Should the meaning of Greek words affect the interpretation of the passages they are found in?

[CadyandZoe]

But, why did you feel the need to point that out? Did I give any indication that I thought you assumed similarly worded scriptures must always be about the same event?

No, as I said, I didn't mean to say that YOU always assume that similar passages speak about the same event. I concluded from your previous posts that you were making this assumption in this case because both of the passages talk about destruction. My conclusion was in error and I apologize for my mistake.

I should have asked you directly why you think they are speaking about the same event. (Can I buy the next round? )

I meant to say that whereas, in the past, I jumped to the conclusion that prophetic passages containing similar or the same wording were speaking about the same prophetic event. I am now convinced that the Bible speaks about more than one day of destruction.

Whereas the Jewish/Roman wars became a "day" of darkness and gloom and involved destruction, it didn't involve the establishment of God's kingdom on earth. Jesus rose to sit at the right hand of the Father, and according to Peter, "heaven must receive [him] until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time."

The time of restoration is attended by warnings, which the book of Revelation calls "trumpets." These will become the run-up to the Day of the Lord and involve fire and smoke and earthquakes and other warning events. These are the times and epochs of which Paul spoke. Those living in Israel at the time might not realize what these warnings mean, but as Paul says, Jesus' believers will know.

I assume the "judgment of Israel" is a reference to what happened in 70 AD? What "judgment of the Gentiles" are you talking about exactly?

The judgment of Israel in 70 AD was punishment for Pharisaic practice and mindset; and for the execution of the Messiah and the persecution of his followers. (See Matthew 23)

The Day of the Lord is yet to happen in our future and comes at the end of what Peter called "the day of restoration." The fires that Peter has in mind are spoken of by the prophet Joel. These fires destroy the houses and fields of those living in Israel. She will be warned of a coming judgment and some of her people will come to Jerusalem to plead for God's mercy while others stay behind. Those who "call upon the name of the Lord" in Jerusalem will be saved; those who stay at home will perish in the fire.

 

[CadyandZoe]

A strong clue about what exactly?

More than one climatic event. The phrase "times and epochs" refers to a prophetic outcome that takes place over many years. Thus the plural "times and epochs" The coming of Jesus is one of the many events that will transpire as God brings about his kingdom on earth.

Yes, and is that not what is described in 1 Thess 5:2-3? Is that not what an event that is coming like a thief in the night resulting in sudden destruction implies?

The metaphor "thief in the night" is meant to highlight the need to be prepared. To come like a thief in the night is NOT to come suddenly; the thief comes unexpectedly. Remember, Jesus said that the kingdom of God doesn't come with signs to be observed. As Peter says, the day of the Lord will come when they are saying "peace and safety." But, there will be warning signs for those who are alert and awake. Thus Jesus exhorts his followers to always be alert.

Yes. And your point is?

Well, according to Wikipedia,

"Amillennialism holds that while Christ's reign during the millennium is spiritual in nature, at the end of the church age, Christ will return in final judgment and establish a permanent reign in the "new heaven and new Earth."​

This doesn't sound like a prophetic circumstance that will take place over many times and epochs. Right?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, as I said, I didn't mean to say that YOU always assume that similar passages speak about the same event. I concluded from your previous posts that you were making this assumption in this case because both of the passages talk about destruction. My conclusion was in error and I apologize for my mistake.

I should have asked you directly why you think they are speaking about the same event. (Can I buy the next round? )

Because they both speak of the second coming of Christ and both speak of His enemies being destroyed at that time. He's not coming twice in the future. To me, this is a no-brainer.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

More than one climatic event. The phrase "times and epochs" refers to a prophetic outcome that takes place over many years. Thus the plural "times and epochs" The coming of Jesus is one of the many events that will transpire as God brings about his kingdom on earth.

You're not looking closely enough at the context of what he said. Take a closer look:

1 Thessalonians 5:1 Now, brothers and sisters, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, 2 for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3 While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.

