Conclusion From Beware the Pseudo-Rapture Doctrine 4

I was using a text that someone else quoted and asked him why he didn't understand the verse to be referring to a time it was referring to?

If I'm remembering your question correctly, it had to do with whether or not Dan9:27 is past (from our perspective) or yet future.

Here's a very brief take on how I see it (and have put in past posts).


Dan9:[24],25-27 is written SEQUENTIALLY.

So, here's how that sequence goes (bearing in mind that this time-prophecy concerns "THY [Daniel's] people" and "THY [Daniel's] holy city"):

--v.25 a specified time period "FROM... UNTO the Messiah the Prince" (concluded on the very day that Jesus RODE into Jerusalem on the animal [Zech9:9] and SAID what He did [Lk19:41-44; also SAID in Matt22:7 and three or so verses in His Olivet Discourse, plus SAID in Lk21:12-24a,b]--BOTH of these passages in bold [and the related ones] having to do with "the city [/ Jerusalem]"--This ["rode" and "said"] occurred on what we call "Palm Sunday"... the very day, according to Ex12:3,5,6, they would SELECT a LAMB and examine it for 4 days... so this is shortly before He is put to death later that very same week);

--v.26a "shall he be CUT OFF and have nothing [or as some versions have it, 'but not for himself']"--His rejection (trials) and His death on the CROSS (see also Jer11:19 ["CUT him OFF"--"like a lamb to the slaughter"] and the posts I've made regarding this);

--[THEN, after that] v.26b "the people OF [the prince THAT SHALL come]" shall destroy the city and the sanctuary" (the things Jesus "SAID" would happen--re: the events surrounding 70ad)... and "desolaTIONS [plural] are determined" (this part is what continues on... "desolationS [plural]"... similar to Lk21:24b,c);

--v.27a "he" links back to v.26b's "the prince THAT SHALL COME" (these capitalized words are unnecessary and superfluous IF this is referring back to the same person in v.25; just saying "the prince" [already referenced] suffices... but this is showing a DISTINCTION, by adding this phrase "[the prince] THAT SHALL COME [/COMING]"<--this also connects 1Jn's saying, "YE HAVE HEARD [commonly used to refer back to OT things] that antichrist IS COMING"); The first item in v.27a speaks of confirming a covenant "FOR ONE WEEK [7 yrs]" (that's not what Jesus did);



Well... I had much more... but I did say I would try to make this BRIEF ( )... so I won't go into the CONNECTIONS I see between Dan9:27a,b,c (which spans a "7 year period") and what Paul says with regard to "the man of sin" in 2Th2 which CONNECTS to each of those [3] points in Dan9:27 [time-wise / sequence-wise]... I have that info in many past posts.

Hope that helps you see my perspective on this Subject... (was trying not to make this post be too cumbersome... =] )

Im really having a hard time with this foolishness.

Dan9:[24],25-27 is written SEQUENTIALLY

^ My apologies if my post was too lengthy / detailed. ( @Cameron143 's Post #463)



I guess I could have just said the part...



... and left it at that, while handing you the wrench for you to try to figure out what I meant by that. lol



I figured by only saying that much, it might lead to some questions in your mind (about our viewpoint), so I figured I'd supply a little bit of "explanation" along with it, so you could at least "see" my reasoning. = )

(I still have my copy of "88 reasons that the rapture will happen in 1988) It PROVES BIBLICALLY that 1988 will be the end - oops -

The antichrist is revealed by him going to the temple of God and proclaiming himself as God.


Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4


This occurs in the middle of the week.


Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;
But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate.”
Daniel 9:27




JPT

justpassinthrough said:
The antichrist is revealed by him going to the temple of God and proclaiming himself as God.

Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4

Assuming your interpretation is correct, there is no evidence of a pretrib rapture in these verse.

She began “speaking in tongues” several months after her initial revelation, which supports the conclusion that her source of “inspiration” was not the Spirit of God. God is not the Author of confusion, or phony “tongues”

except you say that day shall come ... you believe the rap can happen any time, any second from now ... you prolly believe it is the next great event to take place.

except you say that day shall come ... you believe the rap can happen any time, any second from now ... you prolly believe it is the next great event to take place.

I'm going to take Paul's advice and not allow myself to be deceived.

If Paul vewied the "rapture" as the next event for the church, he only had to tell us;
Don't worry, You can't miss The Day of The Lord, because the harpazo will happen first.

He didn't write "the harpazo will happen first. He wrote "the man of lawlessness is revealed first.
He didn't write that it would be separate from The Day of The Lord.

2 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us – whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter – asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

Paul is giving us a warning about false teachings on this subject. Obviously, false teachers were active then as they are now.
His counsel is not to let anyone deceive us in any way. We should not be deceived by this new pretrib rapture philosophy where
everything The Bible teaches about the return of Jesus is contradicted & turned backwards.


