PDA

View Full Version : William Tyndale and the Congregation



northwye
October 20th, 2015, 07:49 AM
William Tyndale and the Congregation

The little c church, translated from ekklesia, means just a meeting, an assembly of people interested in Christ and a congregation. William Tyndale in his 1526 New Testament, translated ekklesia consistently as congregation, except for Acts 14: 13 and Acts 19: 37 where he used churche, meaning a pagan place of worship.

Any doctrine is established by the original meaning of the Hebrew or Greek words used to express that doctrine. A translation into English should not change that doctrine. The Capital C Church goes back to Roman Catholicism, and then after Tyndale's correct use of congregation for ekklesia, Theodore Beza in 1556, a Calvinist, believed in the idea of a catholic church and its hierarchical form of government and therefore chose to support this concept by using the word "church" instead of "assembly." Use of the word "congregation" or "assembly" would not support his church's hierarchical form of church government. William Whittingham's Testament of 1557 followed Beza's usage of "church" and was actually the first edition of the Geneva Bible and was a revision of the Tyndale New Testament.

I Peter 5: 2-3 says "Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;
3. Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock."

I Peter 5:2-3 says that what we call priests and preachers are to feed God's people, but they are not to constrain the people of God, are not to make money from feeding the people of God, and are not to be lords over them. This identifies how the priests and hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church redefined the ekklesia (Greek), the Ecclesia (Latin) and the churche (early English) so that the priests and religious hierarchy could rule over the people.

The Capital C Church makes it easier for the priests and preachers, as an elite clergy class, to preach or imply that there is no salvation outside of the Capital C Church, and even that joining the Capital C Church is the way to salvation. In addition, the control mechanisms of the Capital C Church can be used by those who promote heresiarchal doctrines to make sure that all church members conform to the false doctrines. And so by defending false doctrines the Capital C Church contributes to the falling away from sound doctrine of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4 and the leavening of the kingdom of God in Luke 13: 18-21.

6days
October 20th, 2015, 09:05 AM
I'm not positive of the point you are making. Are you suggesting it is wrong to have a congregation / assembly, that meets in a 'church' building...a church organized around pastors, elders, deacons and teachers?

HisServant
October 20th, 2015, 09:25 AM
I'm not positive of the point you are making. Are you suggesting it is wrong to have a congregation / assembly, that meets in a 'church' building...a church organized around pastors, elders, deacons and teachers?

The ekklesia is free form and not monolithic. It is controlled by the leading of the Holy Spirit, not by the careers of humans.

6days
October 20th, 2015, 01:03 PM
The ekklesia is free form and not monolithic. It is controlled by the leading of the Holy Spirit, not by the careers of humans.
Free form?
Does that mean that they are free to forsake the assembling of believers to worship, teach, learn, admonish, encourage?

And...I don't think you are saying this but I will ask; are you suggesting that those who are not 'free form' are not controlled by the Holy Spirit?

HisServant
October 20th, 2015, 01:06 PM
Free form?
Does that mean that they are free to forsake the assembling of believers to worship, teach, learn, admonish, encourage?

And...I don't think you are saying this but I will ask; are you suggesting that those who are not 'free form' are not controlled by the Holy Spirit?

Free form in that the leadership comes and goes and is beholding to the conformation of the assembly at all times. The assembly owes them nothing.

Basically, the leadership of the assembly is subject to a vote of confidence at any moment and that leadership is not a career path.. it is a temporary gift.

Unfortunately, we now have 'paid clergy' that expect to be supported by congregations for their entire career and retirement, which is opposite of what Paul taught about those that desired to lead.

6days
October 20th, 2015, 01:42 PM
Free form in that the leadership comes and goes and is beholding to the conformation of the assembly at all times. The assembly owes them nothing.

Basically, the leadership of the assembly is subject to a vote of confidence at any moment and that leadership is not a career path.. it is a temporary gift.

Unfortunately, we now have 'paid clergy' that expect to be supported by congregations for their entire career and retirement, which is opposite of what Paul taught about those that desired to lead.
You didn't really answer my questions. I think your answer to both questions is "no...but"?

1.Does that mean that they are free to forsake the assembling of believers to worship, teach, learn, admonish, encourage?

2. And...I don't think you are saying this but I will ask; are you suggesting that those who are not 'free form' are not controlled by the Holy Spirit?

And a new question. ..is "paid clergy" something that is wrong?

HisServant
October 21st, 2015, 08:18 AM
You didn't really answer my questions. I think your answer to both questions is "no...but"?

1.Does that mean that they are free to forsake the assembling of believers to worship, teach, learn, admonish, encourage?

