Explain 2Thessalonians 2:6,7. (use the KJV).

  • 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.
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
JESUS referred to THE HOLY SPIRIT as HE. John 16
Amen.
The bible says there are 3 that bear witness.

1 John 5:7
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
 

Lightskin

Well-known member
Aug 16, 2019
3,165
3,665
113
I never take most commentaries for truth. Why? Because their learning is mainly taken from man, or institutions of man, that have denominal bias. 2 Thess. 2 verses three and six are key to explaining the text. A CAREFUL reading of the Biblical text is what is required, not the commentaries of man.
You’re a self righteous punk. Take that for truth. I have other vernaculars but won’t use them out of respect for everyone else here.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,880
2,112
113

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,880
2,112
113
From BlueLetterBible:

[under G646 - apostasia] "The earlier Greeks say ἀπόστασις [apostasis]; see Lob. ad Phryn., p. 528; [Winer's Grammar, 24]."


____________


And in Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon (1871) - "apostasia - LATER FORM FOR apostasis"

[i.e. apo stasis]
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,880
2,112
113
[quoting from Studylight dot org ... under its "Lexicon"]

Liddell-Scott-Jones Definitions [excerpt]

"ἀπο-στᾰσία, ἡ,
late form for ἀπόστασις,

1. defection, revolt, v.l. in D.H. 7.1, J. Vit. 10, Plu. Galb. 1; esp. in religious sense, rebellion against God, apostasy, LXX Joshua 22:22, 2 Thessalonians 2:3.
2. departure, disappearance, Olymp. in Mete. 320.2.
3. distinguishing, c. gen., Elias in Cat. 119.7.
4. distance, Archim. Aren. 1.5."



[and...under "Thayer's Expanded Definition", under the entry "apostasia"]

"The earlier Greeks say ἀπόστασις; see Lob. ad Phryn., p. 528; (Winer's Grammar, 24)."

[that Grk word ^ is the word "apostasis"]



[and... under "Vocabulary of the Greek NT"...]

"The old word ἀπόστασις, equivalent to –σία"

[in English, the above ^ says, "The old word apostasis, equivalent to --sia (meaning, the different ending of "sia" whereas the old one's ending was "sis"... but this is saying the words are "EQUIVALENT")]


_______

"apo stasis - a standing away from [a previous standing]" or "a DEPARTURE"
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,880
2,112
113
2 Thessalonians 2:3 uses the definite article ('the') with this word.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
22,683
8,225
113
Agreed. (y)


And I already posted the long article/study on that, the one by KSW (I think even referenced by Ice in this article ^ you're posting), so won't put that here in this post. = )
Sorry, but who is KSW?
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,880
2,112
113
Sorry, but who is KSW?
The writer of the long article you "Liked" on the other thread:


"[Kenneth S. Wuest is a member of the Faculty of the Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois, and author of numerous books on New Testament Greek.]"

"The Rapture: Precisely When?" - Kenneth S Wuest

"The answer to these questions will only be convincing to the reader if it is based upon the rules of Biblical exegesis. [...<snip>...] That interpretation which is based upon the above rules is to be regarded as correct until it can be shown by the reapplication of the same rules that an error of human judgment has crept in.
"There is such a thing, therefore, as a scientific method of studying the Word. The student who follows the rules of an experiment in chemistry brings that experiment to a successful conclusion. The student who does not ends up with an explosion. Just so, the student who conducts his study of the Bible along the scientific lines noted above arrives at the correct interpretation, and the student who does not at the wrong one. The exegetical method the student uses in answering the question with reference to the time of the rapture will determine whether he believes in a pretribulational or a posttribulational rapture.
[...]

"The words "a falling away" are the Authorized Version rendering of apostasia. The verbal form afistamai from which it comes is present middle of afisthmi, the root verb, which we will study. The simple verb Jisthmi [histemi] in its intransitive sense means "to stand," the prefixed preposition means "off, away from," and the compound verb, "to stand off from." The word does not mean "to fall." The Greeks had a word for that, piptw. Afisthmi, in its various uses, is reported by Thayer as follows: "to make stand off, cause to withdraw, to stand off, stand aloof, to desert, to withdraw from one"; in contexts where a defection from the faith is in view, it means "to fall away, become faithless." The verb is rendered by the translators of the Authorized Version "to depart," in Luke 2:32; Luke 4:13; Luke 13:27; Acts 12:10; Acts 15:38; Acts 19:9; Acts 22:29; 2 Corinthians 12:8; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy 2:19; Hebrews 3:12. In Luke 8:13 it is translated "fall away," in Acts 5:37, "drew away," and in Acts 5:38, "refrain." Had they translated the word here instead of interpreting it, they would have rendered it by the word "departure." The reader will observe that the predominant translation of the verbal form is "to depart," also, that where it is translated "fall away," the context adds the idea of "falling away" to the verb, which action is still a departure.

