. If this is true (Dr. Tim LaHaye and I believe that it is), then it means that a clear prophetic sequence is laid out by Paul early in his Apostolic' ministry. Paul teaches in 2 Thessalonians 2 that the rapture will occur first, before the Day of the Lord commences. It is not until after the beginning of the Day of the Lord that the Antichrist is released, resulting in the events described by him in chapter 2 of 2 Thessalonians. This is the only interpretation that provides hope for a discomforted people.”

  Dr. Thomas Ice’s article and its sources are found in Pre-Trib Perspective March, 2004, Vol. 8, No. 11: “Is the Rapture in 2 Thessalonians 2:3?
--Terry

[twobombs]

Bronze: please, when you use the book of Revelation please also point out it's sister scripture in the OT.

I'm getting sick and tired of people quoting from Revelation out of thin air;
it's theologically not correct, and scripturewise it just looks plain dumb.

I know you're intelligent; please use the OT as a mirror to prove your point.

 Are you unable to understand Revelation as it stands t.b.?

 Tell you what, why don't you  use the book of Revelation and point out it's sister scripture in the OT to prove pre-trib wrong, and I will give a rebuttal.

Bronzesnake

This isn't about being wrong or right in discussion.
This is about being theologically correct, and use
TWO witnesses to make a point !

Mat 18:16 But if he will not hear [thee, then] take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

2Cr 13:1 This [is] the third [time] I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

Revelation is John is one witness !
Another scripture confirming John = 2nd Witness !

Very important. As long as you use only Rev. Even though
you might be making a righteous case, your case can be
thown down at almost *any* time because you do not
have TWO witnesses describing the SAME thing.

FYI,

[Eddielee]

Excerpt from http://www.nicoc.org/articles/apostasia.pdf:

Meaning is determined by usage, or semantically, regardless of whether or not it agrees with the supposed root meanings of its component parts. One cannot progress from form to meaning yet this is precisely what Dr. Ice has done. You will recall he said, "The word is a Greek compound of apo 'from' and istemi 'stand' Thus, it has the core meaning of 'away from' or 'departure'" His conclusion is based solely on etymology which, as hopefully the reader can see by now, is not even a safe guideline.

If Dr. Ice's proposition were true, we should be able to apply this etymological formula to any word. For example, the word "butterfly" is an English compound of 'butter' and 'fly.' Thus, 'butterfly' has a core meaning of "airborne milk fat." As one can readily see, this is patently false. How does one determine the core meaning of "butterfly" if not by etymology? Usage not form! How does one determine the core meaning of apostasia? Usage not form! Dr. Ice did not apply this simple rule when defining apostasia. The real core meaning, or dominant meaning, of apostasia contradicts his view. His position demands that apostasia mean physical departure from planet earth. However, this meaning cannot be squeezed out of apostasia in any context; much less th root level.

[Bronzesnake]

Excerpt from http://www.nicoc.org/articles/apostasia.pdf:

Meaning is determined by usage, or semantically, regardless of whether or not it agrees with the supposed root meanings of its component parts. One cannot progress from form to meaning yet this is precisely what Dr. Ice has done. You will recall he said, "The word is a Greek compound of apo 'from' and istemi 'stand' Thus, it has the core meaning of 'away from' or 'departure'" His conclusion is based solely on etymology which, as hopefully the reader can see by now, is not even a safe guideline.

If Dr. Ice's proposition were true, we should be able to apply this etymological formula to any word. For example, the word "butterfly" is an English compound of 'butter' and 'fly.' Thus, 'butterfly' has a core meaning of "airborne milk fat." As one can readily see, this is patently false. How does one determine the core meaning of "butterfly" if not by etymology? Usage not form! How does one determine the core meaning of apostasia? Usage not form! Dr. Ice did not apply this simple rule when defining apostasia. The real core meaning, or dominant meaning, of apostasia contradicts his view. His position demands that apostasia mean physical departure from planet earth. However, this meaning cannot be squeezed out of apostasia in any context; much less th root level.

 That argument falls flat on it's face, as the example of the word "butterfly" has no context from which to form any meaningful opinion as to it's meaning.

[Eddielee]

I suppose we can start using apostasia to describe people leaving the church after the service... After all its not the actual meaning of the word that matters, only the sum of its derived parts...

"The church service ran alittle long, and many people started to get hungery, so after the apostacy we all went out to dinner."

