Conclusion From Beware the Pseudo-Rapture Doctrine 4

  • 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.

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,874
2,111
113
I was using a text that someone else quoted and asked him why he didn't understand the verse to be referring to a time it was referring to?
If I'm remembering your question correctly, it had to do with whether or not Dan9:27 is past (from our perspective) or yet future.

Here's a very brief take on how I see it (and have put in past posts).


Dan9:[24],25-27 is written SEQUENTIALLY.

So, here's how that sequence goes (bearing in mind that this time-prophecy concerns "THY [Daniel's] people" and "THY [Daniel's] holy city"):

--v.25 a specified time period "FROM... UNTO the Messiah the Prince" (concluded on the very day that Jesus RODE into Jerusalem on the animal [Zech9:9] and SAID what He did [Lk19:41-44; also SAID in Matt22:7 and three or so verses in His Olivet Discourse, plus SAID in Lk21:12-24a,b]--BOTH of these passages in bold [and the related ones] having to do with "the city [/ Jerusalem]"--This ["rode" and "said"] occurred on what we call "Palm Sunday"... the very day, according to Ex12:3,5,6, they would SELECT a LAMB and examine it for 4 days... so this is shortly before He is put to death later that very same week);

--v.26a "shall he be CUT OFF and have nothing [or as some versions have it, 'but not for himself']"--His rejection (trials) and His death on the CROSS (see also Jer11:19 ["CUT him OFF"--"like a lamb to the slaughter"] and the posts I've made regarding this);

--[THEN, after that] v.26b "the people OF [the prince THAT SHALL come]" shall destroy the city and the sanctuary" (the things Jesus "SAID" would happen--re: the events surrounding 70ad)... and "desolaTIONS [plural] are determined" (this part is what continues on... "desolationS [plural]"... similar to Lk21:24b,c);

--v.27a "he" links back to v.26b's "the prince THAT SHALL COME" (these capitalized words are unnecessary and superfluous IF this is referring back to the same person in v.25; just saying "the prince" [already referenced] suffices... but this is showing a DISTINCTION, by adding this phrase "[the prince] THAT SHALL COME [/COMING]"<--this also connects 1Jn's saying, "YE HAVE HEARD [commonly used to refer back to OT things] that antichrist IS COMING"); The first item in v.27a speaks of confirming a covenant "FOR ONE WEEK [7 yrs]" (that's not what Jesus did);



Well... I had much more... but I did say I would try to make this BRIEF ( :D )... so I won't go into the CONNECTIONS I see between Dan9:27a,b,c (which spans a "7 year period") and what Paul says with regard to "the man of sin" in 2Th2 which CONNECTS to each of those [3] points in Dan9:27 [time-wise / sequence-wise]... I have that info in many past posts.

Hope that helps you see my perspective on this Subject... (was trying not to make this post be too cumbersome... =] )
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,874
2,111
113
^ Oh, and I DID want to mention the "connections" between:

--Dan9:24 to that of Isaiah 27:9,12-13 [/Matt24:29-31] and to that of Rom11:26,27[15] (v.25 "blindness [/a hardening]... UNTIL"... where there are a number of "TILL / UNTIL" passages speaking to this same matter... Relatedly, see also Rom9:26 [as distinct from v.25 re: the Gentiles] correlating with Hos1:10-11... speaking of Israel / Israel's "future" [like Dan12:1-3 speaks to, as well as Ezek37:12-14,20-23, Hos5:14-6:3, Isa26:14-21,19, and several other related passages...])
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
18,729
6,437
113
62
If I'm remembering your question correctly, it had to do with whether or not Dan9:27 is past (from our perspective) or yet future.

Here's a very brief take on how I see it (and have put in past posts).


Dan9:[24],25-27 is written SEQUENTIALLY.