E. Schuyler English, to whom this present writer is deeply indebted for calling his attention to the word "departure" as the correct rendering of apostasia in this context, also informs us that the following translators understood the Greek word to mean "a departure" in this context: Tyndale (1534), Coverdale (1535), the Geneva Bible (1537), Cranmer (1539), and Beza (1565), and so used it in their translations. Apostasia is used once more in the New Testament and is translated "to forsake" (AV) [note: 'TO FORSAKE' is a VERB, not a NOUN], signifying a departure. The neuter noun apostasion in Matthew 5:31; Matthew 19:7; and Mark 10:4 is rendered by the Authorized Version, "divorcement," which word also signifies a departure, here, from antecedent relations.
The writer is well aware of the fact that apostasia was used at times both in classical and koine Greek in the sense of a defection, a revolt in a religious sense, a rebellion against God, and of the act of apostasy. Liddell and Scott in their classical lexicon give the above as the first definition of the word. Moulton and Milligan quote a papyrus fragment where the word means "a rebel." But these are acquired meanings of the word gotten from the context in which it is used, not the original, basic, literal meaning, and should not be imposed upon the word when the context does not qualify the word by these meanings, as in the case of our Thessalonians passage, where the context in which apostasia is embedded does not refer to a defection from the truth but to the rapture of the church. The fact that our word "apostasy" means a defection from the truth is entirely beside the point since we do not interpret Scripture upon the basis of a transliterated word to which a certain meaning has been given, but upon the basis of what the Greek word mean to the first century reader. The fact that Paul in 1 Timothy 4:1 uses this verb in the words "some shall depart from the faith" and finds it necessary to qualify its meaning by the phrase "from the faith" indicates that the word itself has no such connotation. The translators of the Authorized Version did not translate the word, but offered their interpretation of it. They should have translated it and allowed the student to interpret it in its context.

With the translation of the word before us, the next step is to ascertain from the context that to which this departure refers. We note the presence of the Greek definite article before apostasia, of which the translation takes no notice. A Greek word is definite in itself, and when the article is used the exegete must pay particular attention to it. "The basal function of the article is to point out individual identity. It does more than mark 'the object as definitely conceived,' for a substantive in Greek is definite without the article." This departure, whatever it is, is a particular one, one differentiated from all others. Another function of the article is "to denote previous reference." Here the article points out an object the identity of which is defined by some previous reference made to it in the context." Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:1 has just spoken of the coming of the Lord. This coming is defined by the words "our gathering together unto him," not as the second advent, but as the rapture. The Greek word rendered "and" can also be translated "even," and the translation reads, "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, even our gathering together unto him."
The article before apostasia defines that word by pointing to "the gathering together unto him" as that departure. This article determines the context which defines apostasia. The translators took the context of 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 as deciding the significance of the word, but they went too far afield, not grasping the function of the definite article preceding apostasia which points back to the rapture of 2 Thessalonians 2:1, not ahead to the refusal to believe the truth of 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12. The article is all-important here, as in many instances of its use in the Greek New Testament. In 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, Paul had given these saints teaching on the rapture, and the Greek article here points to that which was well known to both the reader and the writer, which is another use of the Greek definite article. Thus, the departure of the church from earth to heaven must precede the great tribulation period [I would say, "must precede the [7-yr] tribulation period" to be more specific (for 'GREAT tribulation' refers only to the latter half of it, though I find that most ppl mis-label this also)]. And we have answered our questions again. [...<snip>...]"

--Kenneth S Wuest, "The Rapture--Precisely When?", Bibliotheca Sacra, BSac 114:453 (Jan 57), p.60

[ www. galaxie . com/article/bsac114-453-05 ]


[end quoting; bold and underline mine, bracketed inserts mine (EDIT: I didn't do the usual bold and underline in this post)]


____________



Ring a bell? = D
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
22,683
8,225
113
The writer of the long article you "Liked" on the other thread:


"[Kenneth S. Wuest is a member of the Faculty of the Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois, and author of numerous books on New Testament Greek.]"

