|
|
Post by venge on Aug 23, 2018 10:19:06 GMT -6
So the rapture happens this year and the man of sin revealed? When did the falling away happen? What happens to credibility if it doesn’t happen this year? You've got valid points venge, and so we should be sure to clearly explain that the discussion is purely hypothetical. We do not necessarily want to 'hang our hat' for exactly the credibility reason you point out. However, I think we can all agree that we are definitely 'in the season', no? My opinion: I don’t see a falling away. I don’t see Elijah. I don’t see a covenant made with many yet. I don’t see the 4th kingdom rising so I’d say No, not yet. I don’t see it. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Aug 23, 2018 10:55:14 GMT -6
So the rapture happens this year and the man of sin revealed? When did the falling away happen? What happens to credibility if it doesn’t happen this year? ... My opinion: I don’t see a falling away. I don’t see Elijah. I don’t see a covenant made with many yet. I don’t see the 4th kingdom rising so I’d say No, not yet. I don’t see it. 1. When did the falling away happen? Apostasy is a transliteration of apostasia, not a translation. The word literally means "departure". If what Paul is referring to in 2 Thess. 2:3 is the departure of the Church (which context and the parallelism between vv. 3 & 7 would indicate) then it hasn't happened yet. If it refers to an actual spiritual defection, then since 1950-on the world has witnessed an unparalleled departure from the historic Christian faith and the DoTL is near, so take your pick. 2. What happens to credibility if it doesn't happen this year? Credibility probably goes down in the minds of those with accusing hearts and an axe to grind, but probably doesn't change in the minds of those who listen to the words we're saying (the rapture is near, we don't know the day or hour, this is speculation, conjecture, etc). In other words, those looking for credibility to go down will believe whatever they want to believe to justify themselves. We've been speculating since '09/'10 and God has been teaching us and increasing the ministry He's given us substantially. 3. I don't see a falling away. Just watch a few of John Haller's videos. It's happening and in fact has already happened (and in historic and unprecedented proportions). In the U.S. for instance, fully 3/4th claim to be Christian, but only 1/3rd or less have an actual biblical worldview, believe in grace and sola fide, believe in a fully literal Genesis, the reality of hell, etc. Those statistics are even worse in many other post-Christian countries which used to tout 90%+ Christianity. All that being said, I believe 2 Thess. 2:3 is first and foremost a reference to the rapture, but perhaps a play on words referring to a certain parallelism between the rapture event and a falling away. 4. I don't see Elijah. Jesus did: John came before the DoTL. Blessings. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Aug 23, 2018 13:19:39 GMT -6
That said, @gary, I had a brief discussion with mike a few weeks ago about an attempt to flesh out the hypothesis that Revelation 12 is a roadmap/overview of the Tribulation. Given the link and information you provided above, what are your thoughts on the following: I'll try to give some of the pieces, without tying them together, and hopefully you will see some patterns: 1. Rev 12:1-2 has been determined to be celestial in nature. 2. Rev 12:3-4 also celestial by the use of 'another' in the text, indicating 'of the same type' since 'sign' is the same word 3. What if these signs (v1 and v3) were time markers, but the descriptions in v2 and v4 were allegorical? Looking closely at 12:2 can a stellar alignment really 'cry out in pain of labor'? 4. In v3 the sign is 'perceived' or 'seen' by John not 'appeared' as translated. The word 'appeared' is inferred. literally, the 12:3 verses could be read: "Also, another sign in heaven; behold..." The 12:1 verse could be read: "In heaven a great sign, a woman...." 