2 Thess 2

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Bowas

Not sure if Paul thought it would be read and intended to be for those the letter not addressed to and directed towards, but it doesn't mean we can take liberties and think he really had us in mind when he wrote it specifically to those he addressed it to. If intended for others, he surely would have used different words instead of "you," he could have said "they' or "them," or "whosoever."

Right, which means 2 Thess 2:13 only applies to those people back then, not you or me or anyone else.

[mfblume]

Search in this forum for a post I made about Victorinus.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Im not going around it. The temple of God Paul refers to is exactly what Jesus refers to here.

If Antichrist or anyone else builds a temple for themselves it is NOT "the temple of God". More importantly, it is not the NAOS of God, a phrase Paul ONLY uses to describe the church of God.

First he mentions the falling away.

12Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death. 13And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. Mark 12:12-13

You begin with an error. Jesus is not describing the apostasy or falling away. He is describing division and warfare and betrayal. Apostasy is when people fall away from apostolic truth and backslide from the gospel. As I already showed, Paul, Peter, Jude, and John all taught there would be a falling away from the faith that would soon begin (John said it was already happening). They explain the apostasy as people within the church departing from the original faith. Jesus is not describing a falling away in the passage you quoted. He is speaking about violence and division in the world against the saints. Worldlings persecuting the saints is not the "falling away".

Then he mentions the abomination of desolation.

14But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

So to understand Jesus version of what happens IMMEDIATELY BEFORE HE COMES....he points us to the prophet Daniel and mentions something STANDING WHERE IT OUGHT NOT. Amen?

And in Luke that abomination of desolation is related to Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, leading to its destruction, which is how the temple was destroyed. Which was the fulfillment of Christ's prophecy concerning Jerusalem and the temple, destroyed in 70 AD. Pushing the Olivet prophecy completely into the future destroys one of the most powerful proofs that Jesus is the Christ: His prophesied destruction of the temple and city of Jerusalem. You cannot take a prophecy that was fulfilled in the first century and throw it off into the indefinite future and say you're still waiting to see it come to pass. If that's the case, we can do that with EVERY prophecy of the Bible and prophecy becomes meaningless.

Daniel 11:45

And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

The phrase "temple of God" is not there. There is nothing there to even suggest such a thing. He plants the tabernacles (plural, tents) of his palace (pavilion, which is a main tent used by generals or nobles during military campaigns). Nothing about a temple of God being built.

... between Daniel 11:36 and Daniel 12:2.....eleven verses, we have theses 4 things mentioned.

Verse 36...A man who exalts HIMSELF as god and above every god.

And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all. But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things. Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.
(Daniel 11:36-39)

It doesn't say he will exalt himself AS God. It says he exalts himself above every god, but also that he will honour a foreign god not known to his ancestors. In fact, the prophecy in this chapter of Daniel concerns Antiochus Epiphanes, who fulfilled the details of the prophecy rather pointedly. Antiochus abandoned the worship of his ancestors' gods, introduced the worship of Jupiter Capitolinus (a god foreign to both Judea and his own native country and people). He established himself as the final arbiter of all religion in his kingdom and in Judea (exalting himself above all gods), dictating who was to be worshipped and who not, and how, etc. He was an irreligious man using religion for his own devices and purposes, he worshipped "the god of forces", that is to say, raw naked power. He cared for nothing but himself and his own power. He set up forts throughout the land, and divided the land by lot for tax purposes which was given (in part) to the people he set up over the various districts. The entire chapter deals largely with Antiochus Epiphanes and his conflicts with Egypt, the Romans, and his terrorizing of Judea.

And yes, that includes the "abomination of desolation". Daniel said this:

And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.
(Daniel 11:31)

Please notice this event occurs BEFORE the event of verse 45 which speaks of a king planting the tabernacles of his palace (pavilion) in the "glorious holy mountain". You have been claiming this collection of tabernacles of a palace is not only the temple of God (!) but is also the "abomination of desolation", yet Daniel's prophecy clearly makes a distinction between the two. The abomination of desolation occurs BEFORE any planting of tabernacles, they are two different things.