2. And...I don't think you are saying this but I will ask; are you suggesting that those who are not 'free form' are not controlled by the Holy Spirit?

And a new question. ..is "paid clergy" something that is wrong?

1.) Yes we are to meet together, but a 'church' is not the only thing that can fulfill this requirement.

2.) Yes, those who revere their leadership as speaking de facto for God without being subject to criticism or reproach have taken the Holy Spirit out of the equation.

3.) Paul states that paid clergy is not appropriate. He worked in the private sector for his worldy needs and exhorted others to follow his lead. But he was not above taking temporary gifts to accomplish short term gains (but these were almost always missionary ventures). Don't let other scripture confuse you though, it is not wrong to pay a pastor on a sermon by sermon basis based on the generosity of the ekklesia at that time... but a permanent salary and benefits is anti-christ behavior and nothing more than a legacy of the pagan Roman practices that were integrated into Christianity under Roman perversion.

4.) You also have to remember that a pastor's full time job is not preaching the Gospel... most of their time is spend teaching which is an elders job.. and elders are not to be paid. Those on missionary journeys and those who's full time jobs are to preach the gospel only to the unsaved can make a living from the offering plate.

northwye
October 21st, 2015, 08:34 AM
"And a new question. ..is "paid clergy" something that is wrong?"

Consider this question with these scriptures in mind:

"And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived." Revelation 18: 23

This implies that at one time the voice of the bridegroom and his bride were heard in what is called Babylon in Revelation 18. Yet what becomes Babylon after the voice of the bridegroom and his bride are no longer heard was at one time in the past something led by the Holy Spirit.

"And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory. 2. And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. 3. For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. 4. And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." Revelation 18: 1-4

Those who belong to Christ are called out of "her."

"And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood. 16. And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth. 17. And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." Revelation 12: 15-17

A remnant, at the time when the serpent-dragon is casting a flood out of his mouth, still holds to the testimony of Jesus Christ. The time when the serpent-dragon is casting a flood out of his mouth is the time when the serpent-dragon is inspiring the many false prophets who are spreading lies.

And - "And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days." Daniel 11: 33

There might be some who were trained in the Christian seminaries to become paid preachers and priests, in the group seen in Revelation 12: 17, but they have been given the truth and are no longer hirelings.

6days
October 21st, 2015, 08:44 AM
There might be some who were trained in the Christian seminaries to become paid preachers and priests, in the group seen in Revelation 12: 17, but they have been given the truth and are no longer hirelings.
I'm going to borrow the words of Fzappa13 from a different thread yesterday...."The hands and the feet and the eyes all coming together to make a body. Problem is the hands want to get together and say if you're not a hand you're not of the body and the eyes are doing the same thing and then, well ... :sigh: ... come Lord Jesus.

Ask Mr. Religion
October 22nd, 2015, 04:10 AM
When someone is joined to Christ in salvation, he is spiritually a member of “the invisible church,” the company of the saved.

Some may ask,

Isn’t this enough? Why should there be any need for visible and formal membership in an organization on earth called “the church?

The answer to this question is found by simply observing the way in which the New Testament speaks of the church of Jesus Christ: it is something which exists visibly, tangibly, externally, and identifiably in the midst of human society as an institution located in certain definite places.

That is why the Scripture speaks with plurality of churches (Acts 15:41; 16:5; Romans 16:4,16) as separate and identifiable societies in particular places (Revelation 2:1). These local societies are responsible for certain things which are clearly external and visible: for instance, to avoid schism, to show care for one another, to exercise given ministries, and to submit to authorities within the church (1 Corinthians 12:14-27).

Regarding the church Scripture speaks of many things which are not merely spiritual or invisible things like behavior in the church (1 Timothy 3:15), the church being told things (Matthew 18:17), the church adjudicating matters (church courts) (1 Corinthians 6:5), the church demonstrating unity (Ephesians 4:3-16), the church feeding widows (1 Timothy 5:16), the church being given pastors (Ephesians 4:11-16) and being governed by elders (Titus 1:5-7; Acts 14:23; 20:17,28; Philippians 1:1).

Besides being contrary to Scripture, it would be impossible for the local church to behave per the teachings of Scripture above if it were but a fluid like structure as proposed in the OP.

AMR

1Mind1Spirit
October 22nd, 2015, 04:18 AM
Besides being contrary to Scripture, it would be impossible for the local church to behave per the teachings of Scripture above if it were but a fluid like structure as proposed in the OP.

AMR

More faithless hot air.

