HERESY?

[Grailhunter]

And that is why the NT is written in Greek of which the Septuagint was transcribed from. I say this because I assumed most everyone knew that Koine Greek was the language of that period when Jesus was born.

This is one of the things I am trying to understand...... the NT is written in Greek of which the Septuagint was transcribed from......

I am not sure if this is what you are meaning to say. Let me take some shots in the dark and see if I can hit something.

The Hebrew language is Hebrew.
The Greek language is Greek.
The Septuagint translated the Hebrew Bible to Koine Greek in the BC era a few centuries before the New testament era the AD era.
The Septuagint had no affect on the Hebrew language or the Greek Language. It was a translation from Hebrew. This was not a book or scroll that was handed out. The idea of people working off of it would have been rare situations. If you knew Greek you would not need to know Hebrew to write Greek. Most of the Apostles probably dictated the Gospels to scribes or had the help of scribes.

Now the writing of the Greek was not so much the trouble....if they could write Greek, fine.....if they dictated to a scribe so they could write it, fine....or even if they had to have the help of a scribe, fine.....that was not the hard part.....

So as far as writing the New Testament the Septuagint did not play a part....with putting the ink to the text.
They wrote the New Testament in Koine Greek and Aramaic because if they did not, hardly no one would have been able to read it.
Many of the Jews could speak Hebrew but could not read or write Hebrew....People who could read and write Hebrew.....people that could read and write Greek were considered like "doctors" education and skill wise...LOL But there is little reason to reference the Septuagint.

The difficulty that the Apostles had with writing the New Testament and probably another reason that they needed scribes was not only to know the Greek words but also the definition of the Greek words. And that is the challenge. The Greek language....Greek culture ..... Greco-Roman religion....bingo! A language that had no words for the Jewish or Christian religious terms. Most of the Apostles were Jewish....they understood the Jewish religious terms and were grasping new Christian religious terms and in the New Testament they were looking for Greek words and definitions to express their thoughts. That was difficult. In some cases they were using Greek words that had no religious definitions to them and adjusting the definitions, a little or a lot.

A simple example is the Hebrew word for sin and the Greek word for sin. In Judaism sin means missing the moral mark of God. In Greek it mean missing the target with your arrow. No religious connection....no moral connection. They used the Greek word for sin and gave it.... expressed it, in a religious context. This was something they had to work with and they or their scribes would have to be very knowledgeable. The spiritual context is something pretty alien to the Greek people and Greek culture, and not present in the Greek language.... their gods lived up on Mt. Olympus and had little concern for morals and the afterlife is very vague.

So all these terms they are using are Greek words with no religious or moral meanings.....the Apostles are changing the definitions and using them in a religious context.

No Bibles for the early Christians, what the Apostles wrote was meant to be taught by word and explained. If you handed the texts of the New Testament to a Jew or a Gentile they would be lost.....these terms had to be explained because just reading the words carried no religious significance in context with the normal understanding of the Greek language.

So this is the issue....writing the New Testament in Greek and instructing the Jews and Gentiles as to what the Christian definitions for those Greek words were.

Now am I close to the topic or did my shots in the dark hit dead air.

 

[Moriah's Song]

he Koine Greek language did not have a single word for unleavened bread but when the scriptures referenced this they actually wrote the phrase "unleavened bread"

My two lexicons do list both Greek words in Greek.

One history site had this to say about the language at the time of Jesus and before...

In addition to Aramaic and Hebrew, Greek and Latin were also common in Jesus’ time. After Alexander the Great’s conquest of Mesopotamia and the rest of the Persian Empire in the fourth century B.C., Greek supplanted other tongues as the official language in much of the region. In the first century A.D., Judea was part of the eastern Roman Empire, which embraced Greek as its lingua franca and reserved Latin for legal and military matters.​

 

[Grailhunter]

My two lexicons do list both Greek words in Greek.

One history site had this to say about the language at the time of Jesus and before...

