Theology Club: Departure cannot possibly mean the removal of the church

Totton Linnet

New member
Your theology requires that but that's not what it is saying

It matters not a fig how many times you argue differently God says that during Jacob's trouble Israel will lie down in safety and none shall make them afraid. Jeremiah 30

Daniel. 12.1. says exactly the same

There will be a time of trouble [tribulation] such as there never was or shall be again but

at that time Michael the great prince of Israel will stand up and Israel will be delivered.

It's foolish to argue point blank with God.
 

Totton Linnet

New member
You can't distinguish between tribulation or trouble and God's fury being poured out.

The tribulation in the bible is persecution. Jesus spoke about it, see how great this persecution is for parents will betray their children and hand them over to death and children will likewise their parents.

Even the holocaust was not that bad.....and this persecution can't be against the Jews....

See if Jewish children betray their parents and hand them over to death, they will be betraying themselves because if the parents are Jewish then the children who betrayed them must be Jewish also.

So those who are being persecuted are Christians.
 

intojoy

BANNED
You can't distinguish between tribulation or trouble and God's fury being poured out.

The tribulation in the bible is persecution. Jesus spoke about it, see how great this persecution is for parents will betray their children and hand them over to death and children will likewise their parents.

Even the holocaust was not that bad.....and this persecution can't be against the Jews....

See if Jewish children betray their parents and hand them over to death, they will be betraying themselves because if the parents are Jewish then the children who betrayed them must be Jewish also.

So those who are being persecuted are Christians.

Fiction
 

whitestone

New member
lol,I suppose at times I word things post trib,premill. ,,I notice many say "what?,explain that,,ect" when I do. I wondered about how this thread would go when I first saw it and who else was post,historic ect if any. But it is good to see it going civil so far,it proves dispys will discuss touchy matters among themselves with respect.

Ive said in the past,or ask how others arrange these verses,,,

1 Corinthians 15:23-26 KJV ,, Matthew 23:39 KJV ,,, and John 5:43 KJV ,,

In John 5:43 Jesus seems to be telling them "well since you don't believe I am the Messiah,then you are going to keep looking for one to come, so your going to believe the the man of sin is me when he comes".

I suppose in most eschatology this is true,everybody's either checked things off the list as fulfilled or their looking at the list and waiting for it to be fulfilled. So the Jews not having the Messiah part checked off as fulfilled in Jesus simply will recognize the man of sin as the king,Messiah ect. when he comes.

So as it seems when he does come he will then restore the kingdom the way they thought it was suppose to happen when they sang that to Jesus back then. Jesus instead went into the temple and told them that not one stone would be left on the other,lol,, it makes you wonder how many who sang "blessed is he that..." changed their mind about Jesus as fulfilling this and then thought he wasn't who he said he was when he didn't do what they thought he was suppose to.

Even among many Christian's they see these things as if checked off the list as fulfilled so there is nothing in the future to "watch for" except for the return of Christ and so when the man of sin comes then they will assume that he is Christ,that is he will mimic the things they think he will do so they'll believe he is the Christ.

In Paul's comment he says "in it's own order",,, so it seems Paul is saying "thing 1 will happen,then thing 2,then ect." and that thing 3,2 ect cant happen before thing 1. ,,,lol

That's why I'm so curious about how to look at those things Jesus said compared to Paul,Peter,John ect.

So If Jesus said they wont see him until they say to him that he is the Christ,and he also said that they were going to receive the one who comes in his own name,which one will they do first?

If they turn and see that he is the Christ, then after they confess him as Christ they follow the man of sin can they return to Christ? If they cannot return then will they all be saved?

To me it seems that they fall first,then they turn to Christ. So to me I see that they say let us make an image to the beast that was and was not yet is(create another state of Israel),then they build a temple(don't need to but they don't see that) then they await that promised Messiah(but another comes instead,M.O.S.),then they worship him as God on earth and to them the judgement begins(in their minds).

So there then are all those disbelievers(real Christians who wont worship the image or take his mark) and their false Messiah has them bring those who wont fall down and worship him as God(Christians) and he kills them/has them killed Revelation 13:15 KJV .