Danoh
October 22nd, 2015, 04:38 AM
When someone is joined to Christ in salvation, he is spiritually a member of “the invisible church,” the company of the saved.

Some may ask,

Isn’t this enough? Why should there be any need for visible and formal membership in an organization on earth called “the church?

The answer to this question is found by simply observing the way in which the New Testament speaks of the church of Jesus Christ: it is something which exists visibly, tangibly, externally, and identifiably in the midst of human society as an institution located in certain definite places.

That is why the Scripture speaks with plurality of churches (Acts 15:41; 16:5; Romans 16:4,16) as separate and identifiable societies in particular places (Revelation 2:1). These local societies are responsible for certain things which are clearly external and visible: for instance, to avoid schism, to show care for one another, to exercise given ministries, and to submit to authorities within the church (1 Corinthians 12:14-27).

Regarding the church Scripture speaks of many things which are not merely spiritual or invisible things like behavior in the church (1 Timothy 3:15), the church being told things (Matthew 18:17), the church adjudicating matters (church courts) (1 Corinthians 6:5), the church demonstrating unity (Ephesians 4:3-16), the church feeding widows (1 Timothy 5:16), the church being given pastors (Ephesians 4:11-16) and being governed by elders (Titus 1:5-7; Acts 14:23; 20:17,28; Philippians 1:1).

Besides being contrary to Scripture, it would be impossible for the local church to behave per the teachings of Scripture above if it were but a fluid like structure as proposed in the OP.

AMR

:thumb:

northwye
October 22nd, 2015, 07:45 AM
There is what many call a remnant now, in 2015, but no one talked about a remnant back 25 years ago. Many, but not all, who are part of this remnant, came out of the churches, largely because the churches are not teaching the truth.

The Capital C Church, in which a clergy class rules over the church members, to control what the members believe, cannot recognize that such a remnant exists.

And - that Capital C Church is largely made up of a majority following dispensationalism and a minority in some theology derived from Calvinism. There is also that important mega church movement now.

Rick Warren has honored W.A. Crisswell as being his mentor. See: http://www.bpnews.net/13683/rick-war...ry-wa-criswell

Rick Warren says Crisswell "...was my father in the ministry. It was under him that I actually felt called to be a pastor," said Warren. "He's been an incredible influence in my life."

Warren attributed Criswell with developing "the most widely copied model" of church organization and ministry in America."

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._A._Criswell

"In 1944 Criswell was called to replace George Washington Truett as the pastor of the First Baptist Church in Dallas. He would spend the remainder of his life at First Baptist, preaching more than four thousand sermons from its pulpit. During his tenure membership grew from 7,800 to 26,000."

Truett was not a dispensationalist, but W.A. Crisswell led a movement in the sixties to make the Southern Baptist Convention entirely dispensationalist. As the dispensationalists took over the Convention - the denomination - they booted out of their seminaries all professors who were critical of dispensationalism.

This is part of the model of the Capital C Church. Its clergy tries to rule over the church members to insure they all follow the correct theology, which is from John Darby, C.I. Scofield and Lewis S. Chafer. Remember what I Peter 5: 2-3 says, "Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;
3. Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock."

Peter says not to be lords over God's heritage, but act as examples to the flock.

And the article from the link just above says "Criswell was an early pioneer of the modern megachurch phenomenon and introduced a number of innovations at First Baptist Dallas that became a model for growing churches all over the country. "

W.A. Criswell was Rick Warren's mentor, not only because Warren was a Southern Baptist early on, but because W.A. Criswell was a pioneer in learning how to grow church membership.

Warren introduced secular methods of advertising, sales, and even used the dialectic method of attitude and behavior change in small groups developed by the Group Dynamics and Encounter Group movements out of the Marxist version of the Hegelian Dialectic.

And - W.A. Criswell was a major leader of the sixties' movement to make the Southern Baptist Convention into a totally dispensationalist denomination. And not long after the dispensationalists totally took over that denominatrion, Criswell led the Convention to get rid of the old Southern Baptist doctrine of the priesthood of the believer.

The priesthood of the believer means that the believer has the authority from God to bring Christian doctrines and morality to the world - and also to be his own "priest" in interpreting the word of God. To be your own "priest" or "preacher" you must first know the truth from Scripture and have a strong love for it. Otherwise, the believer as "priest" simply accepts for himself some set of false doctrines and tries to make others believe the false doctrines.

Since Crisswell was a dispensationalist and dispensationalism is taught and maintained within a church system in which the preacher is the authority and rules over the beliefs of the members, he opposed the doctrine. Dispensationalism cannot have church members thinking they are their own priests or preachers. The dispensationalist preacher must alone rule the Capital C Church.