What he was saying here is that it wouldn't make any sense to write to them about "times and dates" because what he was talking about will take place on one day. One climactic event. Which will include what he wrote about just prior to that in 1 Thess 4:14-17. Not "more than one climactic event" as you are claiming. He was saying the opposite of that. What he was saying here is that he didn't need to write about times and dates to them in relation to the second coming of Christ, because they knew that day of the Lord would occur suddenly and unexpectedly and would not be something that would occur over the course of a period of time.

The metaphor "thief in the night" is meant to highlight the need to be prepared. To come like a thief in the night is NOT to come suddenly; the thief comes unexpectedly.

Regardless, Paul says that the destruction which will accompany the day of the Lord will be sudden.

2 for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3 While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.

So, what you're saying here doesn't change the fact that the destruction accompanying the arrival of the day of the Lord will come suddenly. It will be so sudden and unexpected that it will make it so that "they will not escape". They will have no time to even try to figure out how to escape because it will happen so suddenly.

Remember, Jesus said that the kingdom of God doesn't come with signs to be observed.

That's talking about the current kingdom of God that we are now in. That isn't a reference to His second coming.

Romans 14:17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and receives human approval.

This passage describes the spiritual kingdom of God that we are now in and it does not come with signs to be observed, but rather is a kingdom "of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit".

As Peter says, the day of the Lord will come when they are saying "peace and safety." But, there will be warning signs for those who are alert and awake. Thus Jesus exhorts his followers to always be alert.

Well, according to Wikipedia,

"Amillennialism holds that while Christ's reign during the millennium is spiritual in nature, at the end of the church age, Christ will return in final judgment and establish a permanent reign in the "new heaven and new Earth."​

This doesn't sound like a prophetic circumstance that will take place over many times and epochs. Right?

Paul wasn't talking about anything in particular that would occur "over many times and epochs". That's what you're missing. His point was that the day of the Lord would not take place over "times and epochs", but rather would take place suddenly and unexpectedly.

 

[CadyandZoe]

You're not looking closely enough at the context of what he said. Take a closer look:

1 Thessalonians 5:1 Now, brothers and sisters, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, 2 for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3 While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.

What he was saying here is that it wouldn't make any sense to write to them about "times and dates" because what he was talking about will take place on one day. One climactic event. Which will include what he wrote about just prior to that in 1 Thess 4:14-17. Not "more than one climactic event" as you are claiming. He was saying the opposite of that. What he was saying here is that he didn't need to write about times and dates to them in relation to the second coming of Christ, because they knew that day of the Lord would occur suddenly and unexpectedly and would not be something that would occur over the course of a period of time.

I didn't say there would be more than one climactic event. I said that "times and seasons" are both plural nouns, which refer to future periods (plural) of eschatological fulfillment. By contrast, the second coming of Christ is a single climactic event as you say. Isn't this another difference that proves they are two different subjects? I think it is.

But clearly, he signals a change of subject in verse 1. "Concerning Times and Seasons . . . " He intends to move passed the subject of our being taken up into the air, unto another time, circumstance and situation.

Compare 1Thessalonians 4 with 1Thessalonians 5 with regard to the subjects of the action. 1Thessalonians describes what happens to those who are in Christ; 1Thessalonians 5 describes what happens to "they-them". We-us vs. they-them. The recipients of the action are not the same group.

Logically, then if we are all raised to be with Christ, before the Day of the Lord, then we have no reason to be concerned with that subject since we will no longer be here. But, since the Day of the Lord precedes being taken into the air, believers will be concerned about it, which is why Paul wrote about it.

Regardless, Paul says that the destruction which will accompany the day of the Lord will be sudden.

Yes, of course. The point is, the destruction that accompanies the coming of the Lord is not sudden or unexpected. Another reason to see these as two distinct events.

That's talking about the current kingdom of God that we are now in.

We disagree on this point, obviously. To discuss this, we would need to visit the OT.

That isn't a reference to His second coming.

Romans 14:17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and receives human approval.

This passage describes the spiritual kingdom of God that we are now in and it does not come with signs to be observed, but rather is a kingdom "of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit".

Yes, the kingdom is a "spiritual" kingdom, but the coming Kingdom will be a kingdom in every other way also.

Paul wasn't talking about anything in particular that would occur "over many times and epochs". That's what you're missing. His point was that the day of the Lord would not take place over "times and epochs", but rather would take place suddenly and unexpectedly.

