A Question About The Restrainer

Phoneman777 · Feb 15, 2015

Most Christians conclude that the Restrainer of 2 Thessalonians 2 is the "Holy Spirit filled church" which is preventing the rise of Antichrist and after the church is "taken out of the way" in the rapture, the Antichrist will then be free to arise and wreak havoc on the earth during the "last seven years of tribulation". Sounds legit, right? Wrong.

If the "Holy Spirit filled church" is the Restrainer, then why doesn't Paul just come out and say it?

He'd already told the Thessalonians who the Restrainer was in his previous visit (2 Thessalonians 2:5-6 KJV) so for what purpose does he choose to remain so secretive about the issue in this subsequent letter to them?

Certainly not because he didn't want them to know, because he'd already told them.

And, certainly not because he didn't what this idea spread abroad to the rest of the church because Paul's entire life was dedicated to the spread of all things pertaining to the Gospel, including words of comfort and encouragement to the suffering, persecuted saints that they remain steadfast in the faith through the knowledge that God was still on the throne and was even then yet restraining the rise of of Antichrist by means of His powerful right hand.

In other words, there's simply no reason whatsoever for Paul to not open broadcast the proclamation that the Holy Spirit filled church was the Restrainer, and his decision to not do so makes absolutely no sense.

However, if the Restrainer was exactly what every church father, and the Protestant Reformers who came much later, claims Paul identified it to be - the Roman Empire - then it makes absolute PERFECT sense for him to keep silent about the Restrainer's identity. Such a letter - in which Paul claimed that "the Roman Empire was restraining the rise of Antichrist but when this Empire would be taken out of the way, then the Antichrist would arise" - would spell disaster to the fledgling Christian church should it fall into the wrong hands, seeing that rulers lived under constant threat of intrigue and insurrection from all sides and anyone who spoke about the fall of an empire would dare not speak about such a thing above their breath, let alone pen it in a letter.

Of course, the implication of accepting the Roman Empire as the Restrainer demands that we look for the immediate rise of Antichrist sometime around the middle of the 6th century A.D. and the abandonment of popular ideas about the "rapture", "seven years of tribulation", etc., etc., etc., which is too much for most Christians, so these will continue to promote the idea that the Holy Spirit filled church is the Restrainer, though Scripture, history, and common sense say otherwise. Good thing the Holy Spirit excels at slicing through our preconceived notions in order to bring the sincere searcher of His truth to a knowledge of the same.

Eric E Stahl · Feb 15, 2015

Jesus told the apostles that he was going away and that the comforter would come and when he comes he will reprove the world of sin. John16:7-8

Phoneman777 · Feb 16, 2015

Eric E Stahl said:
Jesus told the apostles that he was going away and that the comforter would come and when he comes he will reprove the world of sin. John16:7-8

"Reprove" means to "punish wrongdoing". "Restrain" means to "prevent (wrongdoing) from occurring". The two are not the same thing.

To claim that the words of Paul that entered the ears of the men of the early church were "Holy Spirit filled church", but came out of their mouths in their attempt to pass along this to posterity as "evil pagan Roman Empire" is a serious indictment of their intelligence and cognitive reasoning ability. In other words, were they too stupid to keep from confusing the idea of "holy and undefiled" with "evil and pagan"???

Marcus O'Reillius · Feb 17, 2015

.
The Church is not the restrainer which can be shown logically from Paul's second letter to the Thessalonians.

2Th 2:1 Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, 2 ...that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed,

6b And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.

When you account for the "unless" and "until" the sequence of events Paul lists is as follows:

The departure from the law - homosexuality, abortion, euthanasia, drug use, atheism, occult worship, hedonism: i.e., modern society in America.
The restrainer is removed from the midst.
The man of perdition is revealed.
Jesus comes on the Day of Christ (the Day of the Lord)
We are gathered to Him

We cannot be removed from the midst and still be around afterward for Jesus to collect us.
___________________________________

However, the restrainer is not the Roman Empire. The King of the North comes from the Roman model; it is the last Kingdom (Daniel chapter 2) having sway over Israel that is smashed by the coming of the 'rock cut out of the mountain without hands' - Jesus is the rock and without hands refers to God the Father/Holy Spirit.

Since the fourth terrible beast, which is the culmination of the Roman Empire over two thousand years, is eliminated by cutting off its head with the capture of the anti-Christ and the false prophet at the final battle of the one 'seven' at Armageddon - it also is logically eliminated from being the restrainer because it must continue onward on the earth.

In other words, the anti-Christ is not restraining himself, indeed, he comes up from within that combination of end-time nations (Rev 13:2). He commands the fourth terrible beast through the one 'seven.' And those component three nations remain after the fourth terrible beast (Dan 7:12) is decapitated for a little while after the one 'seven' (the 30/45 days of Dan 12:11-12).
___________________________________

The rise of Islam is not the anti-Christ's source.

The prince who will come comes from the people who destroy the city and the sanctuary - Daniel 9:26. That was done by the Romans.

Islam is the Kingdom of the South. It has attacked America, Russia, and Europe. It has "mixed" in with the iron of Western-style societies - Daniel 2:45. That word is 'arab in Hebrew: (hint-hint)
___________________________________

It matters little what various commentaries say; what does the Bible say? In this case, we cannot say who the restrainer is; that knowledge has been lost.