The older pre-dispensationalist Southern Baptist priesthood of the believer does not work within the dispensationalist church system which rules over the beliefs of the members to make sure they follow dispensationalist doctrines.

Cruciform
October 23rd, 2015, 04:34 PM
The ekklesia is free form and not monolithic.
Nonsense. Christ's Church (http://scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html) is exactly what Jesus and his apostles made it to be: one, historic, hierarchical, and authoritative.


It is controlled by the leading of the Holy Spirit, not by the careers of humans.
A distinction without a difference, since the Holy Spirit normatively works through human agents and agencies, most particularly through Christ's one historic Church (http://scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html).



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

HisServant
October 24th, 2015, 10:29 AM
Nonsense. Christ's Church (http://scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html) is exactly what Jesus and his apostles made it to be: one, historic, hierarchical, and authoritative.


A distinction without a difference, since the Holy Spirit normatively works through human agents and agencies, most particularly through Christ's one historic Church (http://scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html).



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

The apostles thought like this originally, but the Holy Spirit kept proving them wrong time and time again.... the Holy Spirit cannot be contained by the box the RCC has tried to put him in.

Cruciform
October 24th, 2015, 12:55 PM
The apostles thought like this originally, but the Holy Spirit kept proving them wrong time and time again.... the Holy Spirit cannot be contained by the box the RCC has tried to put him in.
Post #14

disturbo
October 24th, 2015, 06:07 PM
Christ's Church is exactly what Jesus and his apostles made it to be: one, historic, hierarchical, and authoritative.


That's true throughout the entire spectrum of things God has made and even in our social and corporate world. There are different hierarchies of angels, spirits, and POWERS.

northwye
October 25th, 2015, 08:08 AM
John Wyclife, of Yorkshire, England, translated the first Bible into English in 1382, not from the original languages, but from the Latin. Wyclife translated the Latin word ecclesiam into chirche (in old English spelling):

But then William Tyndale in his 1526 New Testament translated ekklesia as congregation, except for Acts 14: 13 and Acts 19: 37 where he used churche, meaning a pagan place of worship. Tyndale broke with Catholic tradition and used congregation for ekklesia something which might have contributed to his being strangled at the stake by the Catholics.

And after the death of John Calvin, Theodore Beza in 1556 returned to the use of church to translate ekklesia - and the Geneva Bible followed him, using church instead of congregation.

Any doctrine is established by the original meaning of the Hebrew or Greek words used to express that doctrine. A translation into English should not change that doctrine. Strong's Exhaustive Concordance defines ekklesia, number 1577, as "a calling out, i.e. (to) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation..."

The Catholic Church - the original Capital C Church - redefined the ekklesia. The doctrine of what the Church is, with its clergy who rule over the beliefs and sometimes the behavior of the church members, was changed as the word used for the assembly of believers began to be called the church.

When Theodore Beza, an early Calvinist, supported the burning of the anti-Trinitarian Michael Servetus (died 1553), he showed his view that the Church should be an organization which rules over men. Beza, contrary to I Peter 5: 2-3, had the Calvinist Church rule by constraint and to lord it over the people, contrary to scripture.

Christ said he came to bring life and it more abundantly. John 10: 10. And when in Luke 9: 54-46 James and John wanted Christ to call down fire from heaven to kill people in a village, Christ "...rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. "

The Calvinists under Beza acted against a major change between the practices of the Old Covenant and those of the New Covenant in the burning to death of Servetus. Christ made it clear that his people are not to murder people because the people reject Christ -or Christ's doctrines.

Theodore Beza did not have the Holy Spirit leading him because in wanting to burn Servetus to death he was acting contrary to the spirit of the Gospel given by Christ. Yet, Beza established for the Reformation the idea that the church should be an institution to rule over those claiming to be Christians.

The redefinition of the ekklesia into the Capital C Church with its ruling clergy made the ekklesia more prone to influences from the things of the world. "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." I John 2: 15 and "...know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." James 4: 4

Those who do not have the Holy Spirit leading them live in the state of the natural man of I Corinthians 2: 14, who does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, and cannot know them.

The natural man without the leading of the Spirit of God is an earth dweller.

Look in a good concordance for earth dweller, or dweller or earth, and find that Revelation 13: 14 says of the second beast that he "...deceiveth them that dwell on the earth...saying to them which dwell on the earth, that they should make an image (eikona) to the beast, which had the wound by the sword, and did live."