The metaphor is adverbial, indicating the manner of its coming; it comes unexpectedly -- that is, how does it begin? It begins all of a sudden. But the Day of the Lord takes place over a long period of time and is attended by many events.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I didn't say there would be more than one climactic event. I said that "times and seasons" are both plural nouns, which refer to future periods (plural) of eschatological fulfillment. By contrast, the second coming of Christ is a single climactic event as you say. Isn't this another difference that proves they are two different subjects? I think it is.

You're not getting it. He was not actually referring to another event besides the day of the Lord that bring sudden and unexpected destruction. What he was saying is that he didn't need to write to them about times and dates because the day of the Lord, consisting of the events described in 1 Thess 4:14-17 and 1 Thess 5:2-3, only involve one day.

But clearly, he signals a change of subject in verse 1

No, he does not! There is absolutely no basis for this claim whatsoever. I wish I knew who decided to put a chapter break at the end of 1 Thess 4 because they deserve to be punished for that. It has caused people like you to not understand that 1 Thess 4:14-5:3 is one narrative about the future day when Christ returns and what will happen on that day. This is why I pointed 2 Thess 1:7-10 out to you because that has both believers being gathered to Christ AND the destruction of His enemies as happening on the same day. That is how 1 Thess 4:14-5:3 should be understood as well because both passages are about the same event: the day that Christ returns.

. "Concerning Times and Seasons . . . " He intends to move passed the subject of our being taken up into the air, unto another time, circumstance and situation.

No, that is not at all what he was saying. If he was then he would have proceeded to talk about things involving times and seasons, but instead he talked about the day of the Lord, which is an actual 24 hour day, during which at some point sudden and unexpected destruction will come down on Christ's enemies. He was saying he didn't need to write to them about times and seasons because the day of the Lord doesn't cover times and seasons, but rather covers one day.

Compare 1Thessalonians 4 with 1Thessalonians 5 with regard to the subjects of the action. 1Thessalonians describes what happens to those who are in Christ; 1Thessalonians 5 describes what happens to "they-them". We-us vs. they-them. The recipients of the action are not the same group.

Well, no kidding. The same is true in 2 Thess 1:7-10. But, what is described in 2 Thess 1:7-10 undeniably happens on the same day. So, if you're trying to say that since two different groups are described that means it's talking about two entirely different events at two entirely different times, then think again because 2 Thess 1:7-10 proves that theory wrong.

Logically, then if we are all raised to be with Christ, before the Day of the Lord, then we have no reason to be concerned with that subject since we will no longer be here. But, since the Day of the Lord precedes being taken into the air, believers will be concerned about it, which is why Paul wrote about it.

LOL. We will be taken into the air ON the day of the Lord. And Christ will destroy His enemies on that day as well. The idea of the day of the Lord preceding us being caught up on the air is laughable at best. You need to pray for wisdom (James 1:5-7).

Yes, of course. The point is, the destruction that accompanies the coming of the Lord is not sudden or unexpected.

Goodness sakes. I'm starting to lose hope for you. What you are saying completely contradicts what is indicated in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12. And you contradict what Jesus Himself taught.

Matthew 24:37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

Have you never read this? Just as those in Noah's day had no idea that the flood was coming until it actually "came and took them all away", Jesus said "that is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man". So, He indicated that there will be massive destruction at His coming and it will be unexpected because He compared it to Noah's day when "they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away".

How can you say His coming won't be unexpected in light of passages like this? You are just blatantly contradicting scripture with your comments. Which shows that your beliefs come only from your imagination and not from scripture.

Another reason to see these as two distinct events.

We disagree on this point, obviously. To discuss this, we would need to visit the OT.

Yes, the kingdom is a "spiritual" kingdom, but the coming Kingdom will be a kingdom in every other way also.

The metaphor is adverbial, indicating the manner of its coming; it comes unexpectedly -- that is, how does it begin? It begins all of a sudden. But the Day of the Lord takes place over a long period of time and is attended by many events.

No, it does not. You have no idea of what you're talking about, as evidenced by the fact that you repeatedly contradict straightforward scripture.