Phoneman777 · Feb 17, 2015

Marcus O'Reillius said:
.
The Church is not the restrainer which can be shown logically from Paul's second letter to the Thessalonians.

2Th 2:1 Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, 2 ...that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed,

6b And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.

When you account for the "unless" and "until" the sequence of events Paul lists is as follows:

The departure from the law - homosexuality, abortion, euthanasia, drug use, atheism, occult worship, hedonism: i.e., modern society in America.

The restrainer is removed from the midst.

The man of perdition is revealed.

Jesus comes on the Day of Christ (the Day of the Lord)

We are gathered to Him

We cannot be removed from the midst and still be around afterward for Jesus to collect us.
___________________________________

However, the restrainer is not the Roman Empire. The King of the North comes from the Roman model; it is the last Kingdom (Daniel chapter 2) having sway over Israel that is smashed by the coming of the 'rock cut out of the mountain without hands' - Jesus is the rock and without hands refers to God the Father/Holy Spirit.

Since the fourth terrible beast, which is the culmination of the Roman Empire over two thousand years, is eliminated by cutting off its head with the capture of the anti-Christ and the false prophet at the final battle of the one 'seven' at Armageddon - it also is logically eliminated from being the restrainer because it must continue onward on the earth.

In other words, the anti-Christ is not restraining himself, indeed, he comes up from within that combination of end-time nations (Rev 13:2). He commands the fourth terrible beast through the one 'seven.' And those component three nations remain after the fourth terrible beast (Dan 7:12) is decapitated for a little while after the one 'seven' (the 30/45 days of Dan 12:11-12).
___________________________________

The rise of Islam is not the anti-Christ's source.

The prince who will come comes from the people who destroy the city and the sanctuary - Daniel 9:26. That was done by the Romans.

Islam is the Kingdom of the South. It has attacked America, Russia, and Europe. It has "mixed" in with the iron of Western-style societies - Daniel 2:45. That word is 'arab in Hebrew: (hint-hint)
___________________________________

It matters little what various commentaries say; what does the Bible say? In this case, we cannot say who the restrainer is; that knowledge has been lost.

The Early Church Fathers unanimously agreed that Paul identified the Restrainer as the Roman Empire and such unanimity can only be the result of either carefully handed down information or a carefully orchestrated ruse to mislead posterity. Tradition teaches that the early church actually prayed for the continuation of the Roman Empire b/c they believed the Antichrist would arise on the heels of its demise. Also, no other explanation is offered as to the identity of the Restrainer by the ECF. All this adds to the weight of evidence that the ECF were correct.

When one considers that the Papacy - which precisely fulfills all the identifying marks of the Antichrist of Bible prophecy - arose just after the fall of the Roman Empire, it is easy to understand why the early church believed what they did.

It goes without saying that the idea of Jesuit Futurism, which places the rise of Antichrist at the end of time, was the product of Jesuit men who decided what was true about Antichrist before searching the Scriptures for confirmation of what they decided was true, instead of first prayerfully seeking the Holy Spirit to reveal to them truth as it is found in Scripture (as did the Protestant Reformers) before embarking on that search. All will agree that this approach to the study of the Scripture can only result in unavoidable failure, seeing that in this method of study the wisdom of man is elevated above that of God.

Marcus O'Reillius · Feb 17, 2015

Sources please, and even if you can produce them, it doesn't mean they're right.

Ditto on what they prayed for with the Roman Empire...

A lack of evidence does not logically weigh any such purported eschatology correct. What you are declaring is illogical.

The Papacy arose within the Roman Empire. It has changed the law and the times, but the Pope is not the anti-Christ.

Jesuits may or may not have believed in a Millennial eschatology; again whatever they believed - and you're coming up quite short in sources for your cited "evidence" - has nothing to do with a literal rendering in a futuristic, Millennial eschatology.

All do not believe that a literal, futuristic exegesis is futile. Rather, it is internally consistent with every aspect of end-time prophecy.

Phoneman777 · Feb 18, 2015

Marcus O'Reillius said:
Sources please, and even if you can produce them, it doesn't mean they're right.

Ditto on what they prayed for with the Roman Empire...

A lack of evidence does not logically weigh any such purported eschatology correct. What you are declaring is illogical.

The Papacy arose within the Roman Empire. It has changed the law and the times, but the Pope is not the anti-Christ.

Jesuits may or may not have believed in a Millennial eschatology; again whatever they believed - and you're coming up quite short in sources for your cited "evidence" - has nothing to do with a literal rendering in a futuristic, Millennial eschatology.

All do not believe that a literal, futuristic exegesis is futile. Rather, it is internally consistent with every aspect of end-time prophecy.

"The Reformers Were Historicist by H. Grattan Guiness" where he lists the testimony of St. Augustine, Tertillian, Chrysostrom, etc.

Lack of evidence? The unanimous belief of the ECF paired with the absence of whatever nebulous ideas bouncing around today is more than enough to warrant serious consideration of Pagan Rome as the Restrainer.

