"That Wicked" has problems!

[Earburner]

Your doctrine is from the "synagogue of Satan".

If you can't expound on that, and prove it so, then your accusations against me have no bearing at all.
Waiting...

 

[Davy]

It saddens me that Post-Tribbers are looking forward to the start of the 7-year Tribulation Period. They are essentially looking to see who the Antichrist will be. They are busy like ants prepping by stockpiling water, dried food, guns, bullets, batteries, axes, etc., and constructing off the grid underground shelters.

Funny, because Christ's elect who well know that a singular Antichrist must first appear in Jerusalem to play God, prior to Christ gathering His Church. So just what will you be doing when that Antichrist shows up? You no doubt will want to be the first one 'taken'! Problem is, when Christ's disciples asked Him, "Where, Lord?" in the last verse of Luke 17, about where the first one taken would go to, He revealed it will be to wheresoever the fowls are gathered around a dead carcase (see Matt.24:28 version too).

Your attitude shows you are not spiritually prepare for what is coming upon you.

 

[Earburner]

I am a baptized Protestant Christian, and if you had kept to the simplicity that is God's written Word instead of trying to support a false doctrine of Judaizers about the temple Paul mentioned in 2 Thess.2, then you would have known early on how I am a true servant of Jesus Christ. But when someone like you brings a doctrine of Judaizers trying to change Apostle Paul's Message of warning about a coming Antichrist to Jerusalem to sit in a literal temple there, then that makes me have doubts about you being a true believer.

The question was:
"Before you came to Christ (hoping that you have), when you were born, were you born WITH the Holy Spirit, or were born as only a "natural man?"
.
> You didn't my question, for one or more of the following reasons:
You didn't understand the question.
You preferred to ignore it.
You simply don't know.
You are afraid to know the truth.

 

[Earburner]

Correction: "You didn't answer my question...."

 

[Earburner]

Say your sorry to Jesus Christ when He comes. I see no repentance in your words for comparing my Lord Jesus Christ's body with that temple in 2 Thess.2 that the future Antichrist is to come and sit in to play God in Jerusalem.

As I did say: "

You are miles away from being able to lecture me on having the Mind of Christ. Your trying to change the simplicity of the Scriptures shows you've left Christ's Word.

No, quite the opposite is true!
I left man's thoughts and ways about God's words, and now depend wholly on His Holy Spirit to explain to me His thoughts and ways about His OWN WORDS. Isa. 55:8-9 and John 16:13.

Why do you fault me for agreeing with God of what HE wants us to do, as opposed what He does not want us to do, saying:

Pro. 3[5] Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
.
Do you trust the Lord ONLY, for His understanding of His OWN words?
I see it as, you do not yet!

 

[Davy]

So brethren, it appears that the Scripture proof of a coming singular Antichrist at the end of this world has been established beyond all doubt. The OP is without Scripture witnesses, nor is any offered besides a 'play' on a couple of phrases in 2 Thessalonians 2. The OP's argument that the KJV "that Wicked" was a political ploy by the KJV translations is moot, simply because the Greek definite article "that" (ho-3588), and the Greek for "Wicked" (anomos-459) are there in the Greek manuscripts, establishing the singular tense of "that Wicked" being about a specific person, i.e., the coming Antichrist.

 

[Earburner]

So brethren, it appears that the Scripture proof of a coming singular Antichrist at the end of this world has been established beyond all doubt. The OP is without Scripture witnesses, nor is any offered besides a 'play' on a couple of phrases in 2 Thessalonians 2. The OP's argument that the KJV "that Wicked" was a political ploy by the KJV translations is moot, simply because the Greek definite article "that" (ho-3588), and the Greek for "Wicked" (anomos-459) are there in the Greek manuscripts, establishing the singular tense of "that Wicked" being about a specific person, i.e., the coming Antichrist.

For mixing the Greek Manuscripts, so that you can pick and choose, you stand corrected!
2 Thes. 2:8
The 1611 KJV was translated from the Textus Receptus Greek Text.
.
How 2 Thes. 2:8 reads in the Textus Receptus Greek:
Morphology
2532[e] καὶ
kai And Conj
5119[e] τότε
tote then Adv
601[e] ἀποκαλυφθήσεται
apokalyphthēsetai will be revealed V-FIP-3S
3588[e] ὁ
ho the Art-NMS
459[e] ἄνομος,
anomos lawless [one],

A. The word "the" is the original word in the Textus Receptus.

B. The word "one" is an insertion in the Textus Receptus, as noted by the [brackets]

C. How it was translated from TR Greek to the 1611-KJV
2 Thes. 2:8 (1611- KJV) and then shall that wicked bee reuealed, whome the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightnesse of his comming:
.
D. How it reads in today's KJV:
> 2 Thes. 2[8] And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming

The word [one] is an insertion by the translators.
[Brackets] mean the word "one" was inserted!