5. If we did not see the dragon sign immediately near the Rev 12:1 sign, and looking at 12:3 "And another sign appeared in heaven" could indicate time elapsed since the first sign. 6. There is some speculation that the Draconids meteor shower should be very spectacular this year. If this aligns with 12:4, and if it is an allegorical sequence to 12:3 as 12:1 is to 12:2, then the 'appearance' of the Dragon sign would be before October 10, followed by the 'sweeping' of the Draconids (v4a) and then v4b. 7. We have no chronologically fixed time period dictated between the sign descriptions, but there is almost exactly 1 year from 9/23/17 to 10/10/18; as well as allegorical descriptions in 12:2 and 12:4 8. "Heaven" in v1 is οὐρανῷ (celestial heaven) in v3 is οὐρανῷ (celestial heaven) and in v4 is οὐρανοῦ (spelled differently - a different heaven, yet refers also to the celestial?). Could it be that the first two infer (imply parallels) to the abode of God; and the latter has no implication of that, but just the 'heavens'? See the strongs references for each spelling. They are used differently. The first appears to infer the dwelling place of God, the last does not? strong's 'heaven(s)'
9. Israel is often assigned the role of the woman in prophecy; 12:6. 10. If Rev 12 is an overview of the enture trib, then there seems to be a chronological sequence after 'the players' are introduced (v1 and v3): a. the woman sign in 12:1 (9/23/17) b. labor starts 12:2 (we have been seeing this in the news, i believe) b. the dragon sign 12:3 (the blood moon in July?) c. the sweeping of the stars in 12:4a (10/10/18) d. the dragon standing before the woman in 12:4b (the peace deal?) e. the birth of the male child 12:5a (israel's Aliyah?) f. the catching up of the male child in 12:5b (Harpazo) g. the fleeing of the woman into the wilderness 12:6 (mid-trib) h. war breakout in Heaven 12:7 i. the victory of Michael and the Angels over the dragon 12:8 j. the casting out of the dragon with his angels 12:9 (Rev 9:1 angel with keys to the abyss?) Based on what I typed below (I typed this sentence last) I might suggest that Rev 12, only goes through the first half of the Tribulation. Read on... I have to add an additional thought to item 9 above, by way of a question: Who or What is Zion? The woman is referred to as Zion in other passages. I wonder if we use it to refer to Israel when in fact it refers to something else: the Kingdom of God maybe? additional commentary on item 10: c - the sweeping of the stars is a prophetic representation of the casting out of Satan and his followers, which occurs 'physically' later (j) e - the male child [specifically related to the birth] may refer to ALL those who will (eventually) enter the Kingdom of God - trib saints, and pre-harpazo believers, Abraham-like historical characters whose belief was credited to them as righteousness - ALL those who are 'citizens' g - given the above, is it possible that the woman fleeing to the wilderness is the removal of the above people, whether by harpazo, or in the case of the jewish remnant during the tribulation, or the trib believers who are killed for their faith I will also add the rest of Rev 12, from v10: v10-v12 ... the proclamation - where else is it referred to scripturally? Is it a single speaker? Is it a vignette vision within the vision of Rev 12? v13-v17 ......... may refer to the AoD at the time that Satan indwells the AC. Pursuit of the woman may be a way of explaining how Satan tries to set up his own kingdom, with his own believers in the sense that he is attempting to usurp the Kingdom of God (if that is who the woman is). This does not preclude (IMHO) an attempt to exterminate all believers (jew and non) who are on earth during the Trib. Note that the attempt to eliminate woman fails and the Dragon goes after 'the rest of her offspring'. --interruption-- I just noticed something odd: v13 - the dragon (δράκων - drakon - noun - nominative singular masculine) is hurled to the earth if this is Satan, then wouldn't it make sense for all references to 'Dragon" in Revelation to describe Satan? therefore: v14 - the woman is taken out of whose reach? The Serpent's (ὂφεως - opheos - noun - genitive singular masculine). Why not Dragon? Are references to the Serpent in Revelation directed to the AC by process of elimination? If not, why does John feel the need to change the term used for Satan? v15 - The Serpent's (ὄφις - ophis - noun - nominative singular masculine) mouth spews the water (A command to march?) - if the Serpent is the AC, and the water is his army... I would not be surprised to find the earth literally swallowing up an army... incidentally, the term 'serpent' is 'ophis' in the greek, not 'drakon'. Used figuratively (in the KJV lexicon below) it means ' an artful[ly] malicious person' biblehub.com/lexicon/revelation/12-16.htmv16 - in this verse the Dragon (δράκων - drakon - noun - nominative singular masculine) is who spews the water... the Lexicon uses 'drakon' and defines it (in the KJV below) as ' a fabulous kind of serpent' biblehub.com/lexicon/revelation/12-16.htmWould it be unreasonable to draw the conclusion that what we are seeing here is the AC possessed by Satan, invading Israel for purposes of exterminating the jews and just before the setting up of the AoD? But the jews get away! See v17: v17 - Why would the dragon be enraged? Because first the 'male child' got away, and then the woman got away too? So he goes off to wage war against the rest of her offspring... "...the rest of her offspring" are described: Wouldn't that be the Tribulation Saints? Or could it be the 144,000; or both? Fascinating thoughts and there is a lot there that I agree with. And check this out... Comet 21P just happens to be the parent body (source) of the Draconid meteor shower. I had no idea until yesterday... I posted this in the comments on one of our articles last night: Here are a few of my thoughts on Rev. 12, in no particular order: 1. The chapter covers the entire Tribulation period w/ particular emphasis on mid-trib events. For example, v. 17 is about at least part of the latter half of the Trib (the Great Trib). The woman has escaped for 1,260 days (the Great Trib) and so satan turns his attention to the Gentile Trib Saints that remain. It also includes, of course, the rapture (v. 5). 2. For consistency sake I believe all of v. 5 applies to the Church. In other words, the male child is only ever the Church. Male child = Christ and the Church. Woman = Israel*. 3. This is important to note: we can use the literal, plain sense of Scripture to recognize that certain things represent both a heavenly and earthly reality because the Bible directly tells us so. Paul Dawson's recent exegesis of the Abrahamic Covenant is a prime example: This applies to the woman and Zion, as well. The Bible clearly equates her to the earthly Zion (Jerusalem) and to the earthly Israel. But it also equates her to the heavenly Zion - New Jerusalem. For example, in Galatians 4:26: And in Hebrews 12 we see that Zion can take on an explicitly heavenly meaning, distinct from earthly Jerusalem: She's both and context dictates which is being referred to. In Rev. 12 we catch a glimpse of both. 4. About labor (v. 2b), I think it's important to remember that John pulls from the Book of Isaiah more than any other book of the Bible and that includes Chapter 12 where the woman gives birth to the male child. John used a very peculiar word in describing the male child that comes directly from Isaiah 66:7-9. The child in Isaiah 66 is a corporate entity born from the earth (c.f. Isa. 26:17-21). Here's a very solid exegesis on this here. I also write about this myself here. In short, the literal fulfillment of the sign of Rev. 12:1-2 happened almost one year ago and in the text this sign precedes the birth of the male child. However, the actual labor pains (v. 2b) that the woman experiences occur after the Church is raptured: The woman's actual pains are The Time of Jacob's Trouble when Israel will be severely persecuted and beaten. Notice that Jeremiah 30 directly connects The Time of Jacob's Trouble with the pain's of childbirth: Understanding then the OT prophecies helps us to rightly divide and place the timing of the signs given in Jesus' Olivet Discourse which He likens to birth pangs. The Church is gone before they start. As far as the dragon is concerned, I wrote about how I would divide these Scriptures last year, which I still stand by, but I also think Draco, Comet 21P, and the Draconids might be the best explanation yet offered for the sign aspect of the Chapter 12 prophecy. Blessings & Maranatha! |
|
|
|
Post by rt on Aug 23, 2018 21:28:08 GMT -6
Gary , thanks for this bit, a real light bulb moment for me. God's word is just so awesome!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 2:56:16 GMT -6
Gary , thank you for your profound writings.
I simply want to add another very good article from Michael Svigel here.
This article covers mainly the question of assumed raptures, found in the book of Revelation.
Bottom line is, Rev 12 describes the situation and the timeline of the church, the rapture, the situation of Israel, the tribulation, and many more corresponding topics frappantly clear and exact.
