You have lost. Defeated. Exposed.
Fortunately, there is hope for you, as God will always receive those who truly repent of their error.
But if not, and it just so happens that you "miss the rapture", you will have no one to blame but yourself.
Revolution in Iran
- Thread starter Gideon300
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Fortunately, there is hope for you, as God will always receive those who truly repent of their error.
But if not, and it just so happens that you "miss the rapture", you will have no one to blame but yourself.
# 4
Contrary to the dispensationalists’ commitment to compartmentalizing each of the self-contained, distinct dispensations, the Bible presents an organic unfolding of history as the Bible traces out the flow of redemptive history,
so that the New Testament speaks of
“the covenants [plural] of the [singular] promise” (Eph 2:12) and uses metaphors that require the unity of redemptive history; accordingly, the New Testament people of God are one olive tree rooted in the Old Testament (Rom 11:17-24).
Kenneth Gentry.
Contrary to the dispensationalists’ commitment to compartmentalizing each of the self-contained, distinct dispensations, the Bible presents an organic unfolding of history as the Bible traces out the flow of redemptive history,
so that the New Testament speaks of
“the covenants [plural] of the [singular] promise” (Eph 2:12) and uses metaphors that require the unity of redemptive history; accordingly, the New Testament people of God are one olive tree rooted in the Old Testament (Rom 11:17-24).
Kenneth Gentry.
Revelation 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
Wow they really opened themselves up to being mocked worldwide with that one.
Why do you persist in blowing smoke?
Paul is not speaking ABOUT the Jews, Mosaic law or Temple.
Paul is not speaking TO an audience composed of Jews either.
Paul is speaking about the Church and to the Church.
And as I proved, Paul cannot possibly be speaking about the any kind of post-Second Coming resurrection either.
And the Greek is to the point and absolutely unequivocal:
Paul is speaking about the pre-trib RAPTURE, that singular event which MUST precede the DOTL so noted in 2 Thes 2.
***********************************************************
Greek Text (2 Tim 2:18)οἵτινες περὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἠστόχησαν,
λέγοντες τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι,
καὶ ἀνατρέπουσιν τὴν τινῶν πίστιν.
Key Phrase:
τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι
τὴν ἀνάστασιν (tēn anastasin)
= “the resurrection” (definite, singular, accusative)
ἤδη (ēdē)
= “already” (time indicator — something has occurred)
γεγονέναι (gegonenai)
= perfect infinitive of γίνομαι → “to have happened / to have come to pass”
→ emphasizes a completed action with ongoing implications
So literally:“saying that the resurrection has already occurred”
Time ElementIt is absolutely correct to say that:
ἤδη (already) + perfect tense (γεγονέναι)
= a completed past event with present consequences
“It already happened.”
Surgically precise air strikes targeting individuals at the street level. The IDF has mastered them.
That has got to put the fear in the Basij goons.
That has got to put the fear in the Basij goons.
Why do you persist in blowing smoke?
Paul is not speaking ABOUT the Jews, Mosaic law or Temple.
Paul is not speaking TO an audience composed of Jews either.
Paul is speaking about the Church and to the Church.
And as I proved, Paul cannot possibly be speaking about the any kind of post-Second Coming resurrection either.
And the Greek is to the point and absolutely unequivocal:
Paul is speaking about the pre-trib RAPTURE, that singular event which MUST precede the DOTL so noted in 2 Thes 2.
***********************************************************
οἵτινες περὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἠστόχησαν,
λέγοντες τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι,
καὶ ἀνατρέπουσιν τὴν τινῶν πίστιν.
Key Phrase:
τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι
τὴν ἀνάστασιν (tēn anastasin)
= “the resurrection” (definite, singular, accusative)
ἤδη (ēdē)
= “already” (time indicator — something has occurred)
γεγονέναι (gegonenai)
= perfect infinitive of γίνομαι → “to have happened / to have come to pass”
→ emphasizes a completed action with ongoing implications
“saying that the resurrection has already occurred”
It is absolutely correct to say that:
ἤδη (already) + perfect tense (γεγονέναι)
= a completed past event with present consequences
“It already happened.”
2 Timothy 2:18 is referring to those heretics who didn't believe in a bodily resurrection. They believed in a resurrection of the spirit only, which they said had already happened with the new birth
NEW DETAILS:IRGC terrorist Gholamreza Soleimani, Commander-in-Chief of the Basij, was reportedly killed while disguised in civilian clothes.