So, here's how that sequence goes (bearing in mind that this time-prophecy concerns "THY [Daniel's] people" and "THY [Daniel's] holy city"):

--v.25 a specified time period "FROM... UNTO the Messiah the Prince" (concluded on the very day that Jesus RODE into Jerusalem on the animal [Zech9:9] and SAID what He did [Lk19:41-44; also SAID in Matt22:7 and three or so verses in His Olivet Discourse, plus SAID in Lk21:12-24a,b]--BOTH of these passages in bold [and the related ones] having to do with "the city [/ Jerusalem]"--This ["rode" and "said"] occurred on what we call "Palm Sunday"... the very day, according to Ex12:3,5,6, they would SELECT a LAMB and examine it for 4 days... so this is shortly before He is put to death later that very same week);

--v.26a "shall he be CUT OFF and have nothing [or as some versions have it, 'but not for himself']"--His rejection (trials) and His death on the CROSS (see also Jer11:19 ["CUT him OFF"--"like a lamb to the slaughter"] and the posts I've made regarding this);

--[THEN, after that] v.26b "the people OF [the prince THAT SHALL come]" shall destroy the city and the sanctuary" (the things Jesus "SAID" would happen--re: the events surrounding 70ad)... and "desolaTIONS [plural] are determined" (this part is what continues on... "desolationS [plural]"... similar to Lk21:24b,c);

--v.27a "he" links back to v.26b's "the prince THAT SHALL COME" (these capitalized words are unnecessary and superfluous IF this is referring back to the same person in v.25; just saying "the prince" [already referenced] suffices... but this is showing a DISTINCTION, by adding this phrase "[the prince] THAT SHALL COME [/COMING]"<--this also connects 1Jn's saying, "YE HAVE HEARD [commonly used to refer back to OT things] that antichrist IS COMING"); The first item in v.27a speaks of confirming a covenant "FOR ONE WEEK [7 yrs]" (that's not what Jesus did);



Well... I had much more... but I did say I would try to make this BRIEF ( :D )... so I won't go into the CONNECTIONS I see between Dan9:27a,b,c (which spans a "7 year period") and what Paul says with regard to "the man of sin" in 2Th2 which CONNECTS to each of those [3] points in Dan9:27 [time-wise / sequence-wise]... I have that info in many past posts.

Hope that helps you see my perspective on this Subject... (was trying not to make this post be too cumbersome... =] )
I welcome all perspectives. Sometimes I think people stop seeing the forest for all the trees.
I think you have an incredible mind that is a gift from God as well as a thirst for knowledge.
How the parts of the car work don't really fascinate me. I just want it to start when I turn the key.
 

Bob-Carabbio

Well-known member
Jun 24, 2020
1,587
794
113
Im really having a hard time with this foolishness.
No need to fret - let the theologians rave, beat their breasts, and gnash their teeth all they want, they'll get nowhere as usual. "Eschatology" is just a religious word meaning "Rank Speculation.

If there's a "Catching away" (I'm a knee-jerk "pre-tribber" personally), then us Christians will be caught away to be with HIM (right now would be fine).

If there's not, WE"RE STILL SAFE in HIM who saved us from Sin and WILL BE BACK for us - when it's time - "Theologians" not withstanding. God makes the rules, not seminaries.

If we die physically before all the excitement (like I probably will), then we'll get to watch the whole show from the other side. Should be interesting.

I recall back in the '70s during the Charismatic outpouring, there was a strong expectation that the end of the age was upon us (I still have my copy of "88 reasons that the rapture will happen in 1988) It PROVES BIBLICALLY that 1988 will be the end - oops -

There were entrepreneurs selling dehydrated "Revelation food" (since Christians couldn't buy or sell without the "mark"). They had two packages they sold 7 year supply for the post-tribbers, and 3-1/2 year supply for the Mid-tribbers.

They suggested, though, that everybody buy the 7 year supply, in case your "theology" was wrong (chuckle). They didn't include a shotgun, though (so you could drive away your starving Christian neighbors when they came for your food).
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,874
2,111
113
^ My apologies if my post was too lengthy / detailed. :D ( @Cameron143 's Post #463)



:) I guess I could have just said the part...

Dan9:[24],25-27 is written SEQUENTIALLY
... and left it at that, while handing you the wrench for you to try to figure out what I meant by that. lol



I figured by only saying that much, it might lead to some questions in your mind (about our viewpoint), so I figured I'd supply a little bit of "explanation" along with it, so you could at least "see" my reasoning. = )
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
18,729
6,437
113
62
^ My apologies if my post was too lengthy / detailed. :D ( @Cameron143 's Post #463)



:) I guess I could have just said the part...