 

[CadyandZoe]

You're not getting it. He was not actually referring to another event besides the day of the Lord that bring sudden and unexpected destruction. What he was saying is that he didn't need to write to them about times and dates because the day of the Lord, consisting of the events described in 1 Thess 4:14-17 and 1 Thess 5:2-3, only involve one day.

I understand your point. But your explanation doesn't square with his. His reason for why we don't need to worry about times and seasons is that we are children of the day, instead of children of the night. We don't worry because, unlike others, we are prepared for the day.

No, he does not! There is absolutely no basis for this claim whatsoever. I wish I knew who decided to put a chapter break at the end of 1 Thess 4 because they deserve to be punished for that. It has caused people like you to not understand that 1 Thess 4:14-5:3 is one narrative about the future day when Christ returns and what will happen on that day.

My point isn't based on the chapter break. It's based on his signal, "concerning times and seasons", which signals his readers that he is making a new point.

This is why I pointed 2 Thess 1:7-10 out to you because that has both believers being gathered to Christ AND the destruction of His enemies as happening on the same day. That is how 1 Thess 4:14-5:3 should be understood as well because both passages are about the same event: the day that Christ returns.

The two passages sound very different to me. For instance, 1Thess. 4 doesn't mention flames of fire or the dealing out of retribution.

No, that is not at all what he was saying. If he was then he would have proceeded to talk about things involving times and seasons, but instead he talked about the day of the Lord, which is an actual 24 hour day, during which at some point sudden and unexpected destruction will come down on Christ's enemies. He was saying he didn't need to write to them about times and seasons because the day of the Lord doesn't cover times and seasons, but rather covers one day.

The "DAY" of the Lord is a long and distinct period in our future with a particular and unique feature: a time when God is ruling over his people and the world. The "Era" of the Lord will come about after periods of darkness, smoke, fire, doom, and destruction. The process will take place over many years time according to the prophets. The Thessalonians are concerned about the run-up to that ERA because it is attended by life-threatening events.

And the run-up to the DOL comes before the coming of Jesus which is why it is a concern.

Well, no kidding. The same is true in 2 Thess 1:7-10. But, what is described in 2 Thess 1:7-10 undeniably happens on the same day. So, if you're trying to say that since two different groups are described that means it's talking about two entirely different events at two entirely different times, then think again because 2 Thess 1:7-10 proves that theory wrong.

I don't see a time indicator in that passage.

LOL. We will be taken into the air ON the day of the Lord. And Christ will destroy His enemies on that day as well. The idea of the day of the Lord preceding us being caught up on the air is laughable at best. You need to pray for wisdom (James 1:5-7).

I get it. You don't agree.

Goodness sakes. I'm starting to lose hope for you. What you are saying completely contradicts what is indicated in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12. And you contradict what Jesus Himself taught.

I disagree. Both Peter and Paul say that we ought to be alert for the Day of the Lord. If our being caught up in the air preceded the DOL, on what basis do we need to be alert?

Matthew 24:37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

Have you never read this? Just as those in Noah's day had no idea that the flood was coming until it actually "came and took them all away", Jesus said "that is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man". So, He indicated that there will be massive destruction at His coming and it will be unexpected because He compared it to Noah's day when "they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away".

How can you say His coming won't be unexpected in light of passages like this? You are just blatantly contradicting scripture with your comments. Which shows that your beliefs come only from your imagination and not from scripture.

Notice the standpoint of Jesus with respect to the objects of action. He is speaking in the third person plural: the flood came and took "them" away. But surely Noah and his family knew that the rains were coming. Paul is correct when he says that Jesus-followers will be ready for that day.

No, it does not. You have no idea of what you're talking about, as evidenced by the fact that you repeatedly contradict straightforward scripture.

I contradict your interpretation, that's for certain.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I understand your point. But your explanation doesn't square with his. His reason for why we don't need to worry about times and seasons is that we are children of the day, instead of children of the night. We don't worry because, unlike others, we are prepared for the day.

No, that isn't what he was saying we don't need to worry about. What we don't need to worry about is suffering God's wrath that he described because we are children of the day rather than children of the night. Instead of suffering God's wrath at that point, we will be caught up to meet Jesus in the air.