In addition to Aramaic and Hebrew, Greek and Latin were also common in Jesus’ time. After Alexander the Great’s conquest of Mesopotamia and the rest of the Persian Empire in the fourth century B.C., Greek supplanted other tongues as the official language in much of the region. In the first century A.D., Judea was part of the eastern Roman Empire, which embraced Greek as its lingua franca and reserved Latin for legal and military matters.​

Of course Lexicons list Greek words....

At the time of Christ Latin was the up and coming fad....the upper class.
But I not sure of the point you are trying to make with the rest of it.
I will take another shot in the dark.
Hellenistic ... relating to Greek history, language, and culture from the death of Alexander the Great to the defeat of Cleopatra and Mark Antony by Octavian in 31 BC. During this period Greek culture flourished, spreading through the Mediterranean and into the Near East and Asia and centering on Alexandria in Egypt and Pergamum in Turkey.

Then to be influenced by this....the Hellenistic Jew....speak Greek and or work for the Greeks or Romans.

The Greek language was in fact the dominate language of the known regions. But at its roots had few Christian concepts in their words.

Is this what we are talking about?

I will add this in case this what you referring to....
What is the Greek word for unleavened bread?

"Azymes" (plural of azyme) is an archaic English word for the Jewish matzah, derived from the Ancient Greek words ἄζυμος (ἄρτος) ázymos (ártos), "unleavened (bread)", for unfermented bread in Biblical times; the more accepted term in modern English is simply unleavened bread or matzah, ….. the key point is derived from two words.

The Bible does specify the difference and when it is referring to unleavened bread, it says unleavened bread.

unleavened bread…………….άζυμο ψωμί.....ázymo psomí

 

[Philip James]

His earthly body was His body here. His resurrected body is a different one. Do you think, when you are resurrected, that you will feel pain, or get cut and bleed? Nope.

Same body, transformed, glorified... But same body, the one born of Mary, that was crucified, died and was buried, and that rose again...

Look at my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me and see, because a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you can see I have.

Pax et Bonum!

 

[Enoch111]

The Septuagint had no affect on the Hebrew language or the Greek Language. It was a translation from Hebrew.

It was not merely a translation. It was a corrupted translation, and that is important to note. To add insult to injury it included all the non-canonical apocryphal books which were around at that time.

 

[Grailhunter]

Prescribed Passover meal --- Seder Meal.
Exodus 12:7-11
Then they are to take some of the blood and put it on the sides and tops of the doorframes of the houses where they eat the lambs. That same night they are to eat the meat roasted over the fire, along with bitter herbs, and bread made without yeast. Do not eat the meat raw or boiled in water, but roast it over a fire—with the head, legs and internal organs. Do not leave any of it till morning; if some is left till morning, you must burn it. This is how you are to eat it: with your cloak tucked into your belt, your sandals on your feet and your staff in your hand. Eat it in haste; it is the Lord’s Passover.

What was served at the Seder Passover meal....
A Seder plate at the center of the table contains Passover foods with particular significance to the exodus story, including matzo, bitter herbs, a lamb shank bone, wine, and a mixture of fruit, nuts and and a nut paste known as charoset, which represents the mortar Jews used while bonding bricks as slaves in Egypt.

Of course none of this should be confused with modern Jewish Seder meals which are very much a ritual. Seder means order and the items are eaten in a particular order with scripture reading.

People key on the type of wine served at the Last Supper.
And here it is the leavened or unleavened bread.
The thing to remember....the Last Supper is not the actual Passover meal and there is no reason to assume it is a Seder meal. And it may have been their beliefs that it was wrong to have a Seder meal except on the evening before Passover.
Also another thing....the Jews were into fat!....they made gravies and sauces from melted fat to dip bread in. It is not part of a Seder meal to have fat gravy....and we all know that they were dipping bread....probably in this sauce.

 

[Grailhunter]

It was not merely a translation. It was a corrupted translation, and that is important to note. To add insult to injury it included all the non-canonical apocryphal books which were around at that time.