He was hiding in a makeshift tent in the Sadeghiyeh area of Tehran.
Patently false. See Philippians 3:11.
Are you telling us that Paul did not understand what Hymenaeus and Philetus were actually talking about? Ridiculous.
Or are you saying that Paul himself had not by then experienced the "new birth". Even more ridiculous.
No, but rather Paul is AWAITING HIS BODILY RESURRECTION at the pre-trib rapture. As are ALL believers!
Philippians 3:11
“that I may attain to the resurrection (ἀνάστασιν) from the dead”
*********************************************************
Greek Text (2 Tim 2:18)οἵτινες περὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἠστόχησαν,
λέγοντες τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι,
καὶ ἀνατρέπουσιν τὴν τινῶν πίστιν.
Key Phrase:
τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι
***τὴν ἀνάστασιν*** (tēn anastasin)
= “the resurrection” (definite, singular, accusative)
****************************************************************
what does “τὴν ἀνάστασιν” actually mean as stated by Paul?
Let’s prove it from Greek usage, grammar, and Paul’s own writings.
1. The Word Itself: ἀνάστασιςGreek breakdown:
ἀνά (ana) = “up”
στάσις (stasis) = “standing”
Literally:“a standing up again”
In normal Greek usage (both biblical and extra-biblical), this refers to:
a rising from a prone/dead state → bodily rising
It is not the natural word for:
spiritual enlightenment
metaphorical renewal
Those ideas use different vocabulary (e.g., ζωή, καινότης, etc.)
2. Paul’s Consistent Usage = Bodily ResurrectionNow we let Paul define his own terms.
A. 1 Corinthians 15 (the clearest case)
This is decisive because it is Paul’s full doctrinal chapter on ἀνάστασις.
Key statements:
“The dead will be raised (ἐγείρονται)” (15:52)
“It is sown a natural body… raised a spiritual body” (15:44)
Critical point:There is continuity of a body
It is transformed, not replaced by a non-physical idea
Paul explicitly argues against denial of bodily resurrection:
“If the dead are not raised… your faith is futile” (15:16–17)
That matches perfectly with:
“they overthrow the faith of some” (2 Tim 2:18)
✔ Same doctrinal issue.
B. Philippians 3:11
“that I may attain to the resurrection (ἀνάστασιν) from the dead”
Greek:
ἐξανάστασιν τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν
= resurrection out from among dead bodies
This is explicitly corporeal language:“from the dead” = from among the physically dead
C. Acts 24:15 (Paul speaking)
“There shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust”
Clearly:future
bodily (since “dead” = νεκρῶν)
3. The Definite Article Matters: “τὴν ἀνάστασιν”In 2 Tim 2:18, Paul does NOT say:
“a resurrection” (ἀνάστασιν)
He says:
τὴν ἀνάστασιν = “THE resurrection”
This implies:a recognized doctrinal event
something already taught and expected
In Pauline theology, that known event is:
the future bodily resurrection of believers
4. Why It Cannot Be “Spiritual Only”If Hymenaeus and Philetus meant:
“spiritual resurrection has already happened”
Paul could have clarified:
“they misunderstand spiritual renewal”
But instead he says:
they have missed the truth
they are destroying faith
Why so serious?
Because denying future bodily resurrection:
destroys hope
collapses eschatology
makes death final
Exactly Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 15.
5. Parallel Error = Denial of Bodily ResurrectionThe error in 2 Timothy 2:18 lines up perfectly with:
In 1 Corinthians 15:
Some said: “there is no resurrection of the dead”
Here: “the resurrection has already happened”
These are two sides of the same heresy:One denies it outright
The other redefines it away
Both eliminate a future bodily event
Final Conclusion (Proven from Greek + Context)✔ ἀνάστασις in Paul = bodily resurrection
✔ Consistently refers to:
rising from the dead
involving a transformed body
✔ In 2 Tim 2:18:
τὴν ἀνάστασιν = the well-known future resurrection
ἤδη γεγονέναι = falsely claiming it already occurred
Therefore:Paul is explicitly referring to the future bodily resurrection—not a metaphor, not merely spiritual renewal.
Patently false. See Philippians 3:11.
Are you telling us that Paul did not understand what Hymenaeus and Philetus were actually talking about? Ridiculous.
Or are you saying that Paul himself had not by then experienced the "new birth". Even more ridiculous.
No, but rather Paul is AWAITING HIS BODILY RESURRECTION at the pre-trib rapture. As are ALL believers!