[Bronzesnake]

I suppose we can start using apostasia to describe people leaving the church after the service... After all its not the actual meaning of the word that matters, only the sum of its derived parts...

"The church service ran alittle long, and many people started to get hungery, so after the apostacy we all went out to dinner."

 When you say service, you must mean the armed forces right? Oh, wait a minute, you meant a silver tea service, of course!

 I suppose we can never use any words in more than one context either. There are many words which have more than one meaning in any dictionary, I guess we'll have to have a vote as to which single meaning we will use for each of those words.

 We can understand any words meaning given the context from which the word is used.


Bronzesnake

[Bronzesnake]

twobombs...

This isn't about being wrong or right in discussion.
This is about being theologically correct, and use
TWO witnesses to make a point !

Mat 18:16 But if he will not hear [thee, then] take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

2Cr 13:1 This [is] the third [time] I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

Revelation is John is one witness !
Another scripture confirming John = 2nd Witness !

Very important. As long as you use only Rev. Even though
you might be making a righteous case, your case can be
thown down at almost *any* time because you do not
have TWO witnesses describing the SAME thing.

FYI,

At least I am making a case. As I have said, make your case with whatever references you like, then I'll offer a rebuttal.

 FYI!

It got quiet here all of a sudden. I wonder if it had to do with a certain question such as... "When do you believe God's wrath, in relation to the seven vails takes place"? hmmmm.

Bronzesnake.

[Bronzesnake]

eddielee...

Wrestle with these verses, and then let me know if it is possible that this "apostasia" just might be relating to the "falling away" in relation with the rapture.


2Th 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.  


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

2Th 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:  

Now be honest my friend.

The Restrainer

Before the Antichrist CAN EVEN BE REVEALED Paul said, "that which is Restraining Him" must be taken out of the way. 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7. The only thing that fits this description is 'the Holy Spirit indwelling the Church.'

The Unique And Hindering Presence

"There is an indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit which has been upon the earth since Pentecost. Old Testament saints had the Holy Spirit with them and as an anointing upon them. That presence, however, could be taken away. The Holy Spirit did not indwell believers prior to Pentecost as an abiding presence that would never leave them. This indwelling is unique to the church, a fact that is clear from many Scriptures. This new presence, which was unknown before Pentecost, can only be removed by removing the church - those in whom the Holy Spirit dwells.
David prayed, "Take not the Holy Spirit form me" (Psalm 51:11), a prayer that would be meaningless today and would reflect inexcusable unbelief. Christ said to His disciples, referring to the Holy Spirit, "He dwelleth with you, and shall be in you (John 14:17). John tells us that when Christ was still here upon earth, "the Holy Ghost was not yet given, because ... Jesus was not yet glorified, He sent the Holy Spirit "from the father" (John 15:26) to be with His church in a new way that had been unknown up to that time.

It is this unique presence of the Holy Spirit in the church which will be removed at the rapture, allowing the Antichrist to be revealed and to have free rein to rule the world. Of course, the Holy Spirit, being omnipresent, will remain here to convict sinners of the truth of the gospel and to win multitudes to Christ during the tribulation period. These are the tribulation saints who will be martyred for their faith." (Dave Hunt, from "In Defense of the Faith" pg's 258-259)

 
Bronzesnake.

[Bronzesnake]

With the Post Trib view countless problems arise...

"Posties" would know the exact day of Jesus' Return, because in Daniel we read...

Daniel 12:11 "And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. "  

In the above verse we see that from the Abomination of Desolation, which occurs at the half way mark of the Tribulation  Daniel 9:27 there will be 1290 days left until the Second Coming. That cannot be reconciled with verses such as "No man knows the day nor the hour..."  This would make all the passages in God's Word speaking of the need for 'keeping watch' and 'being alert' a non issue. This would also leave them with absolutely no need, hope or expectation to look for Jesus Christ to come anytime prior to the completion of the Tribulation. That's Bleak!

The bottom line is that with both the mid trib and the post trib view (as well as prewrath etc.) they would look for the Antichrist to show up before Jesus Christ. We are to be looking for Jesus Christ!

These views destroy imminency. Scripture clearly teaches it.
This alone is ample reason to believe pre trib. But there's more...

Mark 13:35-37 "Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning: Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch."  

Matthew 24:44 "Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh."  

Bronzesnake