Want to add, that M.Svigel is not a proponent of the Rev12 sign (he distanced oneself in no uncertain words), but his article (written years before) supports IMO "our" Rev12 sign interpretation to 100%
Maybe this is an eye opener to some readers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Aug 24, 2018 11:35:16 GMT -6
Thanks for the heads up! Svigel's dismissal of 9/23/17 makes him an even better witness, lol. He came to the same conclusion without wanting to (:
|
|
|
|
Post by venge on Aug 24, 2018 14:50:26 GMT -6
So the rapture happens this year and the man of sin revealed? When did the falling away happen? What happens to credibility if it doesn’t happen this year? ... My opinion: I don’t see a falling away. I don’t see Elijah. I don’t see a covenant made with many yet. I don’t see the 4th kingdom rising so I’d say No, not yet. I don’t see it. 1. When did the falling away happen? Apostasy is a transliteration of apostasia, not a translation. The word literally means "departure". If what Paul is referring to in 2 Thess. 2:3 is the departure of the Church (which context and the parallelism between vv. 3 & 7 would indicate) then it hasn't happened yet. If it refers to an actual spiritual defection, then since 1950-on the world has witnessed an unparalleled departure from the historic Christian faith and the DoTL is near, so take your pick. 2. What happens to credibility if it doesn't happen this year? Credibility probably goes down in the minds of those with accusing hearts and an axe to grind, but probably doesn't change in the minds of those who listen to the words we're saying (the rapture is near, we don't know the day or hour, this is speculation, conjecture, etc). In other words, those looking for credibility to go down will believe whatever they want to believe to justify themselves. We've been speculating since '09/'10 and God has been teaching us and increasing the ministry He's given us substantially. 3. I don't see a falling away. Just watch a few of John Haller's videos. It's happening and in fact has already happened (and in historic and unprecedented proportions). In the U.S. for instance, fully 3/4th claim to be Christian, but only 1/3rd or less have an actual biblical worldview, believe in grace and sola fide, believe in a fully literal Genesis, the reality of hell, etc. Those statistics are even worse in many other post-Christian countries which used to tout 90%+ Christianity. All that being said, I believe 2 Thess. 2:3 is first and foremost a reference to the rapture, but perhaps a play on words referring to a certain parallelism between the rapture event and a falling away. 4. I don't see Elijah. Jesus did: John came before the DoTL. Blessings. I was speaking of Mal 4:5 What you posted: That was not the dreadful day of the Lord which his 2 witnesses come, one being Elijah. Departure or falling away. I don’t see it yet. Just my own observation. The 2 witnesses that come, was written into Revelation way after John the Baptist therefore rendering the assumption it was him invalid and made a future event. Edit: I didn’t have a chance to finish as I was driving lol, but I acknowledge what Christ said. I just wanted to explain quickly that I wasn’t referring to John the Baptist but a future Elijah |
|
|
|
Post by yardstick on Sept 3, 2018 11:54:18 GMT -6
I wanted to add in the relevant information to the word 'apostasia', which seems to be a key word that interpretation can hinge upon. As Gary noted, 'apostasy' is a transliteration of 'apostasia', but it has been defined as both departure, and 'falling away'; and even 'rebellion'. So below I posted links to the words in question: definition in Strong's Concordance biblehub.com/greek/646.htmapostasia: defection, revolt Original Word: ἀποστασία, ας, ἡ Part of Speech: Noun, FeminineTransliteration: apostasiaStrong's Greek 646
2 Occurrences
ἀποστασία — 1 Occ.
ἀποστασίαν — 1 Occ.
Acts 21:21 N-AFS
GRK: σοῦ ὅτι ἀποστασίαν διδάσκεις ἀπὸ
NAS: the Gentiles to forsake Moses,
KJV: the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying
INT: you that apostasy you teach from
2 Thessalonians 2:3 N-NFS
GRK: ἔλθῃ ἡ ἀποστασία πρῶτον καὶ
NAS: you, for [it will not come] unless the apostasy comes
KJV: there come a falling away first,
INT: shall have come the apostasy first and
The root word according to Greek Lexicon: Original Word: ἀφίστημι Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: aphistémiPhonetic Spelling: (af-is'-tay-mee) Short Definition: I lead away, seduce, depart, abstain from Definition: I make to stand away, draw away, repel, take up a position away from, withdraw from, leave, abstain from.