My point isn't based on the chapter break.

You won't ever admit that, of course, but would you interpret it the way you do if the chapter break wasn't there? Maybe you would, but I think many others who think 1 Thess 5:1-3 is talking about an entirely different event from 1 Thess 4:14-17 would not think that if the chapter break wasn't there.

It's based on his signal, "concerning times and seasons", which signals his readers that he is making a new point.

No, he is not. You just have no discernment at all, which is why you believe ridiculous things and deny the deity of Christ and so on.

The two passages sound very different to me. For instance, 1Thess. 4 doesn't mention flames of fire or the dealing out of retribution.

LOL. There is nothing in one of the passages that contradicts the other. Both passages (2 Thess 1:7-10 and 1 Thess 4:14-5:3) reference His second coming, both reference His people being with Him and both reference His enemies being destroyed.

The "DAY" of the Lord is a long and distinct period in our future with a particular and unique feature: a time when God is ruling over his people and the world.

Nonsense. That is not something indicated in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 whatsoever.

The "Era" of the Lord will come about after periods of darkness, smoke, fire, doom, and destruction. The process will take place over many years time according to the prophets.

According to your misinterpretations of the prophets which cause you to contradict what Peter and Paul taught about the day of the Lord.

I get it. You don't agree.

Uh huh. And you don't agree with me. Wow, who knew?

I disagree. Both Peter and Paul say that we ought to be alert for the Day of the Lord. If our being caught up in the air preceded the DOL, on what basis do we need to be alert?

Are you even reading what I'm saying? I never said that our being caught up in the air precedes the day of the Lord. It will happen ON the day of the Lord which is the day that Christ returns.

Notice the standpoint of Jesus with respect to the objects of action. He is speaking in the third person plural: the flood came and took "them" away. But surely Noah and his family knew that the rains were coming. Paul is correct when he says that Jesus-followers will be ready for that day.

Again, are you not reading what I'm saying? I was clearly referring to unbelievers not having any clue about it until it actually happens, not believers. Just like in Noah's day.

 

[CadyandZoe]

No, that isn't what he was saying we don't need to worry about. What we don't need to worry about is suffering God's wrath that he described because we are children of the day rather than children of the night. Instead of suffering God's wrath at that point, we will be caught up to meet Jesus in the air.

In your view, why is important for us to be awake, sober, etc.? If Christ comes to take us away from the wrath, and if both the wrath and the coming of Jesus take place in a single unexpected moment, how can we prepare for that and why would we need to prepare for it?

You won't ever admit that, of course, but would you interpret it the way you do if the chapter break wasn't there?

My interpretation doesn't rely on the chapter break. I always ignore the chapter breaks anyway. I am taking my cues from Paul's use of the Greek phrase "peri de", which is roughly translated as "concerning" or "with regard to" or "on the topic of." Here he alerts the reader that he is changing the subject.

No, he is not. You just have no discernment at all, which is why you believe ridiculous things and deny the deity of Christ and so on.

Paul was talking about the resurrection of the saints. He ends his point with "therefore, encourage one another with these words." The term "therefore" marks the concluding remark to the section. He begins the next section with "Now with regard to . . ." This isn't a matter of discernment. It's a matter of paying attention to verbal cues.

LOL. There is nothing in one of the passages that contradicts the other. Both passages (2 Thess 1:7-10 and 1 Thess 4:14-5:3) reference His second coming, both reference His people being with Him and both reference His enemies being destroyed.

I agree. The two passages don't contradict one another. That wasn't my point.

Nonsense. That is not something indicated in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 whatsoever.

Of course not. For the sake of efficiency, writers don't spend the time to explain commonly held information.
I mentioned earlier that the OT prophetic word is the background behind these two passages.

According to your misinterpretations of the prophets which cause you to contradict what Peter and Paul taught about the day of the Lord.

Well, you and I don't share the same interpretation technique or strategy.

Are you even reading what I'm saying? I never said that our being caught up in the air precedes the day of the Lord. It will happen ON the day of the Lord which is the day that Christ returns.