... and left it at that, while handing you the wrench for you to try to figure out what I meant by that. lol



I figured by only saying that much, it might lead to some questions in your mind (about our viewpoint), so I figured I'd supply a little bit of "explanation" along with it, so you could at least "see" my reasoning. = )
No problem at all. I gave the wrench to my mechanic for a key chain.
I enjoy your posts and your positive attitude.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,874
2,111
113
(I still have my copy of "88 reasons that the rapture will happen in 1988) It PROVES BIBLICALLY that 1988 will be the end - oops -
lol. Yes, of course the author came to the wrong conclusion...; He was using the "Historicist" method of interpretation :D




[...where 1290 DAYS supposedly refers to 1290 YEARS, and so forth... Not.]
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,160
1,787
113
The antichrist is revealed by him going to the temple of God and proclaiming himself as God.


Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4


This occurs in the middle of the week.


Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;
But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate.”
Daniel 9:27




JPT
Assuming your interpretation is correct, there is no evidence of a pretrib rapture in these verse.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,874
2,111
113
justpassinthrough said:
The antichrist is revealed by him going to the temple of God and proclaiming himself as God.

Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4
Assuming your interpretation is correct, there is no evidence of a pretrib rapture in these verse.
The only way these 3 verses can be THOUGHT to say what JPT thinks they say, is by doing what JPT is doing in this text:


--by mis-defining "that Day" (v.3)... incorrectly substituting "rapture" in place of that [phrase];

--by SMOOSHING TOGETHER "revealed" with "SO THAT he sits as God in the temple of God" ideas (as though they occur together at the same time), whilst completely LEAVING OUT a vital part of the sentence


... and then DEDUCING from there that it is saying our RAPTURE [wrong word] won't happen till [after] he "sits in the temple..." (when JPT *ASSUMES* this text is saying he's "revealed"--it's not, though.)




But... wrong deduction comes by means of "mis-defining" certain terms in this text/context and "smooshing together" things that actually span SOME TIME!
 

Bob-Carabbio

Well-known member
Jun 24, 2020
1,587
794
113
She began “speaking in tongues” several months after her initial revelation, which supports the conclusion that her source of “inspiration” was not the Spirit of God. God is not the Author of confusion, or phony “tongues”
SO just another "Pentehostile" venting.

Same 'ol same 'ol
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
11,887
8,705
113
except you say that day shall come ... you believe the rap can happen any time, any second from now ... you prolly believe it is the next great event to take place.
prolly doo :giggle:
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
9,382
5,721
113
except you say that day shall come ... you believe the rap can happen any time, any second from now ... you prolly believe it is the next great event to take place.
I'm going to take Paul's advice and not allow myself to be deceived.

If Paul vewied the "rapture" as the next event for the church, he only had to tell us;
Don't worry, You can't miss The Day of The Lord, because the harpazo will happen first.

He didn't write "the harpazo will happen first. He wrote "the man of lawlessness is revealed first.
He didn't write that it would be separate from The Day of The Lord.

2 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us – whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter – asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

Paul is giving us a warning about false teachings on this subject. Obviously, false teachers were active then as they are now.
His counsel is not to let anyone deceive us in any way. We should not be deceived by this new pretrib rapture philosophy where
everything The Bible teaches about the return of Jesus is contradicted & turned backwards.


There isn't a "rapture" prior to Jesus' second coming. Paul has written straightforwardly that the next thing to expect was
relief when Jesus comes again in vengeance and glory.

6 since it is just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you 7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted, along with us. This will take place at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels, 8 when he takes vengeance with flaming fire on those who don’t know God and on those who don’t obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will pay the penalty of eternal destruction from the Lord’s presence and from his glorious strength 10 on that day when he comes to be glorified by his saints and to be marveled at by all those who have believed, because our testimony among you was believed. ~2 Thess 1
 

Evmur

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2021
5,219
2,618
113
London
christianchat.com
I'm going to take Paul's advice and not allow myself to be deceived.

If Paul vewied the "rapture" as the next event for the church, he only had to tell us;
Don't worry, You can't miss The Day of The Lord, because the harpazo will happen first.