In Revelation 13: 6 this part, or head, of the first beast whose deadly wound was healed is said to open "...his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven."

Unless it is pointed out that the phrase "dwell on earth" or "earth dwellers" is used many times in the New Testament, most people will not begin to suspect that the "earth dwellers" refers not just to all who are living on earth, but to those who are not born again (John 3: 1-6) and are in the state of the natural man, without the Holy Spirit. Those who dwell in heaven in Revelation 13: 6 are those who are led by the Spirit of God.

Thanks to a guy for his Bible study posted on the Internet about the use of earth dwellers in the New Testament a few days ago. Like a quarterback handing off the football to a running back, when some of us post a new insight, we can then take that "football" and run with it down the field. And maybe someone who reads our posts will take the "ball" father - so long as running that new insight into another doctrine of absolute truth does not happen.

Luke 21:35: "For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth."

Revelation 3:10: "Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth."

Revelation 12:12: "Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time."

There are several other texts which use "earth dwellers" or similar phrases to indicate those who are spiritually in a condition of the natural man, the earth dweller.

But look at Revelation 14:3: "And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. " The remnant, the 144,000, is said to be redeemed from the earth, meaning they are transformed into "heaven dwellers," those led by the Holy Spirit, who are born again in Christ Jesus.

"Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: " Ephesians 2: 5-6

The "heaven dwellers" sit with Christ in spiritual high places, that is, having Christ in them, they are raised up spiritually to a high level.

The Capital C Church is an organization which claims to be spiritual, but it incorporates things of the world, and can make those under its influence the "earth dwellers," who do not sit with Christ in heavenly places. Sitting with Christ in heavenly places is metaphoric, and does not literally mean only being up in the clouds or out in space somewhere sitting with Christ. Your location in the creation when you sit with Christ is not important. But the earth dwellers tend to insist on scripture being literally interpreted.

Cruciform
October 26th, 2015, 01:40 PM
The Catholic Church - the original Capital C Church - redefined the ekklesia. The doctrine of what the Church is, with its clergy who rule over the beliefs and sometimes the behavior of the church members, was changed as the word used for the assembly of believers began to be called the church.
Already addressed---and corrected---in Post #14 above.

northwye
October 27th, 2015, 08:46 AM
Is there any indication that the Capital C Church - whether Catholic, Calvinist or dispensationalist (Christian Zionist) - acknowledges that the Church has undergone a falling away as of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4? And has the Church admitted that it has been leavened as Luke 13: 18-21 predicts? Then there are the prophecies of I Timothy 4: 1-2 on departing from the faith, II Timothy 3: 4-5, 7-8, about having only a form of godliness, not being able to come to the truth and resisting the truth, plus the text in II Timothy 4: 3-4 predicting a failure to endure sound doctrine and a turning away from the truth into fables.

There are the statements in Matthew 24 on many false prophets and in II Peter 2: 1-3 it says false prophets will bring in damnable heresies and will speak evil of the truth. Paul in Galatians 1: 6-9 and in II Corinthians 11: 4 warns of creating another Gospel and with that another Jesus. Has the Church in recent years ever acknowledged that all this is going on?

The dispensationalist Capital C Church has taught that there is to be a falling away when their one man anti-Christ figure appears - but this is always in the future and a falling away cannot happen now, but only at a time in the future.

What is the falling away? And how is the falling away tied to God's judgment beginning at the house of God in I Peter 4: 17? How is the falling away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4 related to II Thessalonians 2: 10-12, on the love of the truth? How is it tied in to Revelation 18: 23, the metaphor saying the voice of the bridegroom and of his bride is no longer heard in Babylon and the calling of those who are God's people out in Revelation 18: 4?

The departure in II Thessalonians 2: 3, even going back to the 1526 New Testament of William Tyndale is the English translation of the Greek word, apostasia.

The falling away is the apostasy of the Church, which the Church never acknowledges can happen. Acknowledging the apostasy of the church could result in the beginning of a loss of control over the church members by the priests and preachers, and they do not want that to happen.

The Tyndale New Testament for II Thessalonians 2: 3-4 has "Let no man deceive you by any means for the Lord commeth not except there come a departure first and that that sinful man be opened ye son of perdition
4 which is an adversary and is exalted above all that is called God or that is worshipped: so that he shall sit as God in temple of god and shew himself as God."

The Geneva Bible for II Thessalonians 2: 3-4 says "Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sin be disclosed, even the son of perdition, 4 Which is an adversary, and exalteth him self against all that is called God, or that is worshipped: so that he doeth sit as God in the Temple of God, shewing him self that he is God.

Then the King James Version says "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."