I thought you knew me by now. I was speaking hypothetically in order to make a point.

Again, are you not reading what I'm saying? I was clearly referring to unbelievers not having any clue about it until it actually happens, not believers. Just like in Noah's day.

Yes, I read what you said. But you seem to have inadvertently left out a significant point with regard to Noah. Yes, we both agree that the Day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night, that is, unexpectedly. But can't we also agree that Paul exhorts his readers to be awake and sober? Doesn't Jesus exhort his disciples to be ready for his coming? To be on the alert?

Doesn't it follow then, that the Day of the Lord will not come suddenly, unexpectedly for those who are ready? Alert? Awake?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

In your view, why is important for us to be awake, sober, etc.?

It's talking about being spiritually awake and sober. To be spiritually alert as to what's going on so that you stay in the spiritual light rather than being in spiritual darkness. God's wrath is reserved for those who are in spiritual darkness.

1 Thessalonians 5:8 But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. 9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.

If Christ comes to take us away from the wrath, and if both the wrath and the coming of Jesus take place in a single unexpected moment, how can we prepare for that and why would we need to prepare for it?

By doing things that spiritually mature Christians do. Fellowship with each other. Study scripture. Pray. Serve others. And so on. When you do those things you keep your personal relationship with Jesus strong and keep yourself from being in danger of falling away from the faith. The reason for doing this is obvious. To keep from being among those who have God's wrath come down on them.

My interpretation doesn't rely on the chapter break. I always ignore the chapter breaks anyway. I am taking my cues from Paul's use of the Greek phrase "peri de", which is roughly translated as "concerning" or "with regard to" or "on the topic of." Here he alerts the reader that he is changing the subject.

No, he is not. The subject in 1 Thess 4:14-18 is the day Christ returns and he talks about that day in terms of what will happen to believers on that day. Then, he continues to talk about that day in 1 Thess 5 and then talks about what will happen to unbelievers on that day. There is no basis whatsoever for thinking that he completely changed the subject in 1 Thess 5:1. He didn't change the subject, which is the day of the Lord (day that Christ returns), but rather changed the focus of what will happen on that day from believers to unbelievers.

Paul was talking about the resurrection of the saints. He ends his point with "therefore, encourage one another with these words." The term "therefore" marks the concluding remark to the section.

Only in relation to believers, but he was not done talking about the day Christ returns. He then turned his attention to what will happen to unbelievers on that day.

He begins the next section with "Now with regard to . . ." This isn't a matter of discernment. It's a matter of paying attention t verbal cues.

It's foolish to suggest that we don't need discernment to interpret this. Absolutely foolish. Have you never read 1 Corinthians 2:9-16? If you think we don't need spiritual discernment when interpreting scripture then that would explain why you believe so much nonsense and why you deny the deity of Jesus Christ.

I agree. The two passages don't contradict one another. That wasn't my point.

My point was that would be the only way we could know for sure that they don't relate directly to each other (aren't about the same event).

Well, you and I don't share the same interpretation technique or strategy.

No kidding.

I thought you knew me by now. I was speaking hypothetically in order to make a point.

I know that you believe a lot of false teaching, but I didn't know that you also purposely try to communicate in the most confusing way possible.

Yes, I read what you said. But you seem to have inadvertently left out a significant point with regard to Noah. Yes, we both agree that the Day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night, that is, unexpectedly. But can't we also agree that Paul exhorts his readers to be awake and sober? Doesn't Jesus exhort his disciples to be ready for his coming? To be on the alert?

Yes, of course. What is your point?

Doesn't it follow then, that the Day of the Lord will not come suddenly, unexpectedly for those who are ready? Alert? Awake?

Of course! I didn't say otherwise. Of course the sudden, unexpected destruction does not come upon believers, but only comes upon unbelievers who have no idea that it's coming. But, we know that it's coming. We don't know the day or hour that it's coming, but we know that it's coming some day and there are signs we're given to help us know when it's coming soon.

 

[CadyandZoe]

It's talking about being spiritually awake and sober. To be spiritually alert as to what's going on so that you stay in the spiritual light rather than being in spiritual darkness. God's wrath is reserved for those who are in spiritual darkness.