There is so much corruption in all aspects of the Old Testament, it is hard to argue any one point. There were about 8,000 modifications to the Old Testament before the Septuagint began.

Edit

 

[Pierac]

It was not merely a translation. It was a corrupted translation, and that is important to note. To add insult to injury it included all the non-canonical apocryphal books which were around at that time.

Totally incorrect.. In fact it's much better that your Masoretic Text

AGE OF LEVITICAL SERVICE
Masoretic Text
Numbers 4:3, 23, 30, 35, 39
the ages of the Levites qualified to minister in the temple was between ages 30 to 50
Numbers 8: 24
the ages are between 25 and 50

•In the Septuagint however, both chapters say between 25 and 50 each time. There is no discrepancy.

How Many Horsemen?
Masoretic Text
2 Sam 8:4
(1,700 horsemen)
4 And David took from him a thousand and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand foot soldiers; and David hamstrung all the chariot horses, but left enough for a hundred chariots.
1 Chr 18:4
(7,000 horsemen)
4 And David took from him a thousand chariots, seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand foot soldiers; and David hamstrung all the chariot horses, but left enough for a hundred chariots

LXX: agrees with both. It reads: 7,000 in both passages
2 Sam 8:4 - 4 And David took a thousand of his chariots, and seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: and David houghed all his chariot horses, and he reserved to himself a hundred chariots.
1 Chr 18:4 4 And David took of them a thousand chariots, and seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand infantry: and David houghed all the chariot horses, but there were reserved of them a hundred chariots.

How many years of famine?
Masoretic Text
2 Sam 24:13
(7 years)
13 So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him, Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? or wilt thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee? or that there be three days' pestilence in thy land? now advise, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me.
1 Chr 21:12
(3 years)
12 either three years of famine; or three months of devastation by your foes, while the sword of your enemies overtakes you; or else three days of the sword of the LORD, pestilence upon the land, and the angel of the LORD destroying throughout all the territory of Israel.' Now decide what answer I shall Return to him who sent me."

The LXX reads: 3 years famine in both
(3 years) 2 Sam 24:13- And Gad went in to David, and told him, and said to him, Choose one of these things to befall thee, whether there shall come upon thee for three years famine in thy land; or that thou shouldest flee three months before thine enemies, and they should pursue thee; or that there should be for three days mortality in thy land. Now then decide, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me.

(3 years) 1 Chr 21:12 either three years of famine, or that thou shouldest flee three months from the face of thine enemies, and the sword of thine enemies shall be employed to destroy thee, or that the sword of the Lord and pestilence should be three days in the land, and the angel of the Lord shall be destroying in all the inheritance of Israel. And now consider what I shall answer to him that sent the message.

Masoretic Text
Genesis 2: 2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made (this makes it unclear whether God worked on the Sabbath or not)
LXX reads:
Genesis 2: 2 And God finished on the sixth day his works which he made, (this text would clearly mean that God rested on the Sabbath).

Masoretic Text
Exodus 1:5 in the Masoretic text says “70” people went into Egypt while Stephen said “75” in Acts 7:14.

The Septuagint states in Exodus 1:5 states that “Seventy-five” people went into Egypt. The Dead Sea scrolls also support this number by saying “Seventy-five.” Stephen was quoting the then known Old Testament (the Septuagint).

That Paul relied upon the Septuagint is made strikingly clear from Romans 3.12-18. This entire passage is contained in one psalm in the Septuagint.

Did Job’s Children Really Die?
•In the book of Job, his children are killed in chapter 1 vs. 18-19, yet later in the book, it appears his children are still alive in Job 19:17 (KJV) “My breath is strange to my wife, though I intreated for the children's sake of mine own body. 18 Yea, young children despised me; I arose, and they spake against me.”
•Many modern English translations falsely try to re-translate this into “the brothers or my mother” but that is not in the Hebrew Text. It is simply changed to make sense for modern readers. (See Strong’s Definitions).
•The LXX makes it clearer because it specifies that the children were actually his concubine’s sons and not his children from his wife. LXX: 17 “And I besought my wife, and earnestly intreated the sons of my concubines. 18 But they rejected me for ever; whenever I rise up, they speak against me. 19 They that saw me abhorred me: the very persons whom I had loved, rose up against me.”