There isn't a "rapture" prior to Jesus' second coming. Paul has written straightforwardly that the next thing to expect was
relief when Jesus comes again in vengeance and glory.

6 since it is just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you 7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted, along with us. This will take place at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels, 8 when he takes vengeance with flaming fire on those who don’t know God and on those who don’t obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will pay the penalty of eternal destruction from the Lord’s presence and from his glorious strength 10 on that day when he comes to be glorified by his saints and to be marveled at by all those who have believed, because our testimony among you was believed. ~2 Thess 1

I'm going to take Paul's advice and not allow myself to be deceived.



2 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us – whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter – asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

The only way these 3 verses can be THOUGHT to say what JPT thinks they say, is by doing what JPT is doing in this text:


--by mis-defining "that Day" (v.3)... incorrectly substituting "rapture" in place of that [phrase];

--by SMOOSHING TOGETHER "revealed" with "SO THAT he sits as God in the temple of God" ideas (as though they occur together at the same time), whilst completely LEAVING OUT a vital part of the sentence

... and then DEDUCING from there that it is saying our RAPTURE [wrong word] won't happen till [after] he "sits in the temple..." (when JPT *ASSUMES* this text is saying he's "revealed"--it's not, though.)

Isn't this passage specifically talking about Jesus 2nd coming and not the rapture?

I don't see how that has anything to do with his argument.

Verse 3a's "that Day" refers grammatically to that which the IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING verse was speaking of (in the "false claim" that it "is present / is already here" v.2), which is the matter of "the Day of the Lord"... the earthly-located time-period that is KICKED OFF by:

the FIRST SEAL (rider on wht horse WITH BOW) / the FIRST "birth PANG" Jesus listed ("G5100 - 'A CERTAIN ONE" [bringing deception]) / the "whose COMING / ARRIVAL / ADVENT / PRESENCE / PAROUSIA" of the "man of sin" "IN HIS TIME" (2Th2:9a,6) / "king" of Dan11:36-37 & Dan7 ('[ye have heard] that antichrist is COMING') / Dan9:27a's "he" ('the prince that SHALL COME') to kick off that confirming of the covenant "FOR ONE WEEK [7yrs]"--what we commonly call "the 7-yr Tribulation Period"--a time-period of JUDGMENTs unfolding upon the earth OVER SOME TIME...

... again, it is NOT merely "a singular 24-hr day" (the 24-hr day of Christ's Second Coming to the earth Rev19), and what Paul says in 1Th5:3 PROVES it

He didn't write "the harpazo will happen first. He wrote "the man of lawlessness is revealed first.

If Paul vewied the "rapture" as the next event for the church, he only had to tell us;
Don't worry, You can't miss The Day of The Lord, because the harpazo will happen first.

Don't worry, You can't miss The Day of The Lord, because the harpazo will happen first.

[I changed up the order of these quotes so I could address this part first ^ ]


In the text, the word "first" does NOT hook up with the clause about "the man of sin be revealed".

It is instead connected to the clause preceding that one.


Yes, it makes a difference.



Recall, I've pointed out how Paul uses a VARIETY of terms and phrases (when covering that particular Subject) in his two epistles to the Thessalonians [not to mention, elsewhere].

--the word "harpagēsometha [G726] (used only once) is a VERB ("will be caught away/up" VERB), so it's not REQUIRED that he use this specific VERB here in 2Th2:3 (no definite article, by the way--tho I think it's fine when WE refer to this as an event going to take place), as he doesn't use "G726" in verse 1, though we KNOW that THAT NOUN used there (tho a diff word) SPEAKS TO IT.


Plus, regarding the part I'll bold in your quote, below:



He is not saying, "you can't MISS it,"....

Rather, he is conveying that "the Day of the Lord" (which the "false claim" said "IS PRESENT/IS ALREADY HERE [perfect indicative]") will NOT be present unless / until / "if not shall have come" ONE THING *FIRST* (i.e. His v.1 Subject that he's BRINGING TO BEAR on that "false claim" (v.2) and its "troubling" effects on their minds--in essence, freaking them out [lol] and causing them to eliminate their "HOPE" as indicated by Paul leaving that word off [in this 2nd epistle] of the TRIO [re: their 'faith' 'love/charity' 'hope'] he had intro'd his FIRST letter to them, using).



Paul is NOT saying "YOU CAN'T MISS the Day of the Lord" (He's NOT referring to Christ's Second Coming, here)... he's conveying the fact that it is NOT TRUE "that the Day of the Lord is present" (v.2) coz ONE THING must take place "FIRST" (the Subject PAUL is bringing, per v.1)

[so... instead... it WON'T BE PRESENT (i.e. to unfold upon the earth!) unless / until...]




... and he REPEATS this SEQUENCE 3x in this text (agreeing with the SEQUENCE in his previous epistle to them; not to mention the SAME SEQUENCE disclosed in all other related passages covering this Subject)