1 Thessalonians 5:8 But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. 9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.



By doing things that spiritually mature Christians do. Fellowship with each other. Study scripture. Pray. Serve others. And so on. When you do those things you keep your personal relationship with Jesus strong and keep yourself from being in danger of falling away from the faith. The reason for doing this is obvious. To keep from being among those who have God's wrath come down on them.


No, he is not. The subject in 1 Thess 4:14-18 is the day Christ returns and he talks about that day in terms of what will happen to believers on that day. Then, he continues to talk about that day in 1 Thess 5 and then talks about what will happen to unbelievers on that day. There is no basis whatsoever for thinking that he completely changed the subject in 1 Thess 5:1. He didn't change the subject, which is the day of the Lord (day that Christ returns), but rather changed the focus of what will happen on that day from believers to unbelievers.


Only in relation to believers, but he was not done talking about the day Christ returns. He then turned his attention to what will happen to unbelievers on that day.


It's foolish to suggest that we don't need discernment to interpret this. Absolutely foolish. Have you never read 1 Corinthians 2:9-16? If you think we don't need spiritual discernment when interpreting scripture then that would explain why you believe so much nonsense and why you deny the deity of Jesus Christ.


My point was that would be the only way we could know for sure that they don't relate directly to each other (aren't about the same event).


No kidding.


I know that you believe a lot of false teaching, but I didn't know that you also purposely try to communicate in the most confusing way possible.


Yes, of course. What is your point?


Of course! I didn't say otherwise. Of course the sudden, unexpected destruction does not come upon believers, but only comes upon unbelievers who have no idea that it's coming. But, we know that it's coming. We don't know the day or hour that it's coming, but we know that it's coming some day and there are signs we're given to help us know when it's coming soon.

The difference between our views is this. You believe Paul is talking about the final judgment of mankind. I don't. I believe the Day of the Lord isn't a judgment at all. The Day of the Lord is, as the prophets say, a day of purging, removing ungodliness from Jacob.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The difference between our views is this. You believe Paul is talking about the final judgment of mankind. I don't.

Yeah, I was already aware of that. And I've been showing why you are wrong.

I believe the Day of the Lord isn't a judgment at all. The Day of the Lord is, as the prophets say, a day of purging, removing ungodliness from Jacob.

What does this mean exactly? You speak in riddles. Are you saying you don't think the day of the Lord involves God's wrath against unbelievers?

 

[Zao is life]

1 John 3:1 Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. 3 All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.

You made a statement and you ran away saying I'm annoying you, which implies that whatever you said in your last statement above is true, and may not be corrected.

So here's the correction:

Adam was created in the image and likeness of God and we will be like Christ but only Christ has immortality | eternal life in Himself. We never will. Ours is in Christ. His is in Himself. Jesus is God. We are not.

-- He alone possesses immortality and lives in unapproachable light, whom no human has ever seen or is able to see. To him be honor and eternal power! Amen. --- (1 Timothy 6:15-16, NETfree version).

"For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has given to the Son to have life within Himself" John 5:26

"I am the First and the Last, and the Living One, and I became dead, and behold, I am alive for ever and ever, Amen. And I have the keys of hades and of death." Revelation 1:17-18.--

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You made a statement and you ran away saying I'm annoying you, which implies that whatever you said in your last statement above is true, and may not be corrected.

I didn't run away. Grow up. I implied nothing. You are implying that. You, of course, are free to respond however you want. But, I have nothing more to add. It figures that you would want to ruin a good discussion with insults. You've done that repeatedly in the past and I see you haven't changed.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Yeah, I was already aware of that. And I've been showing why you are wrong.


What does this mean exactly? You speak in riddles. Are you saying you don't think the day of the Lord involves God's wrath against unbelievers?

No, the Day of the Lord does not involve judgment against unbelievers. The Day of the Lord involves a purging of Israel.

The following passage from Isaiah is one of the many passages that speak about the remnant and the purging of Zion when God will remove unrighteousness (literally all unrighteous people) from Jerusalem. I could multiply examples of this prophecy.