He didn't write "the harpazo will happen first. He wrote "the man of lawlessness is revealed first.
He didn't write that it would be separate from The Day of The Lord.

2 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us – whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter – asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

Paul is giving us a warning about false teachings on this subject. Obviously, false teachers were active then as they are now.
His counsel is not to let anyone deceive us in any way. We should not be deceived by this new pretrib rapture philosophy where
everything The Bible teaches about the return of Jesus is contradicted & turned backwards.


There isn't a "rapture" prior to Jesus' second coming. Paul has written straightforwardly that the next thing to expect was
relief when Jesus comes again in vengeance and glory.

6 since it is just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you 7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted, along with us. This will take place at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels, 8 when he takes vengeance with flaming fire on those who don’t know God and on those who don’t obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will pay the penalty of eternal destruction from the Lord’s presence and from his glorious strength 10 on that day when he comes to be glorified by his saints and to be marveled at by all those who have believed, because our testimony among you was believed. ~2 Thess 1
Amen to all of that
 

Radius

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2013
1,171
181
63
I'm going to take Paul's advice and not allow myself to be deceived.



2 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us – whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter – asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.
Isn't this passage specifically talking about Jesus 2nd coming and not the rapture?
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,160
1,787
113
The only way these 3 verses can be THOUGHT to say what JPT thinks they say, is by doing what JPT is doing in this text:


--by mis-defining "that Day" (v.3)... incorrectly substituting "rapture" in place of that [phrase];

--by SMOOSHING TOGETHER "revealed" with "SO THAT he sits as God in the temple of God" ideas (as though they occur together at the same time), whilst completely LEAVING OUT a vital part of the sentence

... and then DEDUCING from there that it is saying our RAPTURE [wrong word] won't happen till [after] he "sits in the temple..." (when JPT *ASSUMES* this text is saying he's "revealed"--it's not, though.)
I don't see how that has anything to do with his argument. If you interpret it to say that the day of Christ-- in which Christ returns giving the church rest from tribulation, executing judgment on them that believe not, when He comes to be glorified in them that believe-- will not occur until the falling away and the man of sin is revealed.... that doesn't mean that the man of sin has to be revealed by sitting in the temple. The revelation of the man of sin and his sitting in the temple don't have to be the same thing for this interpretation, though they can be.

But let us look at what the passage says about the coming of the Lord.


1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 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.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself 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.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
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:

Paul tells us things that need to be fulfilled before the Lord's coming. If there is any doubt, the man of sin is destroyed at the brightness of the Lord's coming. That means the man of sin has to do his stuff before the Lord comes back, because he will be destroyed at the brightness of the Lord's coming. There is justification for reading some screwball idea that the passage refers to two comings of the Lord, because there is no scripture to back up that idea.

II Thessalonians 1 also explains that Christ returns giving the church rest from tribulation, executing judgment on them that believe not, when He comes to be glorified in them that believe. It uses a word for 'appearing' and a word for Christ's coming which is the Greek word for come or go, that literally translates as 'come.' II Thessalonians 2 uses the word 'parousia'. When someone shows up, the Greeks used a word to mean He presented himself. This is a noun form of that word.

In chapter 1, the church getting rest from tribulation and judgment on the wicked all occur when Christ appears, at His coming, using a literal word that means 'come' (or 'go' depending on the context.) In chapter 2, the gathering is associating with the coming of the Lord, and the man of sin is destroyed at the brightness of the Lord's coming. I Thessalonians 4 is more explicit that the resurrection of the dead in Christ and the rapture occurs at the coming of the Lord, also.

So at the coming of the Lord, this will happen:
1. The destruction of that lawless one
2. The resurrection of the dead in Christ
3. The rapture of the church.


Numbers 1 and 2 are specifically mentioned toward the end of the Book of Revelation toward the end of Revelation 19 and early in Revelation 20. In Revelation 19, we see the Rider on the white horse, the 'King of kings and Lord of lords' passage. Then we read about the beast and false prophet being thrown into the lake of fire. Then the 'first resurrection'. After that, we read about the thousand year reign.

This is a very straightforward interpretation. We don't have to look at various references to harvests and priestly bread and try to allegorize a separate return of Christ out of that.
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
9,382
5,721
113
Isn't this passage specifically talking about Jesus 2nd coming and not the rapture?
Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters.