Matthew 1.23/ Isaiah 7.14
"Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel" (which means, God with us).

Masoretic Text
Isaiah 7.14
Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
LXX
Isaiah 7.14
Behold, a Virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Virgin

There are Sooo many more differences in favor of the LXX!!!

Here's a fun video...

Were the Pyramids Built Before the Flood? (Masoretic Text vs. Original Hebrew) - YouTube

 

[Moriah's Song]

which flesh suffered for our
sins, and which the Father of His goodness raised up.

"...and which the Father of His goodness raised up" does not say whether or not it was his body as was his earthly body or his resurrected body. However, other verses in Scripture say that Jesus' resurrected "body" was in a glorified form thus indicating not of earthly flesh.

Heb 9:8...By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the sanctuary is not yet opened as long as the outer tent is still standing

1Pe 3:18...For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit;

 

[Enoch111]

Totally incorrect.. In fact it's much better that your Masoretic Text

Not according to those who know the difference.

 

[Enoch111]

There were about 8,000 modifications to the Old Testament before the Septuagint began.

Where you you get this? If that is really true then we have a worthless Old Testament. But as a matter of fact the Masoretic Text is a faithful transmission of the true text of Scripture and the Isaiah scroll in the Dead Sea Scrolls confirms this. Further more if what you said is true, Christ would not have put His stamp of approval on the Hebrew Tanakh. And that should settle the matter.

 

[Moriah's Song]

Look at my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me and see, because a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you can see I have

It does not say that Jesus walked through walls, but merely says that He appeared to them when the door was locked. As already stated, He could have merely appeared in the space without going through anything. Jesus could also have done many things, such as suddenly appearing to the disciples as they were walking along the road to Emmaus.

The risen Christ also suddenly appeared to the disciples that were walking on the road to Emmaus.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Lol…

 

[Pierac]

Not according to those who know the difference.

Hey, If they love having all those textual errors... I'm cool with it!
I don't have a problem with the MT as long as I understand all the errors and why... I'm good, but to say the LXX is corrupted is poor scholarly work.

Notes on the Septuagint by R. Grant Jones, Ph.D.

Matthew relies on the Septuagint for the assertion that the Messiah’s mother was to be a virgin (Matthew 1.23). Jesus himself follows the traditional Septuagint wording in condemning the Pharisees’ traditions (Matthew 15.8-9). The Septuagint clearly prophesies that Jesus will heal the blind (Luke 4.18-19) - but the Masoretic text is more obscure. The Septuagint foretold that the Messiah’s death would be unjust (Acts 8.32- 33) and that the Gentiles would seek the Lord (Acts 15.16-17). The Hebrew has the nations being “possessed” along with Edom. Paul knows that a remnant of Israel will be saved because he was reading the Old Testament in Greek (Romans 9.27-28). Perhaps if his topic were the return to the Holy Land and not salvation, he would have found the Hebrew reading more suitable. Following the Greek, he knows that the Messiah will conquer his people’s sin - not that he would come to those who had already cleansed themselves from sin, as the Hebrew would have it (Romans 11.26-27). Paul’s thought that Jesus would rule the Gentiles also depends on a Septuagint reading (Romans 15.12). The author of the book of Hebrews - to prove the deity of Christ - proclaims the truth that Jesus is worshipped by all the angels of God (Hebrews 1.6). But the Hebrew Old Testament does not contain that verse. Also on the basis of the Greek Old Testament, that author asserts that the incarnation was prophesied (Hebrews 10.5-7) - that Jesus would have a body, which he would offer for our sanctification (Hebrews 10.10). The Masoretic text at this point stresses auditory capability. Finally, where the Masoretic text described a nonviolent suffering servant, the Septuagint prophesied a sinless Messiah (1 Peter 2.22)...