The Papacy did not rise within the Roman Empire - the Catholic Church arose within it, but the Papacy - the union of the Catholic church and the state - did not come into existence until after the Caesars vacated the throne, upon which the Bishop of Rome took his place there as the supreme authority in both religious and secular affairs in 538 A.D.

Biblical evidence shows that the Papacy is the Antichrist because it fits all the identifying marks of prophecy. If you like, I can show them to you from Scripture, some of which is that, as depicted as the Little Horn, it arose among the ten horns which came out of the "Roman" fourth beast of Daniel 7, it uprooted 3 kings, it changed the Ten Commandments, it speaks "great things" and "blasphemies" which the Bible defines as "claiming to be God" and "claiming the ability to forgive sin", it made "war with the saints and overcame them" by killing between 75-150 MILLION saints, etc.....

History, not opinion, shows that the popular eschatological idea of a "one-man Antichrist who will come during the last 7 years of tribulation, sit down in a rebuilt temple, make a peace treaty between the Arabs and Israel, upon which the breaking of that treaty will usher in Armageddon" is derived from Jesuit prophetic interpretation. I suggest you study the history of the Protestant Reformation and the Jesuit Counter-Reformation from a Protestant perspective.

Born_Again · Feb 18, 2015

Scripture is up for interpretation. In this instance, especially saying the pope is the antichrist, I don't foresee that matching. I honestly don't see the pope pulling off a treaty between Israel and the Arabs.

If I felt the need to dedicate the time (I don't by the way) to sit down, pick events and people, and match them to scripture, I could. Anything can be bent to fit whatever you want. A lot of things are unanimously decided by a lot of people but it doesn't mean its correct. Once again, look at the Crusades and Jerusalem. How many times were treaties made between Islam and Christians and how many times were they broken. And, if I may remind everyone, the Pope commissioned the Crusades.

And when we say Israel, do we mean the country or the people? When you mentioned a treaty between the Arabs and Israel I immediately thought of the Crusade and Jerusalem. That was in like the area 1094 AD and years beyond that by the way. Just my opinion. In the famous words of Levar Burton on Reading Rainbow, "You don't have to take my word for it."

Marcus O'Reillius · Feb 19, 2015

The man of sin has not been revealed. No Pope has stood in the Temple, destroyed by the Romans under Titus in the first Jewish Rebellion of A.D. 67-70.

Furthermore, Gabriel dictated to Daniel that the "prince who will come" who in turn, sets himself up before God, proclaiming himself god, comes from the Romans.

So the author H. Grattan Guinness, way back in 1881, misses the mark by a far amount.

So - while the Roman Catholic Church has, over some time, changed the law (dropping the second Commandment and splitting the tenth into two to make the number complete) and they have changed the times (elevating the first day of the week: Sunday, to be the Sabbath Day - which it is not) and even proclaiming that the Pope, who over the centuries have been quite evil in their actions with notable villains from time to time, the "Vicar of Christ" which is to say the very embodiment of Jesus - and all the other things which this harlot has done while riding the dragon of Rome, drinking the blood of saints; still does not fulfill what is written about a particular man - singular.

H. Grattan Guinness, writing in 1881, dismisses the idea of a physical Temple. He has no idea that in just 30 years, the Roman world is about to light itself on fire, nor after the 'war to end all wars' - could he foresee another World War which on the behalf of a Roman model country, Britain, something unknown in the annals of history would come to pass: Israel would be reestablished as a nation.

Today, after nearly 67 years after its founding, we have witnessed the rebirth of the Sanhedrin (2003) and since that time, they have worked to secure the Temple Mount, part of Israel, but not under their direct control, as a place to rebuild a physical Temple IAW their religion. It is of no small note that they have secured many of the artifacts to resume proper, Jewish Temple worship. One still missing, but under commission to find is the Ark of the Covenant. I suggest to you, that when that artifact is produced, all of Israel will demand a Temple, and they will broker any deal to build it.

These are interesting times, are they not?

Trekson · Feb 19, 2015

[SIZE=12pt]Who is the restrainer? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]2 Thess. 2:6-7 [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]- And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. (NIV).[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Pre-trib believers feel it is either the Holy Spirit or the Church and thus see him coming into power once the rapture occurs. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Pre-wrath adherents believe it to be the arch-angel, Michael. We believe that he is shown in his position of restrainer in Dan. 12:1 - "At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then…” and Rev. 12:7-9 - “And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.” [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Picture two wrestlers locked arm-and-arm, each trying to overthrow the other. Suddenly, Michael, at God’s command, stops striving and stands up from his wrestling position. Satan, since he is now unrestrained, is hurled by God to the earth to fulfill his destiny.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]It’s my strong opinion that anyone who tries to put a historic viewpoint onto any part of Rev. except the beginning of Cp. 12, is seriously barking up the wrong tree. Regarding the view of the OP which claims pagan Rome as the restrainer which in itself is absolutely ludicrous, I offer up this passage. [/SIZE]

Matt.12:22-26 – “Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw.
23 And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David?
24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.
25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
26 And if Satan cast out Satan, (or in this case, restrain) he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?”