 

[Earburner]

Now to conclude this factual study of 2 Thes. 2:8, the KJV reads "that Wicked". Both the word "that" and "wicked", with an upper case "W" ARE NOT FOUND IN the Textus Receptus Greek, from which the KJV was translated!!

 

[Phoneman777]

I don't believe a hydra-headed monster is meant by "man" (singular). And that man cannot possibly be a pope.

True. It means "man" in the plural, and refers to a succession of popes that are at the head of the papacy.

 

[Phoneman777]

Have you ever considered that Israel once was "a church", being "called out ones"?
.
Remember, a church is ALWAYS spoken of in the feminine gender, even if fallen. KJV- Acts 7:38

The papacy is not just "a church" - it is the "church/state" union which is "diverse from the first", because it is a religio-political kingdom.

 

[CoreIssue]

True. It means "man" in the plural, and refers to a succession of popes that are at the head of the papacy.

SDA

 

[Earburner]

The papacy is not just "a church" - it is the "church/state" union which is "diverse from the first", because it is a religio-political kingdom.

I can relate to that understanding, but a "church" (feminine) is not ever a "beast" (masculine).
The Beast in KJV- Rev. "carries" the "fallen woman". She does not "ride" the beast as some believe.
In such a scenario for "carrying" the "fallen woman", the beast in control. If she was to "ride" the beast, the fallen woman would be in control.

 

[Earburner]

^ Correction: ...the beast is in control.

 

[Earburner]

I'm saying you're research is unnecessary because whether the correct words are "that Wicked" or "the wicked" doesn't matter for they BOTH point to the subject of the passsage: the MAN OF SIN. The only question remaining is whether "man" refers to a single man or a plurality of men.

"The only question remaining is whether "man" refers to a single man or a plurality of men."
> THAT IS the purpose of my argument and study!
The words "that Wicked" is NOT written in the TR Greek! However, the words "the lawless" is!!
Unfortunately, along with words "the lawless", the word [one] is an insertion, being depicted by the [brackets].
Without the insertion of the word [one] the plurality of "the lawless" is in total sync. with the context of the NT scriptures.

But, when it is understood in the singular, as it surely was falsified as "the lawless [one]", then that singular view does not rest easy in sync. with all of the NT scriptures, and therefore begs to be explained endlessly, for how or why there should be a singular man.

 

[Earburner]

The papacy is not just "a church" - it is the "church/state" union which is "diverse from the first", because it is a religio-political kingdom.

You didn't address my question, but ran it over with your own conclusion.
Please try again.

 

[Earburner]

True. It means "man" in the plural, and refers to a succession of popes that are at the head of the papacy.

Hmmm...not so fast.
How about this: it means man in the plural, as being EVERY man, who IS NOT born again of the Holy Spirit.
Rom. 8:9 spells out the details.

 

[Phoneman777]

SDA

CoreIssue, if you stop attributing to SDAs that which was MAINSTREAM PROTESTANT DENOMINATION DOCTRINE before there was ever such a thing as an SDA, that would be great.

 

[farouk]

The papacy is not just "a church" - it is the "church/state" union which is "diverse from the first", because it is a religio-political kingdom.

It's very far removed from a simple adherence to local church activities summarized in Acts 2.41-42.

 

[Earburner]

It's very far removed from a simple adherence to local church activities summarized in Acts 2.41-42.

So also, were the Pharisees blown out of proportion, as to how the people of Israel were to worship God.
.
The RCC is nothing but that, a continuation of the Pharisaical belief system, of how they think one should have faith in Christ.
.
So, before you blow yourself out of proportion against them, know that they only typify "the Pharisees", during this period of God's Grace.

 

[Phoneman777]

I can relate to that understanding, but a "church" (feminine) is not ever a "beast" (masculine).
The Beast in KJV- Rev. "carries" the "fallen woman". She does not "ride" the beast as some believe.
In such a scenario for "carrying" the "fallen woman", the beast in control. If she was to "ride" the beast, the fallen woman would be in control.

I like the way you critically analyze the details. We all could benefit greatly from not only shaking the fruit tree, but also climbing up to look behind the leaves and branches.

However, ancient kings were also "carried" by their subjects - over whom they clearly were ruler. The idea of "carry" doesn't necessary denote subordination of that which is carried to the carrier.

But, considering that a "beast" is a kingdom (Daniel 7:23) and the last verse of Revelation 17 says the woman "reigneth over the kings of the Earth" - all kingdoms - the carried woman reigns over every beast kingdom, including the one upon which she sits.