The New Testament authors show a clear tendency to use Septuagint rather than Masoretic readings. The following table provides a selection of thirty of the more significant New Testament deviations toward the Septuagint. The second column shows the New Testament wording, and the rightmost column has the wording from the Hebrew Old Testament. In each case, the New Testament author is true to the Septuagint. Bold font is used to highlight differences between Hebrew and Greek. All quotations are from the Revised Standard Version. Table 2: Sample New Testament Quotations of the Septuagint New/Old Testament Reference New Testament/Septuagint Old Testament/Masoretic Text Mt 1.23/ Is 7.14 “Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel” (which means, God with us).” Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Mt 12.21/ Is 42.4 “and in his name will the Gentiles hope.” And the coastlands wait for his law. Mt 13.14-15/ Is 6.9-10 “For this people's heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed” Make the heart of this people fat, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes Mt 15.8-9/ Is 29.13 “in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.” and their fear of me is a commandment of men learned by rote Mt 21.16/ Ps 8.2 “Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings thou hast brought perfect praise” by the mouths of babes and infants thou hast founded a bulwark Lk 3.4-6/ Is 40.3-5 “and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.” And all flesh shall see it together Lk 4.18-19/ Is 61.1-2 “to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind” to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound Acts 7.42- 43/ Amos 5.25- 27 “And you took up the tent of Moloch, and the star of the god Rephan, the figures which you made to worship” You shall take up Sakkuth your king, and Kaiwan your star-god, your images, which you made for yourselves Acts 8.32- 33/ Is 53.7-8 “In his humiliation justice was denied him, Who can describe his generation? For his life is taken up from the earth.” By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living Acts 13.41/ Hab 1.5 “Behold, you scoffers, and wonder, and perish” Look among the nations, and see; wonder and be astounded Acts 15.16- 17/ Amos 9.11- 12 “that the rest of men may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name” that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations who are called by my name Rom 2.24/ Is 52.5 “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.” Their rulers wail, says the LORD, and continually all the day my name is despised Rom 9.27- 28/ Is 10.22- 23 “Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them shall be saved” For though your people Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will return...
Cut short due to 10,000 word limit

Overall, the agreement in sense between the New Testament and the Septuagint is 93%. This compares favorably with the rate of agreement between the New Testament quotations and the Hebrew Old Testament, 68%.

Do the Math...

 

[Moriah's Song]

Of course Lexicons list Greek words....

True and more interesting info on the language of the early church/the 12 apostles +.

Not only was Koine Greek common in the sense it enjoyed widespread usage throughout the Roman Empire, but it was also common in the sense that it was not the language of the intellectual and academic elites. Classical Greek was used by the educated class. Koine Greek was the language of the working man, the peasant, the vendor, and the housewife—there was nothing pretentious about it. It was the vernacular, or vulgar language, of the day. The great works of Greek literature were written in Classical Greek. No scholar today would care to study anything written in Koine Greek, except for the fact that it is the language of the New Testament. God wanted His Word to be accessible to everyone, and He chose the common language of the day, Koine.

 

[Grailhunter]

Where you you get this? If that is really true then we have a worthless Old Testament

It is mostly categorical...It cannot be a plot unless Satan is at the helm, because nobody lives that long.
The Paleo-Hebrew Bible....what we know of it had Yahweh name in Hebrew in there around 6,000 times.
Around 800 BC "they" decided to remove God's name and insert the Tetragrammaton. The rest of it is sentence adjustment to make all that make sense....And there are other modifications that I would have to look back into notes for.
I will say around the time of the Septuagint they removed the Tetragrammaton and replaced it either LORD or GOD and depend on how you count it...that is another nearly 6,000 modifications of the same category but since you take away any name of God....it read like God is His name....and makes it so that people can twist the meaning of scripture. Like the Trinity existed in the Old Testament and God is its name. But then the numbers go higher because again they had to manipulate the sentences. In the end God the Father's name is no longer in the Bible.