"The Rapture: Precisely When?" - Kenneth S Wuest

"The answer to these questions will only be convincing to the reader if it is based upon the rules of Biblical exegesis. [...<snip>...] That interpretation which is based upon the above rules is to be regarded as correct until it can be shown by the reapplication of the same rules that an error of human judgment has crept in.
"There is such a thing, therefore, as a scientific method of studying the Word. The student who follows the rules of an experiment in chemistry brings that experiment to a successful conclusion. The student who does not ends up with an explosion. Just so, the student who conducts his study of the Bible along the scientific lines noted above arrives at the correct interpretation, and the student who does not at the wrong one. The exegetical method the student uses in answering the question with reference to the time of the rapture will determine whether he believes in a pretribulational or a posttribulational rapture.
[...]

"The words "a falling away" are the Authorized Version rendering of apostasia. The verbal form afistamai from which it comes is present middle of afisthmi, the root verb, which we will study. The simple verb Jisthmi [histemi] in its intransitive sense means "to stand," the prefixed preposition means "off, away from," and the compound verb, "to stand off from." The word does not mean "to fall." The Greeks had a word for that, piptw. Afisthmi, in its various uses, is reported by Thayer as follows: "to make stand off, cause to withdraw, to stand off, stand aloof, to desert, to withdraw from one"; in contexts where a defection from the faith is in view, it means "to fall away, become faithless." The verb is rendered by the translators of the Authorized Version "to depart," in Luke 2:32; Luke 4:13; Luke 13:27; Acts 12:10; Acts 15:38; Acts 19:9; Acts 22:29; 2 Corinthians 12:8; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy 2:19; Hebrews 3:12. In Luke 8:13 it is translated "fall away," in Acts 5:37, "drew away," and in Acts 5:38, "refrain." Had they translated the word here instead of interpreting it, they would have rendered it by the word "departure." The reader will observe that the predominant translation of the verbal form is "to depart," also, that where it is translated "fall away," the context adds the idea of "falling away" to the verb, which action is still a departure.

E. Schuyler English, to whom this present writer is deeply indebted for calling his attention to the word "departure" as the correct rendering of apostasia in this context, also informs us that the following translators understood the Greek word to mean "a departure" in this context: Tyndale (1534), Coverdale (1535), the Geneva Bible (1537), Cranmer (1539), and Beza (1565), and so used it in their translations. Apostasia is used once more in the New Testament and is translated "to forsake" (AV) [note: 'TO FORSAKE' is a VERB, not a NOUN], signifying a departure. The neuter noun apostasion in Matthew 5:31; Matthew 19:7; and Mark 10:4 is rendered by the Authorized Version, "divorcement," which word also signifies a departure, here, from antecedent relations.
The writer is well aware of the fact that apostasia was used at times both in classical and koine Greek in the sense of a defection, a revolt in a religious sense, a rebellion against God, and of the act of apostasy. Liddell and Scott in their classical lexicon give the above as the first definition of the word. Moulton and Milligan quote a papyrus fragment where the word means "a rebel." But these are acquired meanings of the word gotten from the context in which it is used, not the original, basic, literal meaning, and should not be imposed upon the word when the context does not qualify the word by these meanings, as in the case of our Thessalonians passage, where the context in which apostasia is embedded does not refer to a defection from the truth but to the rapture of the church. The fact that our word "apostasy" means a defection from the truth is entirely beside the point since we do not interpret Scripture upon the basis of a transliterated word to which a certain meaning has been given, but upon the basis of what the Greek word mean to the first century reader. The fact that Paul in 1 Timothy 4:1 uses this verb in the words "some shall depart from the faith" and finds it necessary to qualify its meaning by the phrase "from the faith" indicates that the word itself has no such connotation. The translators of the Authorized Version did not translate the word, but offered their interpretation of it. They should have translated it and allowed the student to interpret it in its context.