Isaiah 10:20-22

20 Now in that day the remnant of Israel, and those of the house of Jacob who have escaped, will never again rely on the one who struck them, but will truly rely on the Lord, the Holy One of Israel.​

​

21 A remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God.
22 For though your people, O Israel, may be like the sand of the sea,
Only a remnant within them will return;
A destruction is determined, overflowing with righteousness.​

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, the Day of the Lord does not involve judgment against unbelievers.

LOL. You are impossible to take seriously. You miss the context of everything. Here is what Paul wrote after talking about the sudden and unexpected destruction that occurs upon the arrival of the day of the Lord:

1 Thessalonians 5:4 But you, brothers and sisters, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief. 5 You are all children of the light and children of the day. We do not belong to the night or to the darkness. 6 So then, let us not be like others, who are asleep, but let us be awake and sober. 7 For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk, get drunk at night. 8 But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. 9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.

You somehow don't even recognize that the sudden and unexpected destruction that Paul wrote about in 1 Thess 5:2-3 is God's wrath upon those who are spiritually asleep and in spiritual darkness. That is the context of what he was writing about.

 

[Zao is life]

I didn't run away. Grow up. I implied nothing. You are implying that. You, of course, are free to respond however you want. But, I have nothing more to add. It figures that you would want to ruin a good discussion with insults. You've done that repeatedly in the past and I see you haven't changed.

"Nice" to see the old Spiritual Israelite back. For no reason saying I was annoying you then making a statement that warranted a reply before deciding the conversation was closed. Then saying I need to grow up etc.

Leopards and spots and all that?

PS You don't "close a conversation" by making a statement, especially not a statement in the form of a question that implies what I was saying was untrue, and also not qualifying your statement when the context of the conversation required it.

Anyway, I've nothing further to add now either.

Go well (an African greeting).

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

"Nice" to see the old Spiritual Israelite back.

Looks like you never left. I clearly was indicating that I had nothing more to say on the subject and multiple times I said it was a good discussion but then here you go saying I ran away. Ridiculous.

For no reason saying I was annoying you then making a statement that warranted a reply before deciding the conversation was closed. Then saying I need to grow up etc.

No reason? It was because you had started repeating yourself and saying things that I completely disagreed with while not addressing what I had said. So, once that starts happening it annoys me and I have no interest in continuing the discussion from there. But, we did agree on some other things, so it was a good discussion otherwise and I said so. Just be satisfied with that and agree to disagree instead of saying I ran away.

Leopards and spots and all that?

PS You don't "close a conversation" by making a statement, especially not a statement in the form of a question that implies what I was saying was untrue, and also not qualifying your statement when the context of the conversation required it.

Anyway, I've nothing further to add now either.

Go well (an African greeting).

No one put a gun to your head to force you to comment on the passage I quoted. I had already quoted it multiple times previously, so I just wanted to end the discussion by quoting it once more. There was no need for you to respond. You go well, too.

 

[CadyandZoe]

LOL. You are impossible to take seriously. You miss the context of everything. Here is what Paul wrote after talking about the sudden and unexpected destruction that occurs upon the arrival of the day of the Lord:

1 Thessalonians 5:4 But you, brothers and sisters, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief. 5 You are all children of the light and children of the day. We do not belong to the night or to the darkness. 6 So then, let us not be like others, who are asleep, but let us be awake and sober. 7 For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk, get drunk at night. 8 But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. 9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.

You somehow don't even recognize that the sudden and unexpected destruction that Paul wrote about in 1 Thess 5:2-3 is God's wrath upon those who are spiritually asleep and in spiritual darkness. That is the context of what he was writing about.

I do take that into account, but I ALSO take into account the fact that the phrase "Day of the Lord" must be understood from within the OT context. This is the piece you are missing.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I do take that into account, but I ALSO take into account the fact that the phrase "Day of the Lord" must be understood from within the OT context. This is the piece you are missing.

Do you really take that into account (what I pointed out from 1 Thess 5 regarding the context of verses 2-3)? How can I believe that when you conclude that the sudden and unexpected destruction that Paul referenced is not God's wrath against unbelievers when the context clearly shows that it will come upon those who are in spiritual darkness? Those who are in spiritual darkness are unbelievers, are they not?