Phoneman777 · Feb 19, 2015

Trekson said:
[SIZE=12pt]Who is the restrainer? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]2 Thess. 2:6-7 [/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]- And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. (NIV).[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Pre-trib believers feel it is either the Holy Spirit or the Church and thus see him coming into power once the rapture occurs. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Pre-wrath adherents believe it to be the arch-angel, Michael. We believe that he is shown in his position of restrainer in Dan. 12:1 - "At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then…” and Rev. 12:7-9 - “And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.” [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Picture two wrestlers locked arm-and-arm, each trying to overthrow the other. Suddenly, Michael, at God’s command, stops striving and stands up from his wrestling position. Satan, since he is now unrestrained, is hurled by God to the earth to fulfill his destiny.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]It’s my strong opinion that anyone who tries to put a historic viewpoint onto any part of Rev. except the beginning of Cp. 12, is seriously barking up the wrong tree. Regarding the view of the OP which claims pagan Rome as the restrainer which in itself is absolutely ludicrous, I offer up this passage. [/SIZE]

Matt.12:22-26 – “Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw.
23 And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David?
24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.
25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
26 And if Satan cast out Satan, (or in this case, restrain) he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?”

Did you know that Charles Wesley wore out the floorboards of his bedroom in prayer? Or that Luther said if he didn't pray at least 3 hours a day, he couldn't get anything done?

I think "ludicrous" is a bit strong a word in characterizing the Historicist view which was held by these two and countless other Protestant Reformers of old, especially when such criticism is spawned from day in age where preachers (not to mention the rest of us) who serve up Jesuit Futurism and Dispensationalism morning, noon, and night admit that they pray on average less than ten minutes per day. However, there seems to be ample time for endless rounds of porn, Twitter, reality TV, NFL, NBA, etc. while taking time out on Sunday for a few minutes to praise God before we hastily head for the door to begin the cycle all over again, as if God actually bends His ear to such hypocrisy. Just my opinion.

Marcus O'Reillius said:
The man of sin has not been revealed. No Pope has stood in the Temple, destroyed by the Romans under Titus in the first Jewish Rebellion of A.D. 67-70.

Furthermore, Gabriel dictated to Daniel that the "prince who will come" who in turn, sets himself up before God, proclaiming himself god, comes from the Romans.

So the author H. Grattan Guinness, way back in 1881, misses the mark by a far amount.

So - while the Roman Catholic Church has, over some time, changed the law (dropping the second Commandment and splitting the tenth into two to make the number complete) and they have changed the times (elevating the first day of the week: Sunday, to be the Sabbath Day - which it is not) and even proclaiming that the Pope, who over the centuries have been quite evil in their actions with notable villains from time to time, the "Vicar of Christ" which is to say the very embodiment of Jesus - and all the other things which this harlot has done while riding the dragon of Rome, drinking the blood of saints; still does not fulfill what is written about a particular man - singular.

H. Grattan Guinness, writing in 1881, dismisses the idea of a physical Temple. He has no idea that in just 30 years, the Roman world is about to light itself on fire, nor after the 'war to end all wars' - could he foresee another World War which on the behalf of a Roman model country, Britain, something unknown in the annals of history would come to pass: Israel would be reestablished as a nation.

Today, after nearly 67 years after its founding, we have witnessed the rebirth of the Sanhedrin (2003) and since that time, they have worked to secure the Temple Mount, part of Israel, but not under their direct control, as a place to rebuild a physical Temple IAW their religion. It is of no small note that they have secured many of the artifacts to resume proper, Jewish Temple worship. One still missing, but under commission to find is the Ark of the Covenant. I suggest to you, that when that artifact is produced, all of Israel will demand a Temple, and they will broker any deal to build it.

These are interesting times, are they not?

Paul's "temple" (Gr. "naos") refers to the church which the leader of the Papacy has seated himself in authority for over 1500 years, not some building in the Middle East.

Gabriel's "people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city" refers to the Roman army of Prince Titus - OR - the Jews of Prince Jesus who by their own hand destroyed their city by rejecting Jesus and consequently the protecting hand of God over them. This has nothing to do with some "prince" Antichrist who will come at the end of time.

If Paul's "man of sin" of 2 Thessalonians refers to one man, then Paul's "man of God" in 2 Timothy 3:16 refers to only one man, right? Plurality, not singularity.

The Jews (they are actually Khazarians, not descendants of Abraham) have not returned to Israel by the hand of God b/c they have not repented. I challenge anyone to find just one instance in Scripture where God gathered the Jews back to the land after He'd scattered them without their first having turned to God "with all their heart and all their soul" in repentance. They were "gathered" by the Luciferian agents of the U.N. through Jesuit intrigue and has helped them to succeed in their long awaited goal of overthrowing Protestantism. Yes, very interesting times.

Marcus O'Reillius · Feb 19, 2015

Phoneman777 said:
Paul's "temple" (Gr. "naos") refers to the church which the leader of the Papacy has seated himself in authority for over 1500 years, not some building in the Middle East.

You delude yourself. Paul is building on the teaching of Christ. The Temple houses the "Holy Place." Biblicaly from the OT, that is in the building and in front of the Curtain. That is where Jesus said the abomination will be set up.

Phoneman777 said:
If Paul's "man of sin" of 2 Thessalonians refers to one man, then Paul's "man of God" in 2 Timothy 3:16 refers to only one man, right? Plurality, not singularity.

Both references have modifying verbs that are third person singular. 2Ti 3:17 addresses each man. 2Th 2:3 is talking about A man.

Phoneman777 said:
The Jews (they are actually Khazarians, not descendants of Abraham) have not returned to Israel by the hand of God b/c they have not repented. I challenge anyone to find just one instance in Scripture where God gathered the Jews back to the land after He'd scattered them without their first having turned to God "with all their heart and all their soul" in repentance. They were "gathered" by the Luciferian agents of the U.N. through Jesuit intrigue and has helped them to succeed in their long awaited goal of overthrowing Protestantism. Yes, very interesting times.

You have issues. They are Jews.

I meet your challenge: Ezekiel 38:8 After many days you will be summoned; in the latter years you will come into the land that is restored from the sword, whose inhabitants have been gathered from many nations to the mountains of Israel which had been a continual waste; but its people were brought out from the nations, and they are living securely, all of them.

There is no mention that the inhabitants who have been gathered from many nations - which EXACTLY describes the Israeli population's sources - must have been cleansed in heart towards Christ first. In the Millennium, they will, though, have their reconciliation to the Lord.

It matters not that the British who sought to found Israel in her historical place are in a doomed nation. God can use anything to accomplish His Purpose.

Trekson · Feb 19, 2015

Hi Phoneman, Your words: "I think "ludicrous" is a bit strong a word in characterizing the Historicist view which was held by these two and countless other Protestant Reformers of old,"

I think the highlighted part explains everything. Man, you have to get your head out of the sands of history and back here to good, old reality. Everyone's end-times beliefs are based on their personal experience and relatively recent history. But if Luther and Wesley were alive today, I don't believe they would be historicists! When you consider the reality that the prophesied mark of the beast is just around the corner and we now understand how Rev. 12:9-10 can be literally fulfilled and with Israel becoming a nation once again and if you don't think God's hand is in that starting with 1948 and 1967 and 1973 and all the other attacks they have withstood you are purposely wearing blinders.

From your post to Marcus: "I challenge anyone to find just one instance in Scripture where God gathered the Jews back to the land after He'd scattered them without their first having turned to God "with all their heart and all their soul" in repentance."

We don't have to go far. There was no "national level repentance" when their 70 year Babylonian captivity was over. It was just simply time and "the return" extended over a period of decades. Many of the Jews didn't even want to come back because they were comfortable with their lives at the time.

In these latter days, as prophesied, the gathering is first and the "repentance" will come later, in the guise of the 144,000+. While history does often repeat itself, God is not "trapped" in a time warp where He is bound to do the same thing over and over again. The purpose for the "latter day Israeli revival" is different from all the other times Israel had to repent.

There is also the prophecy of Dan. 12:4 which tells us that knowledge, including a greater spiritual understanding of the 'time of the end" will increase. So the average christian who is interested in end times does have an advantage over those men of old!, because more has been revealed.

Phoneman777 · Feb 23, 2015

Trekson said:
Hi Phoneman, Your words: "I think "ludicrous" is a bit strong a word in characterizing the Historicist view which was held by these two and countless other Protestant Reformers of old,"

I think the highlighted part explains everything. Man, you have to get your head out of the sands of history and back here to good, old reality. Everyone's end-times beliefs are based on their personal experience and relatively recent history. But if Luther and Wesley were alive today, I don't believe they would be historicists! When you consider the reality that the prophesied mark of the beast is just around the corner and we now understand how Rev. 12:9-10 can be literally fulfilled and with Israel becoming a nation once again and if you don't think God's hand is in that starting with 1948 and 1967 and 1973 and all the other attacks they have withstood you are purposely wearing blinders.

From your post to Marcus: "I challenge anyone to find just one instance in Scripture where God gathered the Jews back to the land after He'd scattered them without their first having turned to God "with all their heart and all their soul" in repentance."

We don't have to go far. There was no "national level repentance" when their 70 year Babylonian captivity was over. It was just simply time and "the return" extended over a period of decades. Many of the Jews didn't even want to come back because they were comfortable with their lives at the time.

In these latter days, as prophesied, the gathering is first and the "repentance" will come later, in the guise of the 144,000+. While history does often repeat itself, God is not "trapped" in a time warp where He is bound to do the same thing over and over again. The purpose for the "latter day Israeli revival" is different from all the other times Israel had to repent.

There is also the prophecy of Dan. 12:4 which tells us that knowledge, including a greater spiritual understanding of the 'time of the end" will increase. So the average christian who is interested in end times does have an advantage over those men of old!, because more has been revealed.

Hi, bro, thanks for your thoughts. The captivity so cured the Jews of their idolatry that they returned and set up schools of Mosaic instruction, imposed upon the people rigorous laws that Jesus eventually condemned, and shut out the Gentiles' corrupting influence so as to preserve them from ever being seduced into idolatry again. This is anything but an example of unrepentant Jews gathered to their land after being scattered for their sin, my friend.