With the translation of the word before us, the next step is to ascertain from the context that to which this departure refers. We note the presence of the Greek definite article before apostasia, of which the translation takes no notice. A Greek word is definite in itself, and when the article is used the exegete must pay particular attention to it. "The basal function of the article is to point out individual identity. It does more than mark 'the object as definitely conceived,' for a substantive in Greek is definite without the article." This departure, whatever it is, is a particular one, one differentiated from all others. Another function of the article is "to denote previous reference." Here the article points out an object the identity of which is defined by some previous reference made to it in the context." Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:1 has just spoken of the coming of the Lord. This coming is defined by the words "our gathering together unto him," not as the second advent, but as the rapture. The Greek word rendered "and" can also be translated "even," and the translation reads, "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, even our gathering together unto him."
The article before apostasia defines that word by pointing to "the gathering together unto him" as that departure. This article determines the context which defines apostasia. The translators took the context of 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 as deciding the significance of the word, but they went too far afield, not grasping the function of the definite article preceding apostasia which points back to the rapture of 2 Thessalonians 2:1, not ahead to the refusal to believe the truth of 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12. The article is all-important here, as in many instances of its use in the Greek New Testament. In 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, Paul had given these saints teaching on the rapture, and the Greek article here points to that which was well known to both the reader and the writer, which is another use of the Greek definite article. Thus, the departure of the church from earth to heaven must precede the great tribulation period [I would say, "must precede the [7-yr] tribulation period" to be more specific (for 'GREAT tribulation' refers only to the latter half of it, though I find that most ppl mis-label this also)]. And we have answered our questions again. [...<snip>...]"

--Kenneth S Wuest, "The Rapture--Precisely When?", Bibliotheca Sacra, BSac 114:453 (Jan 57), p.60

[ www. galaxie . com/article/bsac114-453-05 ]


[end quoting; bold and underline mine, bracketed inserts mine (EDIT: I didn't do the usual bold and underline in this post)]


____________



Ring a bell? = D
Indeed it does I do recollect reading this earlier. A superb treatment that is entirely conclusive.
I really do hope that this would be the final nail in the coffin of the preterists!
 
S

Scribe

Guest
Verse 5 is relating to verses 2 and 3 regarding what he taught them. These verses tell us that Christ will NOT make his return until the falling away, (apostacy) and the antichrist is on the scene. Verse 6 and verse 7 relates again to the falling away in VERSE 3. That must happen FIRST, before the antichrist is revealed. Verse 8 and 9 speaks of Christs' return and the destruction of said antichrist.
Again, I think he is referencing the prophet of Daniel which he had taught from previously.
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.

This information he is discussing can be found in Daniel and he is pointing them to these prophecies (just as Jesus did) as a way of knowing the DAY of the LORD or the Day of Christ (the Day of the Lord mentioned in OT prophesies, a day of judgment upon all the earth) that these prophesies about the falling away and the man of sin in Daniel are a sign that they have entered into the Day of the Lord and not before. What details Paul had shared with them before would be coming out of the book of Daniel surrounding this man of sin and all that Daniel said about it as it related to Israel. The great falling away in Daniel would be Israel accepting this man as their messaiah. The great falling away detailed in Revelation surrounds this man of Sin and worshiping him and his image. I would try to find reference to the great falling away in Daniel and if I found that there was something like this mentioned especially in connection with the man of sin, I would feel confidence I had stumbled upon WHAT Paul had taught them before about these things.
 
S

Scribe

Guest
The writer of the long article you "Liked" on the other thread:


"[Kenneth S. Wuest is a member of the Faculty of the Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois, and author of numerous books on New Testament Greek.]"

"The Rapture: Precisely When?" - Kenneth S Wuest

"The answer to these questions will only be convincing to the reader if it is based upon the rules of Biblical exegesis. [...<snip>...] That interpretation which is based upon the above rules is to be regarded as correct until it can be shown by the reapplication of the same rules that an error of human judgment has crept in.
"There is such a thing, therefore, as a scientific method of studying the Word. The student who follows the rules of an experiment in chemistry brings that experiment to a successful conclusion. The student who does not ends up with an explosion. Just so, the student who conducts his study of the Bible along the scientific lines noted above arrives at the correct interpretation, and the student who does not at the wrong one. The exegetical method the student uses in answering the question with reference to the time of the rapture will determine whether he believes in a pretribulational or a posttribulational rapture.
[...]

"The words "a falling away" are the Authorized Version rendering of apostasia. The verbal form afistamai from which it comes is present middle of afisthmi, the root verb, which we will study. The simple verb Jisthmi [histemi] in its intransitive sense means "to stand," the prefixed preposition means "off, away from," and the compound verb, "to stand off from." The word does not mean "to fall." The Greeks had a word for that, piptw. Afisthmi, in its various uses, is reported by Thayer as follows: "to make stand off, cause to withdraw, to stand off, stand aloof, to desert, to withdraw from one"; in contexts where a defection from the faith is in view, it means "to fall away, become faithless." The verb is rendered by the translators of the Authorized Version "to depart," in Luke 2:32; Luke 4:13; Luke 13:27; Acts 12:10; Acts 15:38; Acts 19:9; Acts 22:29; 2 Corinthians 12:8; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy 2:19; Hebrews 3:12. In Luke 8:13 it is translated "fall away," in Acts 5:37, "drew away," and in Acts 5:38, "refrain." Had they translated the word here instead of interpreting it, they would have rendered it by the word "departure." The reader will observe that the predominant translation of the verbal form is "to depart," also, that where it is translated "fall away," the context adds the idea of "falling away" to the verb, which action is still a departure.

E. Schuyler English, to whom this present writer is deeply indebted for calling his attention to the word "departure" as the correct rendering of apostasia in this context, also informs us that the following translators understood the Greek word to mean "a departure" in this context: Tyndale (1534), Coverdale (1535), the Geneva Bible (1537), Cranmer (1539), and Beza (1565), and so used it in their translations. Apostasia is used once more in the New Testament and is translated "to forsake" (AV) [note: 'TO FORSAKE' is a VERB, not a NOUN], signifying a departure. The neuter noun apostasion in Matthew 5:31; Matthew 19:7; and Mark 10:4 is rendered by the Authorized Version, "divorcement," which word also signifies a departure, here, from antecedent relations.
The writer is well aware of the fact that apostasia was used at times both in classical and koine Greek in the sense of a defection, a revolt in a religious sense, a rebellion against God, and of the act of apostasy. Liddell and Scott in their classical lexicon give the above as the first definition of the word. Moulton and Milligan quote a papyrus fragment where the word means "a rebel." But these are acquired meanings of the word gotten from the context in which it is used, not the original, basic, literal meaning, and should not be imposed upon the word when the context does not qualify the word by these meanings, as in the case of our Thessalonians passage, where the context in which apostasia is embedded does not refer to a defection from the truth but to the rapture of the church. The fact that our word "apostasy" means a defection from the truth is entirely beside the point since we do not interpret Scripture upon the basis of a transliterated word to which a certain meaning has been given, but upon the basis of what the Greek word mean to the first century reader. The fact that Paul in 1 Timothy 4:1 uses this verb in the words "some shall depart from the faith" and finds it necessary to qualify its meaning by the phrase "from the faith" indicates that the word itself has no such connotation. The translators of the Authorized Version did not translate the word, but offered their interpretation of it. They should have translated it and allowed the student to interpret it in its context.

With the translation of the word before us, the next step is to ascertain from the context that to which this departure refers. We note the presence of the Greek definite article before apostasia, of which the translation takes no notice. A Greek word is definite in itself, and when the article is used the exegete must pay particular attention to it. "The basal function of the article is to point out individual identity. It does more than mark 'the object as definitely conceived,' for a substantive in Greek is definite without the article." This departure, whatever it is, is a particular one, one differentiated from all others. Another function of the article is "to denote previous reference." Here the article points out an object the identity of which is defined by some previous reference made to it in the context." Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:1 has just spoken of the coming of the Lord. This coming is defined by the words "our gathering together unto him," not as the second advent, but as the rapture. The Greek word rendered "and" can also be translated "even," and the translation reads, "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, even our gathering together unto him."
The article before apostasia defines that word by pointing to "the gathering together unto him" as that departure. This article determines the context which defines apostasia. The translators took the context of 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 as deciding the significance of the word, but they went too far afield, not grasping the function of the definite article preceding apostasia which points back to the rapture of 2 Thessalonians 2:1, not ahead to the refusal to believe the truth of 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12. The article is all-important here, as in many instances of its use in the Greek New Testament. In 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, Paul had given these saints teaching on the rapture, and the Greek article here points to that which was well known to both the reader and the writer, which is another use of the Greek definite article. Thus, the departure of the church from earth to heaven must precede the great tribulation period [I would say, "must precede the [7-yr] tribulation period" to be more specific (for 'GREAT tribulation' refers only to the latter half of it, though I find that most ppl mis-label this also)]. And we have answered our questions again. [...<snip>...]"

--Kenneth S Wuest, "The Rapture--Precisely When?", Bibliotheca Sacra, BSac 114:453 (Jan 57), p.60

[ www. galaxie . com/article/bsac114-453-05 ]


[end quoting; bold and underline mine, bracketed inserts mine (EDIT: I didn't do the usual bold and underline in this post)]


____________



Ring a bell? = D
It is not conclusive that the word departure must mean the rapture. (And I lean toward a pretribulation viewpoint) As mentioned in the article above this word can apply to a departure from the faith. A departure from mainline Jewish observance of their traditional belief of worship of the one true God and not bowing the knee to an image, and then to worship the image that the Antichrist gives life to, (something the 3 Hebrew Children would never do) can also be the interpretation of a GREAT DEPARTURE. If there is a reference in the book of Daniel that can apply to "A great departure in connection with the man of sin" then the hermeneutical rules of "context" (immediate context, antichrist), "theological context" (other scriptures in Daniel), "authorial intent", (what did Paul mean if we could ask him to explain), and what did the readers understand (they were told about this before, what was it they were told about this great falling away, how did they understand this "repeated" topic they had heard about from him previously. These rules of interpretation are even more important that the the "Lexical rule of hermeneutics" (analysis of the original words) since words alone do not communicate the authors intent if they are divorced from their sentences and context.
 

Rondonmon

Senior Member
May 13, 2016
1,304
183
63
This is a good question. I am not sure I have the answer but I do think I am on the right trail.

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

(So we know that Paul had taught them about this before. My guess is that he taught them from Daniel and interpreted at length so that THEY KNEW what he was talking about. Unfortunately we were not there and do not KNOW what he had told them. Nevertheless it is probable that the references in the following three verses clues us in as to WHAT in Daniel he would have been teaching. ..

.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, .....

I think one of the biggest clues are "Mystery of iniquity" = Daniel 8

23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.

And also the reference to he that holds back could be referencing Dan 12:

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

My guess is that Paul had taught them previously an interpretation from Daniel concerning these prophecies and that they KNEW he was talking about Dan 12 and probably something that Michael was going to hold back until he stands up.

He must have been talking about Daniel and so that is where I would go for the answers. I think that if we can come up with an interpretation about "He that withholdeth, and he that letteth will let until he be taken out of the way" from the book of Daniel we will have discovered WHAT "I told you these things" was that he had previously taught them. If we come up with an interpretation that can not be found in the book of Daniel we are probably not teaching what Paul had previously taught them.
I have Daniel 11 and 12 down pat, I did an Exegesis on Daniel 11 that showed who every Greek King was and how he came to power, this led me to also do Daniel 12, I should have enjoined Daniel 10 as its all one dream.

Thus, tbh I don't think it's about Daniel 12 brother. I think it's about the Rapture of the Church happening before the Day of the Lord or God's Wrath falling, thus he's telling them, remember I told you this before [THAT, they can't go through God's coming wrath because the Church body is Raptured {Gathered unto the Lord verse 1} before the DOTL. Likewise, the Man of Sin and the Departure {Falling Away is the Departure of the Church not of the Faith which is spoken about nowhere in the passage} of the Church or Gathering unto Christ Jesus.

Studying Daniel 12 opened me up to a great understanding EVERYTHING IS BACKWARDS to what we are thinking. The 1335 comes first, the 1290 comes next then the 1260 happens.
 
S

Scribe

Guest
I have Daniel 11 and 12 down pat, I did an Exegesis on Daniel 11 that showed who every Greek King was and how he came to power, this led me to also do Daniel 12, I should have enjoined Daniel 10 as its all one dream.

Thus, tbh I don't think it's about Daniel 12 brother. I think it's about the Rapture of the Church happening before the Day of the Lord or God's Wrath falling, thus he's telling them, remember I told you this before [THAT, they can't go through God's coming wrath because the Church body is Raptured {Gathered unto the Lord verse 1} before the DOTL. Likewise, the Man of Sin and the Departure {Falling Away is the Departure of the Church not of the Faith which is spoken about nowhere in the passage} of the Church or Gathering unto Christ Jesus.

Studying Daniel 12 opened me up to a great understanding EVERYTHING IS BACKWARDS to what we are thinking. The 1335 comes first, the 1290 comes next then the 1260 happens.
Interesting. This digging deeper is edifying.