I can't see any logic in separating the "rapture" from the second coming when Paul does not.
Especially when he is using the same language as Jesus:

30 ‘Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. ~ Matt 24
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,874
2,111
113
I don't see how that has anything to do with his argument.
JPT is "connecting": "that Day" (which he wrongly defines as "rapture") and "revealed" (re: man of sin) and "SO THAT he sits as God in the temple of God" resulting in his notion that these are connected time-wise.

In JPT's mind, the "SO THAT" connects with the "revealed" (and thusly connects somehow with the "rapture" [incorrect word for "that Day"<--coz v.3a's "that Day" refers back to verse 2's "false claim" about the time-period of Judgments being already here [1Th5:3--horizontal / earthly time-period], not referring back to Paul's verse 1 "corrective" Subject [vertical])




If you interpret it to say that the day of Christ-- in which Christ returns giving the church rest from tribulation, executing judgment on them that believe not, when He comes to be glorified in them that believe-- will not occur until the falling away and the man of sin is revealed.... that doesn't mean that the man of sin has to be revealed by sitting in the temple. The revelation of the man of sin and his sitting in the temple don't have to be the same thing for this interpretation, though they can be.
I'm just pointing out how JPT is "connecting" the man of sin be "revealed" with "SO THAT he sits as God in the temple of God" (as though they take place at the same time)...
...and he is making the conclusion that "rapture" relates to this point / point-in-time (where he incorrectly defines "that Day" v.3a as "rapture";<--and BTW, speaking of that,
the "false claim" in v.2 THAT v.3a ('that Day') SPECIFICALLY REFERS BACK TO [grammatically], is NOT the Subject of "rapture"(v.1)...

...rather, it is the (v.2)"false claim" "that the Day of the Lord is present / is already here [perfect indicative]"<--Action completed at a specific point of time IN PAST, with results continuing into the present." i.e. PERFECT tense.




IOW, the false claim (v.2) is NOT that the rapture has taken place (nor that Jesus Himself is present).
 
Oct 31, 2015
2,290
588
113
Verse 3a's "that Day" refers grammatically to that which the IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING verse was speaking of (in the "false claim" that it "is present / is already here" v.2), which is the matter of "the Day of the Lord"... the earthly-located time-period that is KICKED OFF by:

the FIRST SEAL (rider on wht horse WITH BOW) / the FIRST "birth PANG" Jesus listed ("G5100 - 'A CERTAIN ONE" [bringing deception]) / the "whose COMING / ARRIVAL / ADVENT / PRESENCE / PAROUSIA" of the "man of sin" "IN HIS TIME" (2Th2:9a,6) / "king" of Dan11:36-37 & Dan7 ('[ye have heard] that antichrist is COMING') / Dan9:27a's "he" ('the prince that SHALL COME') to kick off that confirming of the covenant "FOR ONE WEEK [7yrs]"--what we commonly call "the 7-yr Tribulation Period"--a time-period of JUDGMENTs unfolding upon the earth OVER SOME TIME...

... again, it is NOT merely "a singular 24-hr day" (the 24-hr day of Christ's Second Coming to the earth Rev19), and what Paul says in 1Th5:3 PROVES it

There is one coming of the Lord, the second coming of Christ in which He gathers His people at the resurrection and rapture, as well as destroys the wicked.


For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words. But concerning the times and the seasons, brethren, you have no need that I should write to you. For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night. For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape. But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief. 1 Thessalonians 4:15-5:4


At the coming of the Lord, the day of the Lord, these three things are clearly taught to occur;


The Resurrection
The Rapture
The destruction of the wicked




JPT
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,874
2,111
113
He didn't write "the harpazo will happen first. He wrote "the man of lawlessness is revealed first.
[I changed up the order of these quotes so I could address this part first ^ ]


In the text, the word "first" does NOT hook up with the clause about "the man of sin be revealed".

It is instead connected to the clause preceding that one.


Yes, it makes a difference.

If Paul vewied the "rapture" as the next event for the church, he only had to tell us;
Don't worry, You can't miss The Day of The Lord, because the harpazo will happen first.
Recall, I've pointed out how Paul uses a VARIETY of terms and phrases (when covering that particular Subject) in his two epistles to the Thessalonians [not to mention, elsewhere].