I appreciate your input, but to me, to attribute the "increased knowledge of Daniel" to our day is to completely ignore church history to the nth degree, brother. The "great religious awakening" of the middle 19th century saw the unsealing of the book of Daniel, with emphasis on the "2,300 years" prophecy, which began to be studied simultaneously ALL OVER THE WORLD. It was from this study that YOU YOURSELF owe a debt of gratitude for your current belief of the soon return of Jesus, which was not in the Earth until this time. Much truth was derived from this era but due to modern Christianity's affinity with Rome's "diversionary tactics of Futurism and Preterism", Historicism has been all but lost and now many today think they have achieved the spiritual enlightenment that belonged to the Protestants "of old".

Trekson · Feb 23, 2015

Hi Phoneman, Your words: "This is anything but an example of unrepentant Jews gathered to their land after being scattered for their sin, my friend."

Back to your original challenge: "I challenge anyone to find just one instance in Scripture where God gathered the Jews back to the land after He'd scattered them without their first having turned to God "with all their heart and all their soul" in repentance!"

I met your highlighted challenge and you just don't want to accept it. That a small number of Jews learned their lesson is a far cry from your standard of with all their heart and all their soul" in repentance". If you read the five post-exilic books of Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi you will see that even after the return they went back to inter-marrying and ignored the temple while building house for themselves, again not an example of "with all their heart and all their soul" in repentance."

Your words: "The "great religious awakening" of the middle 19th century saw the unsealing of the book of Daniel, with emphasis on the "2,300 years" prophecy..."

That is your opinion. Personally, I believe the "increase of knowledge regarding endtimes" didn't begin until just recently in the latter half of the 20th century. The "great religious awakening" can simply be attributed to the bible being available for everyone and that the populace could now read it for themselves, thus increasing in popularity, the prophetic books. Considering the prophecy is regarding 2300 DAYS and NOT years just shows that their understanding has been wrong from the beginning. This sounds like you have SDA leanings which are notorious for their confusion about biblical prophecy.

Phoneman777 · Feb 25, 2015

Trekson said:
Hi Phoneman, Your words: "This is anything but an example of unrepentant Jews gathered to their land after being scattered for their sin, my friend."

Back to your original challenge: "I challenge anyone to find just one instance in Scripture where God gathered the Jews back to the land after He'd scattered them without their first having turned to God "with all their heart and all their soul" in repentance!"

I met your highlighted challenge and you just don't want to accept it. That a small number of Jews learned their lesson is a far cry from your standard of with all their heart and all their soul" in repentance". If you read the five post-exilic books of Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi you will see that even after the return they went back to inter-marrying and ignored the temple while building house for themselves, again not an example of "with all their heart and all their soul" in repentance."

Your words: "The "great religious awakening" of the middle 19th century saw the unsealing of the book of Daniel, with emphasis on the "2,300 years" prophecy..."

That is your opinion. Personally, I believe the "increase of knowledge regarding endtimes" didn't begin until just recently in the latter half of the 20th century. The "great religious awakening" can simply be attributed to the bible being available for everyone and that the populace could now read it for themselves, thus increasing in popularity, the prophetic books. Considering the prophecy is regarding 2300 DAYS and NOT years just shows that their understanding has been wrong from the beginning. This sounds like you have SDA leanings which are notorious for their confusion about biblical prophecy.

Where is your evidence that the Jews, whether those who remained in Babylon or those who returned to the promised land, fell back into idolatry? If such evidence exists, then why do scholars agree with me that the Babylonian captivity cured them of it? If you are suggesting that nothing less than perfection constitutes repentance, then we are ALL in a most wretched state. The intermarriage problem was quickly dealt with.

Sadly, Jesuit Futurism has blinded many to accurate church history so much so that you believe history to be my opinion. The Great Religious Awakening happened. Do you know why? Please allow me to share this with you: Major end time prophecies concerning the prophesied earthquake, the darkened sun, the blood red moon, and the falling stars began to be fulfilled which caused many worldwide to simultaneously search the Scriptures for an explanation.
1) The Great Lisbon Earthquake on November 1, 1755. (It was felt from Finland, throughout Europe, and all the way down to North Africa)

2) The Dark Day of May 19, 1780. (Around mid-morning in colonial America, the sun went completely black. Cows returned to their barns, chickens to their roosts, Congress recessed, and people said that it was so black that you couldn't see your hand in front your face.)

3) Blood Red Moon (happened the night which followed the Dark Day. Unlike these current blood moons we've been hearing about, there was absolutely no astronomical reason for why the moon went blood red that night.)

4) The Falling Stars of November 12, 1833. The greatest meteoric shower to ever occur with between 100,000 to 200,000 per hour. (Lincoln was awakened from his bed and told, “Mr. Lincoln, the Lord has come!” He went to the window, looked beyond our atmosphere and saw the constellations yet in their courses, and replied, “The Lord is still on His throne,” before returning to bed. The Native Americans referred to it as the "winter of the plenty stars”.

These are the signs in the heavens which led many to the Scriptures and ultimately reject popular ideas that “after the 1,000 years of peace upon which we are entering Jesus will return”. They discovered from the prophecies that Jesus was to return much, much sooner for His saints.