Then they do the same thing with Christ...no one knows were the word Jesus came from so now most Bibles do not have the name of God the Father or God the Son in them.

 

[Cooper]

Where you you get this? If that is really true then we have a worthless Old Testament. But as a matter of fact the Masoretic Text is a faithful transmission of the true text of Scripture and the Isaiah scroll in the Dead Sea Scrolls confirms this. Further more if what you said is true, Christ would not have put His stamp of approval on the Hebrew Tanakh. And that should settle the matter.

The Old Testament, apart from the prophets and Psalms, is dead. We live in a new dispensation.
.

 

[Moriah's Song]

The Septuagint translated the Hebrew Bible to Koine Greek in the BC era a few centuries before the New testament era the AD era.

Correct.

The Bible does specify the difference and when it is referring to unleavened bread, it says unleavened bread.

unleavened bread…………….άζυμο ψωμί.....ázymo psomí

Also correct.

However, the Greek word for "leavened bread" was "artos" and that is what the NT uses for all references to the "communion bread." The only time the word "Unleavened" is used in the NT is when it is referring to the "Feast of Unleavened bread" in Mat 26:17, Mar 14:1, Mar 14:12, Luk 22:1, Luk 22:7, Act 12:3, & Act 20:6.

The other 2 refereces to "unleavened bread" are not connected to the feast. 1Co 5:7, 1Co 5:8

But the word for "bread" only, the Greek word "artos" (leavened bread) is used in the NT communion memorial bread.

 

[Philip James]

"...and which the Father of His goodness raised up" does not say whether or not it was his body as was his earthly body or his resurrected body. However, other verses in Scripture say that Jesus' resurrected "body" was in a glorified form thus indicating not of earthly flesh.

Heb 9:8...By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the sanctuary is not yet opened as long as the outer tent is still standing

1Pe 3:18...For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit;

Hello Moriah,

Scripture is clear that Jesus rose bodily from the tomb.. Is it transformed, glorified? Sure, but it is still the same body that was born of Mary, suffered, was crucified and died... it is not a different body..


Thomas, called Didymus, one of the Twelve, was not with them when Jesus came.

So the other disciples said to him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands and put my finger into the nailmarks and put my hand into his side, I will not believe."


Now a week later his disciples were again inside and Thomas was with them. Jesus came, although the doors were locked, and stood in their midst and said, "Peace be with you."


Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here and see my hands, and bring your hand and put it into my side, and do not be unbelieving, but believe."

Thomas answered and said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

the resurrection of the body is a central tenet of the Christian faith!

Merry Christmas!

 

[Moriah's Song]

He is no longer flesh that He was when He was man.

True

His resurrected body is a different one...His earthly body was His body here.

True

Scripture is clear that Jesus rose bodily from the tomb.. Is it transformed, glorified? Sure, but it is still the same body that was born of Mary, suffered, was crucified and died... it is not a different body..

I would say that is true as you wrote it but I think it may be a matter of semantics when you say that "it is not a different body." The completeness of the thought is that...

a. "Jesus died on the cross in his human form.
b. Was buried in His human form.
c. Was raised in "in a different body" but just HOW different it does not say (as far as I have seen in scripture anyways)
d. But, because Jesus was sinless when He died, He could very well have risen in a different form that permitted Him to "suddenly appear to those on the road to Emmaus."

Luk 24:30 When he was at table with them, he took the bread and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them. (It doesn't say that he ate it.)
Luk 24:31 And their eyes were opened and they recognized him; and he vanished out of their sight.​

e. Because he could suddenly "appear" 7 miles away from Jerusalem, and yet "suddenly appear in the Upper Room where the "door was shut", Jesus had to have had a "different" if not His glorified body.
f. But whatever Jesus' "body" consisted of after his resurrection, it was different than our bodies will be when we are resurrected and will also have to be "transformed" if we are alive at the time of the of the rapture at the end of this world as we know it - the Second Coming; not a third "rapture."