Now if we consider that happening, then those who are even in our own family will think that if they don't tell him(MOS,who they think is God) where you are hiding ,then to them the only chance we will have is for them to help us/turn us in ect. and they will think that they are doing Gods service in doing so.

But what is holding all this back from coming? Can the rapture occur before the image is set up and those who will be killed for not worshiping it are killed? Can the first Resurrection take place before all of those who will be killed for Jesus names sake Matthew 24:9 KJV ,have been killed for their testimony?
 
Last edited:

intojoy

BANNED
Those who are Tribulation Saints and are not martyrs are not part of the first resurrection they will enter into the kingdom with unglorified bodies.
 

intojoy

BANNED
will you then be martyred?


Not all will die.
Some have died more than once.
If I am there is a crown involved.

The Body, the Church contains martyrs as well as those who sleep. Yet the church does not and will not have any tribulation saints since according to the Revelation of Jesus Christ no church is mentioned after the start of the Trib.
 

whitestone

New member
Not all will die.
Some have died more than once.
If I am there is a crown involved.

The Body, the Church contains martyrs as well as those who sleep. Yet the church does not and will not have any tribulation saints since according to the Revelation of Jesus Christ no church is mentioned after the start of the Trib.


Some,,those who remain(have not then as yet died) will be caught up(not martyred) but will be changed in an instant,,,

Zechariah 5:9 KJV one woman went in and was weighed and found wanting,in ad70 she was put into the pit Revelation 17:8 KJV but then two women came out,one is the Gospel of the kingdom of God, the other the Gospel of Grace they are both standing together in Zechariah 4:12 KJV and Revelation 11:4 KJV ,,,
 

musterion

Well-known member
I have a copy of the June 1978 Berean Searchlight with an article by C.R. Stam on this subject entitled "Still Waiting."
We believe that we proved conclusively that the word apostasia in 2 Thes. 2:3 does not refer to religious apostasy, but to departure -- and in its context, to the departure of the Church from this earth to be with Christ.*

While the word apostasia occurs in only one other place in the New Testament, its root verb is found fifteen times. We listed every single one of these occurrences to demonstrate that it always means depart -- nothing more. Thus the devil "departed" from Christ (Luke 2:37), we are told to "depart" from iniquity (2 Tim 2:19), Paul prayed that his thorn in the flesh might "depart" from him (2 Cor 12:8)...
[etc]

* This is not to deny, of course, that the Scriptures do teach that [doctrinal] apostasy will prevail at the close of this age and, indeed, began in Paul's own day.
Tot, why not check the other twelve uses of the verb for yourself and see what you see.
 

musterion

Well-known member
Tot said:
You can't distinguish between tribulation or trouble and God's fury being poured out.
From the February '79 Searchlight article, The Day of the Lord's Wrath.


The heart of the issue is the identity of the "Day of the Lord." Those who oppose the pre-trib rapture are forced to argue that the terms "Day of the Lord" and "Day of Wrath" are confined to a brief period that comes after the tribulation. They cannot allow any application of these terms to the tribulation because Paul plainly declares that we are "delivered from the WRATH to come" (1 Thess 1:10). Thus they argue from Joel 2:31, Matt 24:29-30, Acts 2:20 and Rev 6:12-17 that the order is always the same: tribulation, signs, and then the Day of the Lord . . .

From Rev 1:10 we believe the Apostle John was transported by the Spirit into the future "Day of the Lord" and was instructed to write down what he saw. What did he write? Did he write only about what will happen after the tribulation? Or did he write about events in the tribulation too? Remember, he wrote what he saw in "the Day of the Lord."

In Rev 15 and 16 we have the seven bowls of the "wrath of God" being poured out upon the earth. But we do not have Christ coming at the battle of Armageddon until bowls 6 and 7. This means at least 5 bowls of God's wrath are poured out before the tribulation comes to an end. Furthermore, these bowls are said to "fill up" (Rev 15:1) the "wrath of God" which clearly shows the inaugurate the conclusion of something that will already have been going on. How then can it possibly be held that the wrath of God will only come after the tribulation has ended? . . .

We who are members of Christ's Body will be raptured before that time, for we...

"WAIT FOR GOD'S SON FROM HEAVEN, WHOM HE RAISED FORM THE DEAD, EVEN JESUS, WHICH DELIVERED US FROM THE WRATH TO COME (1 Thess 1:10)."
 

Danoh

New member
I have a copy of the June 1978 Berean Searchlight with an article by C.R. Stam on this subject entitled "Still Waiting."
Tot, why not check the other twelve uses of the verb for yourself and see what you see.

A thought...

There is difference in understanding within the various Mid-Acts camps as to whether 2 Thess. 2:2's "falling away first" is referring to the Body's catching away (which is what a "rapture" is) or to a departure by some from doctrine.

Those within Mid-Acts in favor of its being a reference to a Rapture go by one form of Greek word study and or another, together with a mention of "the context."

While those within Mid-Acts in favor of its being a reference to a departure from faith (the view I hold), tend to rely on/emphasize a much greater scope and context within Scripture than merely a few passages.

That is how all issues are to be approached. Not via the surface level/first impression reading into things via a few passages taken out of and or made the overall scope and context that is so favored by many - even by many within Mid-Acts - but via actual, overall, scope and context.
 

musterion

Well-known member
A wholesale departure from The Faith (aka doctrinal apostasy) would not be news. Paul said it would happen; indeed it was happening while Paul was yet alive ("all in Asia"). That departure was essentially complete within 100 years of his death per the judaized, sacramentalized doctrines of the "church" "fathers" who, to this day, are held in unconscionably high esteem.
 
A thought...

There is difference in understanding within the various Mid-Acts camps as to whether 2 Thess. 2:2's "falling away first" is referring to the Body's catching away (which is what a "rapture" is) or to a departure by some from doctrine.

Those within Mid-Acts in favor of its being a reference to a Rapture go by one form of Greek word study and or another, together with a mention of "the context."

While those within Mid-Acts in favor of its being a reference to a departure from faith (the view I hold), tend to rely on/emphasize a much greater scope and context within Scripture than merely a few passages.

That is how all issues are to be approached. Not via the surface level/first impression reading into things via a few passages taken out of and or made the overall scope and context that is so favored by many - even by many within Mid-Acts - but via actual, overall, scope and context.

Good to see you Book "Em Danoh !! -

I too believe the falling away is of faith, but I do believe there will be a rapture as the Bible tells us. 2 Thessalonians 2:3 KJV -
 

Danoh

New member
A wholesale departure from The Faith (aka doctrinal apostasy) would not be news. Paul said it would happen; indeed it was happening while Paul was yet alive ("all in Asia"). That departure was essentially complete within 100 years of his death per the judaized, sacramentalized doctrines of the "church" "fathers" who, to this day, are held in unconscionably high esteem.

Consider that one, your point there is from within your own logic; two, Paul wrote Thessalonians many years before.

In fact, the departure from the faith is from the Law and is the same departure Paul himself had been at the head of the line of back when he was lost.

Where that departure had Israel headed towards back then - towards the Day of the LORD in His Wrath was temporarily cut off with the saving of Paul unto his "my gospel."

Romans chapters 1-3, 9-11, and 15:8-12- the direction Israel and the world had then been headed towards having been temporarily replaced by Paul's Christ given " Now the God of hope," etc., of Romans 15:13-21.
 

musterion

Well-known member
Consider that one, your point there is from within your own logic;

Oh, I see you're back to this old routine: I'm not really taking Paul at his word the way I think I am. I'm not actually looking at what happened in history. I'm really just inventing what I think Paul said and am interpreting history to fit, but I'm too stupid to realize it.

two, Paul wrote Thessalonians many years before.
And?

In fact, the departure from the faith is from the Law and is the same departure Paul himself had been at the head of the line of back when he was lost.
The apostasy Paul elsewhere said would happen, and DID happen, is from the revelation given to him, not from the Law.

Where that departure had Israel headed towards back then - towards the Day of the LORD in His Wrath was temporarily cut off with the saving of Paul unto his "my gospel."