Today, anyone who denies that Jesus is coming soon is ridiculed with the same level of scorn which those who claimed during the Great Religious Awakening that Jesus was coming soon were ridiculed. In fact, it was not until well into the 20th century that the church as a whole began to teach that Jesus is coming soon. We owe all this to the Lord for His mercy in revealing truth to us back then, and we should reject popular Jesuit Futurism ideas which lead to compounded delusion.

Marcus O'Reillius · Feb 26, 2015

Rather than be "cured" of their sin following their captivity in Babylon, coming under a succession of ruling Kingdoms as portrayed by the dream God gave Nebuchadnezzar which Daniel interpreted in chapter 2 of his book; the Jews were alternately "Hellenized" under the Greeks and took to altering their bodies so that they also appeared to be uncircumcized when working out in the nude - which was a Grecian practice. Likewise at the time of Jesus' first Advent, Jews were also comfortable with Roman rule like Herod who built the Temple.

The "Dark Day of May 19, 1780" was a highly localized event affecting a best a few thousand people. It did not abruptly end the Great Tribulation. Ditto your blood red moon and meteor shower. All three happen in conjunction to the Great Tribulation and are always mentioned together, suggesting their appearance is not spread out by decades.

The "popular" idea that Jesus appears after thousands of years of peace, is not popular at all - and it's not a popularity contest. This 'not-so-popular' idea runs directly counter to Daniel 9:26 in that war continues until the end. To portray the declining Roman Empire, marked with multiple civil wars, the rise of islam with its hundreds of wars against the West, the tribal and national infighting of Europe - not to mention the constant war which was concurrently being waged in the Americas and Asia as "peace" - is to be totally deluded by your own eschatology that your re-write not only the Bible, but history as well.

The Jesuits are hardly to blame for a futuristic, Millennium approach to end-time prophecy interpretation. That did come in the mid-nineteenth century after centuries of Amillennial teaching, but that was not due to the Jesuits.

Phoneman777 · Feb 26, 2015

Marcus O'Reillius said:
Rather than be "cured" of their sin following their captivity in Babylon, coming under a succession of ruling Kingdoms as portrayed by the dream God gave Nebuchadnezzar which Daniel interpreted in chapter 2 of his book; the Jews were alternately "Hellenized" under the Greeks and took to altering their bodies so that they also appeared to be uncircumcized when working out in the nude - which was a Grecian practice. Likewise at the time of Jesus' first Advent, Jews were also comfortable with Roman rule like Herod who built the Temple.

The "Dark Day of May 19, 1780" was a highly localized event affecting a best a few thousand people. It did not abruptly end the Great Tribulation. Ditto your blood red moon and meteor shower. All three happen in conjunction to the Great Tribulation and are always mentioned together, suggesting their appearance is not spread out by decades.

The "popular" idea that Jesus appears after thousands of years of peace, is not popular at all - and it's not a popularity contest. This 'not-so-popular' idea runs directly counter to Daniel 9:26 in that war continues until the end. To portray the declining Roman Empire, marked with multiple civil wars, the rise of islam with its hundreds of wars against the West, the tribal and national infighting of Europe - not to mention the constant war which was concurrently being waged in the Americas and Asia as "peace" - is to be totally deluded by your own eschatology that your re-write not only the Bible, but history as well.

The Jesuits are hardly to blame for a futuristic, Millennium approach to end-time prophecy interpretation. That did come in the mid-nineteenth century after centuries of Amillennial teaching, but that was not due to the Jesuits.

While it's true that they became "Hellenized" in their thinking, this was at best the source of religious confusion (ie. "body shell from which the 'immortal soul' escapes at death") but certainly was never a vehicle by which the Jews again descended into idolatry, which was comprised of prayer to and veneration of false gods, vile sexual nature worship, and human sacrifice. The historical record proves that the Jews repented of these idolatrous practices and never again returned to them and we really should stop trying to indict them of such things for the sake of establishing non-extent proof that in 1948 God suspended His very own established condition at the dedication of the Temple Solomon built by which He would gather them after He'd scattered them: repentance.

Yes, only a few people were affected by the Dark Day which was indeed a supernatural event, but the prophecy doesn't demand that a certain number witness it. News of the event spread near and far and the event itself was enough to convince people, along with the other signs of earthquake, falling stars, and blood moon, to search the Scriptures and discover the truth of the soon return of Jesus, a movement which came to be known as the "Great Religious Awakening".

The "popular idea" I presented was really just an example of the varied ideas which all had a common thread: Jesus wasn't coming for a long, long time. That is why when the Great Religious Awakening happened, and people from different denominations everywhere started preaching that Jesus is coming soon, these which came to be known as "Adventists" were ostracized and eventually disfellowshipped from their mainline churches as "cultists" teaching and preaching heresies. It is a matter of history.

I never said that the teaching of a post-millennium return of Jesus came from the Jesuits. I have stated historical fact that the Jesuits were responsible for Futurism and Preterism. Darby introduced the "secret rapture" theory but the Jesuit foundation for his idea was already in the world. As much as we'd not like to admit, the Jesuits went to the Bible to confirm what they already decided was fact - that the Papacy could not possibly be the Antichrist - instead of approaching the Bible by the only means by which we can be assured spiritual enlightenment which is to be led...led out of error and into truth by the Holy Spirit.

Eric E Stahl · Mar 3, 2015

Phoneman777 said:
"Reprove" means to "punish wrongdoing". "Restrain" means to "prevent (wrongdoing) from occurring". The two are not the same thing.

To claim that the words of Paul that entered the ears of the men of the early church were "Holy Spirit filled church", but came out of their mouths in their attempt to pass along this to posterity as "evil pagan Roman Empire" is a serious indictment of their intelligence and cognitive reasoning ability. In other words, were they too stupid to keep from confusing the idea of "holy and undefiled" with "evil and pagan"???

I am the light of the world for Jesus and the salt of the earth for Jesus. So are we all who have Jesus in our hearts. When we let our lights shine we hold back the darkness. When God takes us home the darkness will not be restrained anymore.

JesusIsFaithful · Mar 4, 2015

Phoneman777 said:
Most Christians conclude that the Restrainer of 2 Thessalonians 2 is the "Holy Spirit filled church" which is preventing the rise of Antichrist and after the church is "taken out of the way" in the rapture, the Antichrist will then be free to arise and wreak havoc on the earth during the "last seven years of tribulation". Sounds legit, right? Wrong.

If the "Holy Spirit filled church" is the Restrainer, then why doesn't Paul just come out and say it?

He'd already told the Thessalonians who the Restrainer was in his previous visit (2 Thessalonians 2:5-6 KJV) so for what purpose does he choose to remain so secretive about the issue in this subsequent letter to them?

Paul was talking about all of these movements of the "Spirit" that was not of Him as the falling away from the faith was happening even back then.

2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

In the "Toronto Blessings", the "Pensacola Outpouring", and the "holy laughter" movement, they all preach receiving the Holy Spirit again after a senational sign in the flesh. The preaching of another baptism with the Holy Spirit with evidence of tongues which comes with no interpretation is also the mystery of iniquity that is already at work.

Paul described this work of iniquity and then afterwards, reminded believrs when they had received the sanctification of the Spirit and the belief of the truth and that was by the hearing of the gospel.

2 Thessalonians 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: 14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

So if a believer believes the lie that they can receive the Holy Spirit again and after a sign, then the restrainer is taken out of the way. Believers are allowing their house to be broken into by a thief just as any one that opens themselves up to receiving spirits are doing.

It is a new age mentality and this is why tongues without interpretation is not of Him either as they be familiar spirits that babble..

Isaiah 8:19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead?

Psalm 27:7 Hear, O Lord, when I cry with my voice: have mercy also upon me, and answer me. 8 When thou saidst, Seek ye my face; my heart said unto thee, Thy face, Lord, will I seek. 9 Hide not thy face far from me; put not thy servant away in anger: thou hast been my help; leave me not, neither forsake me, O God of my salvation. 10 When my father and my mother forsake me, then the Lord will take me up. 11 Teach me thy way, O Lord, and lead me in a plain path, because of mine enemies.
John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me...13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

Many wayward believers are seeking the Holy Spirit and asking the Holy Spirit to come and fall on them; even asking the Holy Spirit for the gift of tongues when the Holy Spirit is not the way in coming to God the Father at all. This is why all invitations points to the Son, the Bridegroom for it is by the Son, we have been married to God to live that reconciled relationship with God through Jesus Christ.

The Bridegroom relates to us through the Holy Spirit in us, but our response is back to the Bridegroom and by Him the Father if one wishes to avoid seducing spirits in chasing after them & falling for them.

So God will permit a strong delusion to occur when believers believe the lie that they can receive the Holy Spirit again and after a sign since the sign of tongues was to serve as a sign to unbelievers; not to serve as a sign to the believers as if that is proof of when they are saved or receiving the Holy Spirit again which they cannot. 2 Corinthians 11;1-4 & 1 Timothy 4:1-2 & this one below:

Luke 11:9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. 10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. 11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent? 12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion? 13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

To ask for receiving the Holy Spirit again is to make the Father look evil as if He did not give you the Holy Spirit the first time as promised for knocking at the door of Jesus.

These wayward believers are still brothers in spite of the damnation cited, because to be left behind at the pre tribulation rapture event as a castaway but yet to be received later on as a vessel unto dishonour STILL in His House is the damnation spoken of here as Paul goes on into the 3rd chapter of 2nd Thessalonians where he addresses these wayward believers that are disorderly and not walking after the tradtions taught of us in verse 1-7, but he commanded that we are not to treat them as the enemy, but to withdraw from them in admonishing them because they are brothers still in verses 14-15.

If they repent with the Lord Jesus Christ's help, by shunning vain & profane babblings and pray normally; and chase no more after the spirits in receiving them after a sign like an adulterous generation, then by His grace & by His help, He has purged the iniquity from themselves to be received as a vessel unto honour in His House when the Bridegroom comes at the pre tribulational rapture event.

2 Timothy 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.

The Holy Spirit is still in them but the restraining part; the prevention part has been removed for believing the lie that you can receive the Holy Spirit again.

Ephesians 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

1 John 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. 4 And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full. 5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. 8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

A Question About The Restrainer

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads