Who Is "the Restrainer" In 2 Thess. 2:6-7

[tom55]

What has teh teachings of church got to do with Jesus?? There is a reason why Christ gives the holy spirit to those who love Him, so that the ycan be taught by Him and not havee to live with mens lies and deceipt. But as usuall jesus is ignored for mens ways.

Are you asking about the teachings of the church Jesus established?

Are you suggesting the men that lead a church do not love Christ so they have not been givin the Holy Spirit?

Is it possible that you are the one living a lie and those that follow the teachings of a church are living according to scripture?

Are you saying that you are being taught by Jesus and he is talking to you personally which enables you to discern the lies from the truth?

 

[mjrhealth]

Are you asking about the teachings of the church Jesus established?

no thew catholics did, thats why it is called the "catholic church".

as for His church, people keep looking for it but cant see it because it is not a brick building.

Is it possible that you are the one living a lie and those that follow the teachings of a church are living according to scripture

How can that be, I follow Christ, dont you??

Are you saying that you are being taught by Jesus and he is talking to you personally which enables you to discern the lies from the truth?

Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
Joh 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

Joh 10:14 I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.

Joh 10:4 And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.
Joh 10:5 And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.

So who will you Follow??

Joh_8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Are you not free??

 

[tom55]

no thew catholics did, thats why it is called the "catholic church".

as for His church, people keep looking for it but cant see it because it is not a brick building.

How can that be, I follow Christ, dont you??

Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
Joh 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

Joh 10:14 I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.

Joh 10:4 And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.
Joh 10:5 And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.

So who will you Follow??

Joh_8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Are you not free??

You seem to have a difficult time logically and articulately answering any questions. You Said: There is a reason why Christ gives the holy spirit to those who love Him, so that the ycan be taught by Him and not havee to live with mens lies and deceipt. But as usuall jesus is ignored for mens ways.

So I asked you: Are you saying that you are being taught by Jesus and he is talking to you personally which enables you to discern the lies from the truth? A simple yes or no will answer that question.

I agree the church is not a brick building, however, it houses the people that make up the church that Jesus established. Since you say you follow Jesus and Jesus said take your differences to the church which church do you go to when your brother sins against you?

You say you follow Christ and his teachings. He also said when you make a dinner or a supper, don't call your friends or thy brethren or their kinsmen or thy rich neighbors. He said to call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind and you shall be blessed.

Is that what you do since you follow Jesus?

 

[michaelvpardo]

Absolutely?

Isaiah 61:2 has a gap of two thousand years in the middle of one sentence.

Has war ceased?
If yes, then the end of the one 'seven' has come.
If not, then the one 'seven' has not come.

Great shot Marcus.
Some people just don't want the facts to get in the way of their delusion.

 

[Phoneman777]

William Edward Hartpole Lecky didn't use the words apostate Protestantism....He said Protestantism. Don't twist his words like you twist scripture. This goes back to my original point about your bias that you can not defend: You like to quote William Edward Hartpole Lecky when it fits your Anti-Catholic rhetoric but a quote from him that disrupts your theory you ignore.

If the Catholics and Apostate Protestants (who according to you distort Gods commandments) are wrong for accepting the teachings of their church and their church leaders does that not make it possible that you are wrong when you accept the teachings of your church or whichever interpretation of the bible YOU choose to accept on any certain matter?

I think my last post should be sufficient for anyone who reads it with his eyes open to see that my position is of one that condemns BOTH the Papacy as Antichrist...

-and-

..."apostate Protestantism" (Protestantism which started out sincerely seeking truth but eventually began rejecting it down the road) as "the False Prophet".

God is calling His people to "come out of Babylon...that you be not partakers of her sins and recieve not of her plagues" - "Babylon" is a symbol for "religious confusion", which is a most aptly applied opprobrium to both the Papacy and Apostate Protestantism, so please come out of there before it's too late.

 

[tom55]

I think my last post should be sufficient for anyone who reads it with his eyes open to see that my position is of one that condemns BOTH the Papacy as Antichrist...

-and-

..."apostate Protestantism" (Protestantism which started out sincerely seeking truth but eventually began rejecting it down the road) as "the False Prophet".

God is calling His people to "come out of Babylon...that you be not partakers of her sins and recieve not of her plagues" - "Babylon" is a symbol for "religious confusion", which is a most aptly applied opprobrium to both the Papacy and Apostate Protestantism, so please come out of there before it's too late.

If the RCC and Apostate Protestants are wrong for accepting the teachings of their church and their church leaders does that not make it possible that you are wrong when you accept the teachings of your church or whichever interpretation of the bible YOU choose to accept on any certain matter?

 

[Phoneman777]

If the RCC and Apostate Protestants are wrong for accepting the teachings of their church and their church leaders does that not make it possible that you are wrong when you accept the teachings of your church or whichever interpretation of the bible YOU choose to accept on any certain matter?

No, it is not possible, because not I nor do other teachers in my Christian denomination apply a "private" interpretation to the Bible, as all other denominations do. If everyone would go to the Bible and the Bible alone for their doctrines, and allow the Bible itself to interpret itself for us, then everyone would believe the same thing. Unfortunately, that is not nor ever will be the case, because there will always be men who apply a private interpretation to Scripture and then seek out only those verses that support that interpretation, while IGNORING the vast majority of other verses that disprove their interpretations.

BTW, Catholicism only recognizes ONE - and I repeat: ONLY ONE - true Protestant denomination. Every single other Protestant denomination - be they Lutherans, Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, Church of God, etc. - she denounces as partakers of a false rebellion b/c they, in spite of themselves, bow to her authority and acknowledge her supremacy over them, because they teach that which can be supported from Catholic tradition alone, not the Scriptures.

 

[tom55]

No, it is not possible, because not I nor do other teachers in my Christian denomination apply a "private" interpretation to the Bible, as all other denominations do. If everyone would go to the Bible and the Bible alone for their doctrines, and allow the Bible itself to interpret itself for us, then everyone would believe the same thing. Unfortunately, that is not nor ever will be the case, because there will always be men who apply a private interpretation to Scripture and then seek out only those verses that support that interpretation, while IGNORING the vast majority of other verses that disprove their interpretations.

BTW, Catholicism only recognizes ONE - and I repeat: ONLY ONE - true Protestant denomination. Every single other Protestant denomination - be they Lutherans, Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, Church of God, etc. - she denounces as partakers of a false rebellion b/c they, in spite of themselves, bow to her authority and acknowledge her supremacy over them, because they teach that which can be supported from Catholic tradition alone, not the Scriptures.

I am very interested in learning more about your denomination. (I am being very honest when I say that) I visited your profile and it is not listed there. Which one do you belong to?

Which Protestant denomination does the Catholic church recognize? (I can't seem to find the answer via mr. google)

 

[Phoneman777]

I am very interested in learning more about your denomination. (I am being very honest when I say that) I visited your profile and it is not listed there. Which one do you belong to?

Which Protestant denomination does the Catholic church recognize? (I can't seem to find the answer via mr. google)

I'll share what Catholicism says first:

"''Reason and sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible.'' John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893.

So, you see that the Papacy identifies Sabbath keeping Christians with "Protestantism" to the exclusion of all other Sunday keeping Christians, which they have stated are not true Protestants because they are really obeying the authority of the Catholic church "in spite of themselves", according to Monsignor Louis Segur.

"The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant.'' The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4.

 

[tom55]

I'll share what Catholicism says first:

"''Reason and sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible.'' John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893.

So, you see that the Papacy identifies Sabbath keeping Christians with "Protestantism" to the exclusion of all other Sunday keeping Christians, which they have stated are not true Protestants because they are really obeying the authority of the Catholic church "in spite of themselves", according to Monsignor Louis Segur.

"The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant.'' The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4.

I don't care what Catholicism says. I don't care what some cardinal said 70-100 years ago. I don't care about your hate for the RCC.

What do you have to say TODAY about my very direct question to you? (I am very interested in learning more about your denomination..... Which one do you belong to?)

 

[Phoneman777]

I don't care what Catholicism says. I don't care what some cardinal said 70-100 years ago. I don't care about your hate for the RCC.

What do you have to say TODAY about my very direct question to you? (I am very interested in learning more about your denomination..... Which one do you belong to?)

I think you meant to say that you don't care for my hatred for what the RCC teaches, because I've made it painfully clear to you that I do not hate anyone. When you're ready to accept that, I'll continue speaking to you.

 

[tom55]

I think you meant to say that you don't care for my hatred for what the RCC teaches, because I've made it painfully clear to you that I do not hate anyone. When you're ready to accept that, I'll continue speaking to you.

I accept your hatred.

Still no answer to my question: I am very interested in learning more about your denomination..... Which one do you belong to?

 

[Phoneman777]

I accept your hatred.

Still no answer to my question: I am very interested in learning more about your denomination..... Which one do you belong to?

It's perfectly acceptable to hate error, because error causes those God loves to be lost and He wants them to be saved very much. That's why I hate the errors of Catholicism - the Antichrist of prophecy - because its empty rituals and dogmas serve as a means for remembering God for those who truly wish to forget Him.

As for my denomination:

"''Reason and sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible.'' John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893.

"The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant.'' The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4.

Kudos to the Catholic church for the endorsement.

 

[tom55]

It's perfectly acceptable to hate error, because error causes those God loves to be lost and He wants them to be saved very much. That's why I hate the errors of Catholicism - the Antichrist of prophecy - because its empty rituals and dogmas serve as a means for remembering God for those who truly wish to forget Him.

As for my denomination:

"''Reason and sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible.'' John Cardinal Gibbons, The Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893.

"The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant.'' The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4.

Kudos to the Catholic church for the endorsement.

I agree it is acceptable to hate error. As you may recall (even though you probably won't admit it) you have made many errors (false accusations) against our Catholic brothers and the RCC on this forum. So is it possible you are the antichrist? After all you did say, "That's why I hate the errors of Catholicism - the Antichrist of prophecy...". So it stands to reason if you hate the errors of Catholicism and their errors make them the antichrist then wouldn't that possibly make your errors (7th day Adventist) the antichrist?

Furthermore, isn't it true the Adventist denomination has some of the same beliefs as the RCC? Would that make both the RCC and the Adventist POSSIBLY the antichrist?

Here is an earlier quote from you: "No, it is not possible, because not I nor do other teachers in my Christian denomination apply a "private" interpretation to the Bible, as all other denominations do. If everyone would go to the Bible and the Bible alone for their doctrines, and allow the Bible itself to interpret itself for us, then everyone would believe the same thing. Unfortunately, that is not nor ever will be the case, because there will always be men who apply a private interpretation to Scripture and then seek out only those verses that support that interpretation, while IGNORING the vast majority of other verses that disprove their interpretations."

I just want to make sure we are talking about the Seventh-day Adventist church that traces its roots to William Miller who was a Baptist and predicted the Second Coming would occur between March 21, 1843, and March 21, 1844?
The same William Miller who reluctantly endorsed the position of a group of his followers known as the seventh-month movement who claimed Christ would return on October 22, 1844 and when that didn’t happen either he forswore predicting the date of the Second Coming? After that his followers broke up into a number of competing factions.


What makes the 7th day Adventist infallible (since it obviously started out very fallible in its interpretation of scripture) compared to any other denomination? If we go the to the Bible alone for doctrines wouldn't we have to find in the bible what books are supposed to be in it (table of contents)? How do we know we got the right books since there was disagreement on which books should be in the bible? How do you know your denomination got it right? And why did it take God over 1800 years to finally reveal the truth to us and bless us with the truth of the 7th Day Adventist doctrine? Why did God abandon us for 1800 years?

I find it interesting that you hate RCC doctrines, even though you share some of them, AND you use alleged statements from a Catholic sources to bolster your beliefs!!

 

[blessedhope]

And Confusion and denial over the role and Deity of the Holy Spirit has been a pervasive heresy in Christendom since Modalism was first introduced in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, a new confusion has been recently reintroduced. Although this view is not over the Deity of God the Holy Spirit, but over the varying roles in which He has participated in since Genesis 1:2, and what He will do on into the future. In 1990, Marvin Rosenthal introduced a book entitled The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church which offered up an alternative view to the Pre, Mid, and Post Tribulation Rapture views that had been debated for millennia. Subsequently, Mr. Rosenthal's work opened a flood gate of similar and divergent views as he was followed by Robert Van Kampen and many, many others who have carried this particular eschatological torch to our current day.

The Pre-Wrath view supports the idea that the remnant faithful are delivered in a Rapture event at the Seventh Seal Judgment. For Pre-Wrath, the Seal Judgments are ongoing once opened and allows for the Church to proceed three-quarter's of the way into the seven year, 70th Week of Daniel. Three quarters of the way in takes them past the midpoint, but delivering them just prior to the Day of the Lord and the subsequent Wrath of God.

The Pre-Wrath view has brought certain issues to light and one in particular, that is a 'make or break' passage for whether their view (or ours) is legitimately biblical or not. There simply isn't any other way around it. That passage, is over the identity of this mysterious "Restrainer" and what that entails as the Apostle Paul mentions; (NKJV, emphasis mine)

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.

8 And then, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.

9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, (1) with all power, signs, and lying wonders,

10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

11 (2) and for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie,

12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thess. 2:8-11)

The problem, is that this verse (vs. 7) forces the narrative of the following verses (vs. 8-11), to mean only one thing...essentially, that X can't happen until Y does...which means, the Antichrist (man of lawlessness) CANNOT be revealed, UNTIL the one who restrains the Antichrist, is taken out of the way. That is simply the normal reading of the text and the way it was intended to be understood.

So the dilemma that both the Pre-Tribulation and Pre-Wrath Rapture views face then, is that if the Holy Spirit is the Restrainer, than Pre-Wrath (and Post Trib) cannot be true, because we see in the First Seal Judgment (Rev. 6:1-2) unleashing the Antichrist upon the earth...and that means the Holy Spirit must be removed/moved out of the way before this man can be revealed. And since Christian's are 'sealed by the Holy Spirit' as a guarantee until the day of redemption, the Holy Spirit's removal would also remove those individuals He indwells and seals.

If the Holy Spirit is not the Restrainer, than the Pre-Trib view cannot be true because the Holy Spirit in His current role would remain on the earth, along with all those He seals and indwells as mentioned in the previous scripture references.

Now, both views will argue incessantly about numerous other passages and words (think Matt. 24 and Parousia), but the one question everyone has is, why didn't Paul just clarify who the Restrainer was and end any ambiguity about it back in the first century? So first let's take stock and differentiate between what we know, what we don't, and what we assume.

Just so we are all on the same sheet of music, according to Strong's, the English word Restrains (or letteth in the KJV) in the Greek is katecho. It means:

1. to hold back, detain, retain
1. from going away
2. to restrain, hinder (the course or progress of)
1. that which hinders, Antichrist from making his appearance
2. to check a ship's headway i.e. to hold or head the ship
3. to hold fast, keep secure, keep firm possession of
2. to get possession of, take
1. to possess

There are four main candidates for the "He", "he", "He who lets", "He who restrains" in 2 Thess. 2:7. These candidates are:

1. The Holy Spirit
2. Human Government
3. Michael the Archangel
4. Satan

 

[blessedhope]

And If we remove those who couldn't fit the singular, masculine, third person pronoun ('He' instead of 'they' or 'them') we get...

1. The Holy Spirit
2. Human Government
3. Michael the Archangel
4. Satan

Michael the Archangel is removed because he alone, couldn't restrain lawlessness over the face of the earth. It would need to be him, and a whole lot of angelic hosts assisting him, thus, they would be 'they' or 'them'.

According to Scripture, a 'house divided against itself cannot stand' (Luke 11:17), thus Satan would not work against himself to restrain lawlessness, since he is the father of it.

1. The Holy Spirit
2. Human Government
3. Michael the Archangel
4. Satan

So that really only leaves one viable candidate...God the Holy Spirit.

What we know

1. That the Holy Spirit is God, and is omnipotent and omnipresent. (Psalm 139:7; Acts 5:3-5)

2. That God the Holy Spirit has been present on this earth since He 'hovered over the face of the deep' as detailed in Genesis 1:2.

3. The Holy Spirit's role in the Old Testament after Creation, has been to come upon particular individuals to accomplish certain things; Bezalel (Ex. 31), Seventy Elders (Num. 11:25), Balaam (Num. 24), Othniel (Judges 3:9-10), Samson (Judges 13:24-25), Saul (1 Sam. 11:6), David (1 Sam. 16:13-14), Daniel (Dan. 4:9), and Jesus (Isaiah 11:1-3) to name a few.

4. That the Holy Spirit has the ability to physically move people around and up; Ezekiel (Ez. 3:14), Philip (Acts 8:39), John (Rev. 4:1-2).

5. The Holy Spirit existed on the earth, BEFORE He was given on the day of Pentecost. (See previous OT verses)

6. That the Holy Spirit has been referred to by different names; Helper, Comforter, Spirit, Holy Ghost, Spirit of truth, etc.

7. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost (Acts 2) marked a fulfillment to a promise (John 14:26, 15:26) given by Jesus that they (believers) would NOT be left alone as orphans, but would have the Holy Spirit forever and that Christ would return (John 16:16-18) thus marking a new era/dispensation in which the Holy Spirit now sealed believers permanently as detailed by the Apostle Paul. (2 Cor. 1:21-22, Eph. 1:13-14, 4:30)

8. We know that currently, Satan has some form of temporary dominion over the earth. (Luke 4:5-6, Eph. 2:2, 1 John 5:19)

9. We know that The Antichrist is a man, (Dan. 8:23, 9:26-27, Rev. 6:1-2) who has the full backing of Satan, and is able to perform lying signs and wonders (2 Thess. 2:8-11, Rev. 13).

10. We know that the Restrainer (or the One who restrains lawlessness), has to be taken out of the way, before the 'man of lawlessness' can be revealed.

11. Angels, even an Archangel, is a created individual who is not omnipresent.

12. A house divided against itself, cannot stand.

 

[blessedhope]

And What we don't know

1. We don't know specifically why Paul didn't explain what he meant in 2 Thess. 2:7

2. We don't know exactly what the role of the Holy Spirit will be in the 70th Week of Daniel.

3. We don't know how long it is between the Seal Judgments opening, or how much they overlap each other in regards to the other judgments.

What we assume

1. We assume that Paul was attempting to authenticate his second letter to them in 2 Thess. 2:7, by using that particular phrase (restrains-katecho) as a personal descriptor of the Holy Spirit, which is something he hadn't previously used in writing, but only in person to them, which is why he uses 'He who restrains' to validate this second letter and refute the forgery he previously mentions at the beginning of the chapter. (2 Thess. 2:1-2)

2. We assume that this Antichrist will have the supernatural abilities that surpass the average human. He (and the False Prophet) are able to perform supernatural feats that as of today, we don't have the ability to do, or rather, humans are restrained from doing. God allows that particular barrier to be removed which allows Satan to fully manifest his powers through this man. 2 Thess. 2:9 states the coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders...

Conclusion

I have previously wrote about this, and include it here as well to offer up for your consideration. Revelation 13 chronicles the rise of this man along with the False Prophet, and they are essentially able to take over the entire world. If the Restrainer were simply an angel, say Michael the Archangel, he would not be able to stop Satan and his legions of demonic hosts. So if Michael singularly couldn't do it, and would need help (say from other angels), then it would not be singularly the Restrainer, but Restrainer's. And the references wouldn't be to Him, but to them.

The only Person who could singularly, thwart or restrain all evil, is God the Holy Spirit. We already know that Jesus referred to the Holy Spirit as a "He" in the Upper Room Discourse. (John 14-16) We know that in this age, He was given to fill and seal the believers until the day of redemption. We know that He will guide and direct us into all truth. We know that He moves people and leaders to act in certain ways, to accomplish His will. We also know He can physically transport people over long distances or into other dimensions.

So why is it a stretch to say He also is the one who restrains all evil? Granted, we have evil in the earth today, but through the Church, God has used us as the agents of restraint (salt and light), and depending on how faithful we are to the task of 'making disciples of all nations', to one degree determines how much evil is allowed. Compare what the United States used to represent, as compared to Nazi Germany, Iran, North Korea, the Soviet Union, or communist China. Granted, we have fallen far from where we were, but there is still enough salt and light in this nation to keep the flame flickering...until God snuffs it out through the Rapture of the Church. Probably one of the most underrated points of contention FOR the Pre-Tribulation Rapture, and our necessary removal prior to the start of the 70th Week is, the fruits of the Spirit;

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. (Gal. 5:22-23)

No one in their right mind would argue that these things will be present through the seven year Tribulation. Juxtaposed to this, is the Olivet Discourse which states;

"And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another. 11 Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many. 12 And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come." - (Matt. 24:11-14)

The Holy Spirit, through the vessels He inhabits, i.e....the Church, to varying degrees, has held the flood of evil from completely enveloping the world in total darkness. Remember the Dark Ages...when Christianity was suppressed by the Roman Catholic Church for hundreds of years? Marry the fruits of the Spirit up with the barrier God put in place to prevent man from taking on supernatural qualities, and the world is largely like it has been for the past two thousand years. Miracles happen yes, but we aren't seeing the same supernatural events and feats like we did in the Old Testament in today's world.

Taking the Holy Spirit out of the way at the Rapture, isn't removing His omnipotence and presence from the earth, any more than before coming down as cloven tongues of fire at Pentecost. What changes, is the Holy Spirit's role in these final seven years. Again, I don't pretend to know exactly what that is, but people will still come to saving faith much as they did before the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost some 2,000 years ago. The testament in Revelation 7 & 13, that many will still come to faith after the Rapture, isn't proof the Church is still here, its proof that God's mercy is boundless, and He is longsuffering that none should perish.
Enjoy.

 

[Phoneman777]

I agree it is acceptable to hate error. As you may recall (even though you probably won't admit it) you have made many errors (false accusations) against our Catholic brothers and the RCC on this forum. So is it possible you are the antichrist? After all you did say, "That's why I hate the errors of Catholicism - the Antichrist of prophecy...". So it stands to reason if you hate the errors of Catholicism and their errors make them the antichrist then wouldn't that possibly make your errors (7th day Adventist) the antichrist?

Furthermore, isn't it true the Adventist denomination has some of the same beliefs as the RCC? Would that make both the RCC and the Adventist POSSIBLY the antichrist?

Here is an earlier quote from you: "No, it is not possible, because not I nor do other teachers in my Christian denomination apply a "private" interpretation to the Bible, as all other denominations do. If everyone would go to the Bible and the Bible alone for their doctrines, and allow the Bible itself to interpret itself for us, then everyone would believe the same thing. Unfortunately, that is not nor ever will be the case, because there will always be men who apply a private interpretation to Scripture and then seek out only those verses that support that interpretation, while IGNORING the vast majority of other verses that disprove their interpretations."

I just want to make sure we are talking about the Seventh-day Adventist church that traces its roots to William Miller who was a Baptist and predicted the Second Coming would occur between March 21, 1843, and March 21, 1844?
The same William Miller who reluctantly endorsed the position of a group of his followers known as the seventh-month movement who claimed Christ would return on October 22, 1844 and when that didn’t happen either he forswore predicting the date of the Second Coming? After that his followers broke up into a number of competing factions.


What makes the 7th day Adventist infallible (since it obviously started out very fallible in its interpretation of scripture) compared to any other denomination? If we go the to the Bible alone for doctrines wouldn't we have to find in the bible what books are supposed to be in it (table of contents)? How do we know we got the right books since there was disagreement on which books should be in the bible? How do you know your denomination got it right? And why did it take God over 1800 years to finally reveal the truth to us and bless us with the truth of the 7th Day Adventist doctrine? Why did God abandon us for 1800 years?

I find it interesting that you hate RCC doctrines, even though you share some of them, AND you use alleged statements from a Catholic sources to bolster your beliefs!!

Miller was never an SDA! He misinterpreted the prophecy of Daniel 8, as did many others of his time. But, by the time the SDA church officially organized 20 years later, our doctrines were firmly in place and are still to this day as rock solid as ever.

Just think of all the Biblical confusion which could have been avoided if a certain pedophile-invested, murderous church had not taken the Bible away from the people, only allowed it translated into a dead language that only priests were taught to understand, adopted the practice of deliberately teaching false doctrines rooted in paganism which practice continues still today, and punished with DEATH any who would seek to possess or read for themselves God's Holy Word. You continue to demonstrate a lack of knowledge of Scriptural truth or true church history.

 

[tom55]

Miller was never an SDA! He misinterpreted the prophecy of Daniel 8, as did many others of his time. But, by the time the SDA church officially organized 20 years later, our doctrines were firmly in place and are still to this day as rock solid as ever.

Just think of all the Biblical confusion which could have been avoided if a certain pedophile-invested, murderous church had not taken the Bible away from the people, only allowed it translated into a dead language that only priests were taught to understand, adopted the practice of deliberately teaching false doctrines rooted in paganism which practice continues still today, and punished with DEATH any who would seek to possess or read for themselves God's Holy Word. You continue to demonstrate a lack of knowledge of Scriptural truth or true church history.

Got it. Miller was wrong but the people that followed him (Millerites) got it right. Opposite of the RCC history. Peter (they claim to be their first Pope) was right but everyone after him got it wrong.

SDA doctrine is rock solid? Everyone else's doctrine is wrong? Isn't it true some of the Adventist doctrine has some of the same beliefs as the RCC? Why did God wait 1800 years to reveal to man (SDA) what doctrine was right? And if your going to hold Ellen White in great esteem you should read some of the things she has written.

The SDA has had MANY of its leaders molest children and sexually harass it's members. Probably on the same scale as the RCC when you consider the RCC has 1 billion members and the SDA has 18 million members.

Mathew 7:3-5

 

[Phoneman777]

Got it. Miller was wrong but the people that followed him (Millerites) got it right. Opposite of the RCC history. Peter (they claim to be their first Pope) was right but everyone after him got it wrong.

SDA doctrine is rock solid? Everyone else's doctrine is wrong? Isn't it true some of the Adventist doctrine has some of the same beliefs as the RCC? Why did God wait 1800 years to reveal to man (SDA) what doctrine was right? And if your going to hold Ellen White in great esteem you should read some of the things she has written.

The SDA has had MANY of its leaders molest children and sexually harass it's members. Probably on the same scale as the RCC when you consider the RCC has 1 billion members and the SDA has 18 million members.

Mathew 7:3-5

Friend, there's no comparison to sincere Protestants who turn from their mistakes in prophetic interpretation toward the correct understanding of it, and Catholics who are determined to follow error even when the light of truth is so mercifully shined unto them.

Also, you obviously don't understand how deception works, and that is perfectly understandable seeing that you stubbornly defend the monumental errors of Catholicism. The devil is not going to fool anyone with a fake 6 dollar bill. His modus operandi is to mix a small amount of error with a lot of truth so that those who lack Holy Spirit discernment will be ensnared. Like mixing a little arsenic in a nice tall glass of OJ.

The Bible teaches that Jesus did NOT have a nature like the angels, but that "He Himself ALSO, LIKEWISE took part in the SAME flesh" as we have. What kind of flesh do we have? Perfect flesh? No, fallen flesh. Jesus had a nature that was identical to ours, yet He sinned not once because of His close relationship with the Father.

What does the Antichrist teach? That MARY was perfect (Immaculate Conception) which is NOWHERE in Scripture, and that the combined perfect Mary and perfect Holy Spirit produced a Jesus that was DIFFERENT from us and this DIFFERENCE is why we need the mediation of MARY, as per the one you call Mother Theresa claims, "No Mary, no Jesus" and why the Catholic church says, "As no one comes to the Father but by the Son, no one comes to the Son but by Mary."

Yes, the Antichrist denies that Jesus came in the flesh, just like John says it would.