But in any event, what is this "abomination of desolation"? History itself tells us:

The fifteenth day of Casleu, in the hundreth and fiue and fourtieth yeere, they set vp the abomination of desolation vpon the altar, and they buylded altars throughout the cities of Iuda on euery side.
(1 Maccabees 1:57)

Jesus said in His Olivet prophecy when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel, then flee into the mountains because the destruction of Jerusalem is at hand. Luke clarifies His words as "when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies". Why? Because the Romans were coming to do the same thing Antiochus Epiphanes did - destroy Jerusalem and set up an abomination (idol) on the temple site. Which, by the way, is exactly what they did. Antiochus invaded Jerusalem and set up an idol, and slaughtered numerous Judeans. The Romans invaded Jerusalem, desecrated the altar, destroyed the temple, and set up their idolatrous standards on the ruined site, and slaughtered over a million Judeans.

12:1...A time of trouble such as never was to that time or never will be again. Easily compared to what Jesus said would occur just before he comes. See Mark 13:19

Daniel never said "or never will be again", you are inserting words that do not exist. Daniel said this:

And 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.
(Daniel 12:1)

That is not the same as JEsus saying "such as never was, no, nor ever shall be". The depredations of the Judeans under the terror of Antiochus Epiphanes was the greatest time of trouble they had ever seen up to that point. Jesus however said the time trouble that was to come would be not only greater than that of Antiochus, but would not be surpassed by any afterwards. So the two times of trouble (one in Daniel 12, and one in Matthew 24) are NOT THE SAME.

Furthermore, according to futurism, the "great tribulation" which you expect is to be the last tribulation, because it leads right into the Millennium. At the end of the Millennium is the final conflict, but the Gog and Magog army coming against the camp of RESURRECTED and IMMORTAL SAINTS can hardly be called a "tribulation". Yet, Jesus's words imply there would, indeed, be tribulations AFTER the "great tribulation" - which proves the great tribulation is not what futurists like yourself think it is.

12:2...The resurrection of the dead.

Here's the context:

And 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. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever. But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
(Daniel 12:1-4)

Daniel was being assured that the tribulation his people would experience under Antiochus would come to an end. He also assured Daniel there would be a resurrection of the dead, and that the righteous would shine forth as the stars, and so forth. The angel speaking to Daniel is not giving a play-by-play scenario of the events which would follow immediately one after the other. In prophecy, events that are separated by centuries and even millennia are often spoken of as occurring right after one another in close proximity. The angel did not say "and at that time the dead shall arise" etc. He was finishing the prophecy, telling Daniel "don't worry, everything turns out fine, go your way, the book is sealed until the time of the end, knowledge shall increase."

Its all there. The end time scenario. Not from a "pop" book but by doing what Jesus pointed us to do. Searching the Prophet Daniel for something STANDING WHERE IT OUGHT NOT.

How do you explain this?

No, it's not "all there - the end time scenario". The end time scenario you believe is a scenario created by book sellers, it is not the scenario described in the Bible, as I just proved. You inserted several key parts of your scenario into the text where they don't exist. You also took various statements out of context, and you ignored the very real and proven historical fulfillments of prophecies you believe are yet future.

There is no way a power mad heathen king's military tents in conquered Jerusalem equate to "the temple (naos) of God". Especially when "the temple (naos) of God" is a special phrase used by Paul exclusively for the church.

I'm sorry brother, but futurism is simply wrong on prophecy. It goes against the very purpose of Bible prophecy itself, which is to vindicate God as the true God, who is able to foretell history because He controls history. Futurism takes numerous prophecies which have come to pass in striking exactitude, and throws them off into an unknown "sometime in the future", robbing the Bible of many of it's most powerful prophetical fulfillments. Which is why the predictions of futurists never come to pass, they aren't meant to - everything's always "just around the corner". And most importantly, the identities of the man of sin, antichrist, the beast, the false prophet, the little horn, etc are hidden.

Futurism was invented by a Jesuit during the Counter Reformation to do precisely that.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Search in this forum for a post I made about Victorinus.

Why?

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Search in this forum for a post I made about Victorinus.

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...78&postcount=8

[Michael The Disciple]

There is no way a power mad heathen king's military tents in conquered Jerusalem equate to "the temple (naos) of God". Especially when "the temple (naos) of God" is a special phrase used by Paul exclusively for the church

So this word can ONLY be used for the Church? Its definition by Strongs is "to dwell".

a fane
shrine
temple

Nothing about the word makes it exclusive to the Church.

Mark 14:58

58We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.

Mark 15:29

29And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, 30Save thyself, and come down from the cross.

Mark 15:38

38And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.

Luke 1:9

9According to the custom of the priest's office, his lot was to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord.

Temple in these 4 verses is the same as Paul used in 2 Thess 2:4. There are more verses where the word is not used for the Church but this should suffice.

So the word temple as used both by Jesus and Paul and others means "to dwell".

Its a dwelling place. In context a dwelling place for God. The man of sin sits in the temple of God SHEWING HIMSELF....THAT...HE...IS GOD.

[Michael The Disciple]

Daniel never said "or never will be again", you are inserting words that do not exist. Daniel said this:

And 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.

You are correct. In my haste I wrote a quick paraphrase instead of copying the verse.

The context of Daniel 12 certainly seems IMO to be the same as in Matt 24.

Dan 12:1-4

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. 2And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever. 4But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

Matt 24 15:


15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand 16Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: 17Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 18Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 19And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 20But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: 21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Note that what Jesus is referring to is supposed to be understood by reading Daniel the prophet. If Antiochus fulfilled this Jesus made a mistake. Jesus puts it in THE FUTURE where Antiochus was hundreds of years in THE PAST.

Jesus continues:

Verses 29-31

29Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

This is when the resurrection happens, at the coming of Jesus to gather the saints.

Paul describes it the same way.

Jesus comes and gathers together his people.

2 Thess 2:1-2

These are all pointing to the time of the resurrection.

1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

[Michael The Disciple]

You begin with an error. Jesus is not describing the apostasy or falling away. He is describing division and warfare and betrayal. Apostasy is when people fall away from apostolic truth and backslide from the gospel. As I already showed, Paul, Peter, Jude, and John all taught there would be a falling away from the faith that would soon begin (John said it was already happening). They explain the apostasy as people within the church departing from the original faith. Jesus is not describing a falling away in the passage you quoted. He is speaking about violence and division in the world against the saints. Worldlings persecuting the saints is not the "falling away".

If Christians turn from Jesus its known as falling away. It is not limited to being deceived.

MATT 24:9-12

Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. 10And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. 11And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. 12And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

So these people do not "fall away"?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

So this word can ONLY be used for the Church?

It is ONLY used by Paul for the church. How a writer uses a word is part of how we understand what the writer means. This is basic Bible 101 stuff.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

If Christians turn from Jesus its known as falling away. It is not limited to being deceived.

MATT 24:9-12

Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. 10And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. 11And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. 12And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

So these people do not "fall away"?

Jesus didn't say many shall fall away. He begins by saying you shall be hated for His sake and then describes persecution, even by family, just as in Matthew 10:21-26 (please read it).

The falling away is a departure from the original faith. I have amply demonstrated from Paul, Peter, Jude, and John that the apostasy concerns PROFESSING CHRISTIANS DEPARTING FROM APOSTOLIC TRUTHS, not just general hatred and persecution of saints by the world.

Moreover, Paul specifically linked apostasy with strong delusion and deception, so how you can say the apostasy isn't limited to being deceived baffles me.

Furthermore, the passage you quoted in Matthew 24 does not suggest the apostasy is still future from now. History has proven the Lord's words are true, it began in John's day and has continued to now. But he that shall endure to the end - in spite of the mess - shall be saved.