Romans chapters 1-3, 9-11, and 15:8-12- the direction Israel and the world had then been headed towards having been temporarily replaced by Paul's Christ given " Now the God of hope," etc., of Romans 15:13-21.
If you want to reply to what I posted from Stam, have at it.
 

Danoh

New member
Oh, I see you're back to this old routine: I'm not really taking Paul at his word the way I think I am. I'm not actually looking at what happened in history. I'm really just inventing what I think Paul said and am interpreting history to fit, but I'm too stupid to realize it.

And?

The apostasy Paul elsewhere said would happen, and DID happen, is from the revelation given to him, not from the Law.

If you want to reply to what I posted from Stam, have at it.

You just did it again. I never called you stupid, nor implied that you are - you read that into my words, followed that with allowing yourself to believe said reading of yours into my words as being what I was up to and then reacted to that as if I had called you stupid - that is just you reading your own logic into a thing.

It is not bothering to check with the other person.

Again, I meant no offense. Now, if you insist on needing to take your off-based reading into my words, well, I can't help you there - you "are not straightened in us, but" you "are straightened in your own bowels" (emotional issues of the flesh) 2 Cor. 6:12.

At the same time, perhaps you might pause a moment to reflect on how you feel - on how that that is perhaps how others on here might feel who you always mistreat.

Can you do that? Or does all this have to be about how your feelings are hurt but the feelings of others don't matter?

That said - do this - quit believing your fleshly mind. It will lie to you every time, Eph. 2:2; 4:22.

In fact, study out how this problem often manifests itself within many within Mid-Acts the moment they are not agreed with at the same time they allow themselves to throw mud at others.

Of course, you can take offense to all this too.

If so, then so be it until you one day look back and see "that Danoh guy posted some sound words about this problem."

Please feel free to throw what mud your fleshly mind might now prompt you to. It won't be from the victory you have in Christ, but it will set off mine to glory in, in response.

Get over yourself; a place of being easily hurt is no place to live out one's day to day.

The best to you in this whatever road you decide on.

Yours in Gal. 6:1 and Gal. 5:1.
 

glorydaz

New member
You just did it again. I never called you stupid, nor implied that you are - you read that into my words, followed that with allowing yourself to believe said reading of yours into my words as being what I was up to and then reacted to that as if I had called you stupid - that is just you reading your own logic into a thing.

It is not bothering to check with the other person.

Again, I meant no offense. Now, if you insist on needing to take your off-based reading into my words, well, I can't help you there - you "are not straightened in us, but" you "are straightened in your own bowels" (emotional issues of the flesh) 2 Cor. 6:12.

At the same time, perhaps you might pause a moment to reflect on how you feel - on how that that is perhaps how others on here might feel who you always mistreat.

Can you do that? Or does all this have to be about how your feelings are hurt but the feelings of others don't matter?
That said - do this - quit believing your fleshly mind. It will lie to you every time, Eph. 2:2; 4:22.

In fact, study out how this problem often manifests itself within many within Mid-Acts the moment they are not agreed with at the same time they allow themselves to throw mud at others.

Of course, you can take offense to all this too.

If so, then so be it until you one day look back and see "that Danoh guy posted some sound words about this problem."

Please feel free to throw what mud your fleshly mind might now prompt you to. It won't be from the victory you have in Christ, but it will set off mine to glory in, in response.

Get over yourself; a place of being easily hurt is no place to live out one's day to day.

The best to you in this whatever road you decide on.

Yours in Gal. 6:1 and Gal. 5:1.

Well, I can see nothing has changed here.

You're still high minded and think you know others are being "hurt" by your high mindedness. :chuckle:
 

LoneStar

New member
He took the meaning of "departure" in 2nd Thess. and changed it from rebellion which had been the unanimously accepted meaning and gave it a new meaning "departure" as in "removal" i.e. the removal of the church.

This makes IMPOSSIBLE grammar. For Paul now says this

"Brethren concerning the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ and our meeting Him in the clouds I beseech you etc....

....that day cannot come unless first there has come a departure...."

So Paul according to Darby is saying

Brethren...concerning the rapture, that day cannot come until first there has come a rapture.

See how impossible that is?
Good point.
 
Top