Philippians 3:11
“that I may attain to the resurrection (ἀνάστασιν) from the dead”
*********************************************************
οἵτινες περὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἠστόχησαν,
λέγοντες τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι,
καὶ ἀνατρέπουσιν τὴν τινῶν πίστιν.
Key Phrase:
τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι
***τὴν ἀνάστασιν*** (tēn anastasin)
= “the resurrection” (definite, singular, accusative)
****************************************************************
what does “τὴν ἀνάστασιν” actually mean as stated by Paul?
Let’s prove it from Greek usage, grammar, and Paul’s own writings.
Greek breakdown:
ἀνά (ana) = “up”
στάσις (stasis) = “standing”
“a standing up again”
In normal Greek usage (both biblical and extra-biblical), this refers to:
a rising from a prone/dead state → bodily rising
It is not the natural word for:
spiritual enlightenment
metaphorical renewal
Those ideas use different vocabulary (e.g., ζωή, καινότης, etc.)
Now we let Paul define his own terms.
A. 1 Corinthians 15 (the clearest case)
This is decisive because it is Paul’s full doctrinal chapter on ἀνάστασις.
Key statements:
“The dead will be raised (ἐγείρονται)” (15:52)
“It is sown a natural body… raised a spiritual body” (15:44)
There is continuity of a body
It is transformed, not replaced by a non-physical idea
Paul explicitly argues against denial of bodily resurrection:
“If the dead are not raised… your faith is futile” (15:16–17)
That matches perfectly with:
“they overthrow the faith of some” (2 Tim 2:18)
✔ Same doctrinal issue.
B. Philippians 3:11
“that I may attain to the resurrection (ἀνάστασιν) from the dead”
Greek:
ἐξανάστασιν τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν
= resurrection out from among dead bodies
“from the dead” = from among the physically dead
C. Acts 24:15 (Paul speaking)
“There shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust”
future
bodily (since “dead” = νεκρῶν)
In 2 Tim 2:18, Paul does NOT say:
“a resurrection” (ἀνάστασιν)
He says:
τὴν ἀνάστασιν = “THE resurrection”
a recognized doctrinal event
something already taught and expected
In Pauline theology, that known event is:
the future bodily resurrection of believers
If Hymenaeus and Philetus meant:
“spiritual resurrection has already happened”
Paul could have clarified:
“they misunderstand spiritual renewal”
But instead he says:
they have missed the truth
they are destroying faith
Why so serious?
Because denying future bodily resurrection:
destroys hope
collapses eschatology
makes death final
Exactly Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 15.
The error in 2 Timothy 2:18 lines up perfectly with:
In 1 Corinthians 15:
Some said: “there is no resurrection of the dead”
Here: “the resurrection has already happened”
One denies it outright
The other redefines it away
Both eliminate a future bodily event
✔ ἀνάστασις in Paul = bodily resurrection
✔ Consistently refers to:
rising from the dead
involving a transformed body
✔ In 2 Tim 2:18:
τὴν ἀνάστασιν = the well-known future resurrection
ἤδη γεγονέναι = falsely claiming it already occurred
Paul is explicitly referring to the future bodily resurrection—not a metaphor, not merely spiritual renewal.
Paul believed in the resurrection of the dead (body), which is why he wrote that those who believed in only a spiritual resurrection were in error. That is why those heretics said that the resurrection had already happened; they were not referring to a bodily resurrection because they didn't believe in one, just like the Sadducees didn't.
Sounds like unbelief in Jesus all together.
We've had people on this forum claim that the new birth is the first resurrection, so yes, some do, and have, believe(d) in something called a spiritual resurrection.
Hymenaeus and Philetus were likely gnostics
www.biblegateway.com
The discipline had not produced the desired repentance in Hymenaeus when 2 Timothy 2:17, 18 was written. The doctrinal error of Hymenaeus and Philetus, destructively spreading like gangrene, was their denial of an eschatological resurrection. They allegorized the resurrection by insisting that it was a past spiritual experience, having occurred when they were raised from ignorance and sin as they came to know the true God. When they believed that the resurrection took place in the lives of believers is not indicated, perhaps at baptism. They prob. based their teaching on a misinterpretation of Romans 6:1-11 and Colossians 3:1. It was motivated by incipient Gnosticism, which held that matter was evil and that consequently salvation consisted in liberation from the body. The teaching of a future bodily resurrection was deemed illogical and inconceivable (cf. 1 Cor 15:12).