biblehub.com/lexicon/2_thessalonians/2-3.htmbiblehub.com/greek/868.htmStrong's Greek 86814 Occurrencesἀπέστη — 2 Occ. (Luke 4:13, Acts 12:10) ἀπέστησαν — 1 Occ. (Acts 22:29)ἀπέστησεν — 1 Occ. (Acts 5:37)ἀφίστανται — 1 Occ. (Luke 8:13)ἀφίστατο — 1 Occ. (Luke 2:37)ἀποστάντα — 1 Occ. (Acts 15:38)ἀποστὰς — 1 Occ. (Acts 19:9)ἀποστῇ — 1 Occ. (2 Cor 12:8)ἀποστῆναι — 1 Occ. (Hebrews 3:12)ἀποστήσονταί — 1 Occ. (1 Timothy 4:1)ἀπόστητε — 2 Occ. (Luke 13:27, Acts 5:38)Ἀποστήτω — 1 Occ. (2 Timothy 2:19)Luke 2:37 V-IIM/P-3SGRK: ἣ οὐκ ἀφίστατο τοῦ ἱεροῦNAS: She never left the temple,KJV: years, which departed not fromINT: who not departed the templeLuke 4:13 V-AIA-3SGRK: ὁ διάβολος ἀπέστη ἀπ' αὐτοῦNAS: temptation, he left Him untilKJV: the temptation, he departed fromINT: the devil departed from himSo I have questions: 1. Is there any secular greek passage that predates or is concurrent with the timing of the 2 Thess passage writing, which uses ἀποστασία in a specific sense; and in what sense is it used?2. Isn't is possible that we are seeing wordplay inspired by the Holy Spirit; and that ἀποστασία means BOTH departure AND 'apostasy' (in the sense of rebellion)?Also, I noticed something which may or may not be significant: Look who wrote each of the passages that contain the words in this analysis: Paul - Acts 21:21 (ἀποστασίαν) 2 Thessalonians 2:3 (ἀποστασίαν) 2 Cor 12:8 (ἀποστῇ) Hebrews 3:12 (ἀποστῆναι) 1 Timothy 4:1 (ἀποστήσονταί) 2 Timothy 2:19 (Ἀποστήτω) Luke - Luke 4:13, Acts 12:10 (ἀπέστη) Acts 22:29 (ἀπέστησαν) Acts 5:37 (ἀπέστησεν) Luke 8:13 (ἀφίστανται) Luke 2:37 (ἀφίστατο) Acts 15:38 (ἀποστάντα) Acts 19:9 (ἀποστὰς) Luke 13:27, Acts 5:38 (ἀπόστητε) Both of these men were learned men, who understood the nuances of the greek language. Maybe a closer look into the parts of speech of each of these words will shed some additional light? Which of the word forms used above are used in the physical sense; and which are used in the spiritual sense? BTW, the literal translation of 'apo - stasia' is "apostasy – literally, "a leaving, from a previous standing." Also, 'apo' the prefix for the word has a direct translation - "from" However, I am having some trouble reconciling 'stasia' having a root word 'histemi'. They don't even sound similar? Addendum: found this when searching for 'στασία' (stasia) as the root: "protection" translate.google.com/?hl=en#el/en/%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%AF%CE%B1www.bing.com/translator/?from=el&to=en&text=%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%AF%CE%B1 |
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Sept 4, 2018 8:33:15 GMT -6
Yes, yes! Option #2 is definitely my preference. The context of the passage (our gathering unto Christ), the precedent from Paul's previous letter to the Thessalonians (rapture of the dead AND living in Christ), and the very clear parallelism in 2 Thess. 2 (v. 3 and v. 7), make the hyper-literal "departure" translation of v. 3 a very, very strong possibility.
Furthermore, while an argument can be made that apostasia can have the connotation of a spiritual departure/defection, one thing forgotten in the debate is that this is a noun, whereas aphistémi is a verb. I could be wrong on this, but I'm not aware of any other noun form equivalent of departure, besides apostasia in the Greek.
In other words, let's suppose Paul wanted to tell the Thessalonians about the rapture. And he wanted to refer to it as a specific event: THE rapture. His only noun option, as far as I can tell, would be apostasia. Neither of the harpazo nouns (harpagmos and harpagé) could be used, because their meanings are so vastly different.
These are some of the reasons I think the primary idea Paul was conveying was the rapture and removal of the restrainer, but I have no problem with it also being subtle wordplay. Indeed there will be lots of apostasy towards the end of the age (as we can already see) and there will be even more in the Trib.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Sept 5, 2018 8:52:06 GMT -6
This is an intriguing video from Ty Green. He's found a plausible series of signs that line up with what I've mentioned preceding the sign of the dragon, and his findings also line up with the theoretical timeline in this thread (rapture 2018, Trib begins 2021, second coming 2028). Whether you agree or disagree, it's still worthwhile to watch:
|
|
|
|
Post by stormyknight on Sept 5, 2018 9:17:41 GMT -6
Definitely produces a sense of imminence. He is coming and we will understand.
"The anger of the Lord will not turn back
until he fully accomplishes
the purposes of his heart.
In days to come
you will understand it clearly." Jer. 23:20
|
|