--the word "harpagēsometha [G726] (used only once) is a VERB ("will be caught away/up" VERB), so it's not REQUIRED that he use this specific VERB here in 2Th2:3 (no definite article, by the way--tho I think it's fine when WE refer to this as an event going to take place), as he doesn't use "G726" in verse 1, though we KNOW that THAT NOUN used there (tho a diff word) SPEAKS TO IT.


Plus, regarding the part I'll bold in your quote, below:

Don't worry, You can't miss The Day of The Lord, because the harpazo will happen first.
He is not saying, "you can't MISS it,"....

Rather, he is conveying that "the Day of the Lord" (which the "false claim" said "IS PRESENT/IS ALREADY HERE [perfect indicative]") will NOT be present unless / until / "if not shall have come" ONE THING *FIRST* (i.e. His v.1 Subject that he's BRINGING TO BEAR on that "false claim" (v.2) and its "troubling" effects on their minds--in essence, freaking them out [lol] and causing them to eliminate their "HOPE" as indicated by Paul leaving that word off [in this 2nd epistle] of the TRIO [re: their 'faith' 'love/charity' 'hope'] he had intro'd his FIRST letter to them, using).



Paul is NOT saying "YOU CAN'T MISS the Day of the Lord" (He's NOT referring to Christ's Second Coming, here)... he's conveying the fact that it is NOT TRUE "that the Day of the Lord is present" (v.2) coz ONE THING must take place "FIRST" (the Subject PAUL is bringing, per v.1)

[so... instead... it WON'T BE PRESENT (i.e. to unfold upon the earth!) unless / until...]




... and he REPEATS this SEQUENCE 3x in this text (agreeing with the SEQUENCE in his previous epistle to them; not to mention the SAME SEQUENCE disclosed in all other related passages covering this Subject)
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
9,382
5,721
113
[I changed up the order of these quotes so I could address this part first ^ ]


In the text, the word "first" does NOT hook up with the clause about "the man of sin be revealed".

It is instead connected to the clause preceding that one.


Yes, it makes a difference.



Recall, I've pointed out how Paul uses a VARIETY of terms and phrases (when covering that particular Subject) in his two epistles to the Thessalonians [not to mention, elsewhere].

--the word "harpagēsometha [G726] (used only once) is a VERB ("will be caught away/up" VERB), so it's not REQUIRED that he use this specific VERB here in 2Th2:3 (no definite article, by the way--tho I think it's fine when WE refer to this as an event going to take place), as he doesn't use "G726" in verse 1, though we KNOW that THAT NOUN used there (tho a diff word) SPEAKS TO IT.


Plus, regarding the part I'll bold in your quote, below:



He is not saying, "you can't MISS it,"....

Rather, he is conveying that "the Day of the Lord" (which the "false claim" said "IS PRESENT/IS ALREADY HERE [perfect indicative]") will NOT be present unless / until / "if not shall have come" ONE THING *FIRST* (i.e. His v.1 Subject that he's BRINGING TO BEAR on that "false claim" (v.2) and its "troubling" effects on their minds--in essence, freaking them out [lol] and causing them to eliminate their "HOPE" as indicated by Paul leaving that word off [in this 2nd epistle] of the TRIO [re: their 'faith' 'love/charity' 'hope'] he had intro'd his FIRST letter to them, using).



Paul is NOT saying "YOU CAN'T MISS the Day of the Lord" (He's NOT referring to Christ's Second Coming, here)... he's conveying the fact that it is NOT TRUE "that the Day of the Lord is present" (v.2) coz ONE THING must take place "FIRST" (the Subject PAUL is bringing, per v.1)

[so... instead... it WON'T BE PRESENT (i.e. to unfold upon the earth!) unless / until...]




... and he REPEATS this SEQUENCE 3x in this text (agreeing with the SEQUENCE in his previous epistle to them; not to mention the SAME SEQUENCE disclosed in all other related passages covering this Subject)
One can make a verse of scripture mean ANYTHING no matter how bizarre, by using your methods.

How do you get out of bed in the morning? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: