- This topic is empty.
- Posts
The Lord continues to amaze me with his word. He opened something up to me that is such a blessing. It shook me to my very soul. I hope you all enjoy it as much as I did. It makes allot of sense. I have read this scripture so many times before. I believe the Lord has revealed it's meaning to me. I ask all of you for your comments. I believe this to be true.
2 Thess. 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
When I read this, the Holy Spirit reminded me of things I have been told already through the spirit. How the Catholic Church did away with the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and speaking and tongues and gifts of the spirit. I believe this is the falling away it is talking about. And the man it is talking about is not one man, but a type of man. A breed of men. If you look in verse 10, it says:
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
In this verse, I believe it is telling how they will take the Holy
Spirit from the church.7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
As to what this man of sin looks like. I believe the answer is
found in 2 Tim. 32 Timothy 3 KJV
1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters,
proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers,
incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers
of God;5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from
such turn away.6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead
captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the
truth.Quote (heiscomingintheclouds @ Aug. 04 2006,18:12) The Lord continues to amaze me with his word. He opened something up to me that is such a blessing. It shook me to my very soul. I hope you all enjoy it as much as I did. It makes allot of sense. I have read this scripture so many times before. I believe the Lord has revealed it's meaning to me. I ask all of you for your comments. I believe this to be true. 2 Thess. 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
When I read this, the Holy Spirit reminded me of things I have been told already through the spirit. How the Catholic Church did away with the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and speaking and tongues and gifts of the spirit. I believe this is the falling away it is talking about. And the man it is talking about is not one man, but a type of man. A breed of men. If you look in verse 10, it says:
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
In this verse, I believe it is telling how they will take the Holy
Spirit from the church.7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
As to what this man of sin looks like. I believe the answer is
found in 2 Tim. 32 Timothy 3 KJV
1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters,
proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers,
incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers
of God;5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from
such turn away.6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead
captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the
truth.
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=5;t=140;st=110i go in to detail on that verse you mentioned. I think you will find this very interesting.
This was a post I replied to You about under the “Other Writings” section. It was under the subject of Enoch. You were sharing with me your stand on the king james version. I don't think you must have saw the post. It is interesting you also bring up this same verse. The very verse i was using to demonstrate how Christians relying 100% on an english translation as being perfect and not referencing the original language can misunderstand the message.
The link in the previous post was to this post. Also I have provided a link to an online strong's concordance so you can look up my work. Simply copy and then paste the link into your address bar and hit return.
This is the Post I had made and was trying to direct you to below:
———————————————————–
I stand with ya on God's word being infallable, but I don't quite get what scripture and verse you have that says the KJV of 1611 is an inspired translation. I love the KJV, but I don't think the translators were inspired.
The doctrine of preservation of God's word, I whole hardedly agree with. I just don't believe that the preserving has taken place in the manner that KJV purists hold to. I believe in the inspired writ of the original manuscripts and their preservation throughout time til (via copying) our current day. I can't find any scriptural teaching that future translators will be without error.
The New Testament is the most accurate and preserved document we have in existance. We have 5600 complete copies of ancient New Testaments and thousands of more fragments and documentary evidence. I call that preservation!!!
I use the KJV as my hardcore study bible because it is a word for word translation and because of the Strong's concordance. The Thee's and Thou's are actually useful, unbeknownst to many, since it helps distinguish who is being spoken to our about, whether in the singular or plural tense. I love the english of that time period it was probably at it's most pure then.
I am sure you have been hit over the head with the 1 John 5:7 verse before, but I think it needs another bonk, I hit lightly.
However, I find that most all translations have errors. Thats why i feel it is important to reference the original language myself.
Case in point for most all translations:
2 Thessalonians 2:7
The famous “taken out of the way” verse that leads to the false teaching of the rapture. Should be translated “until it comes out of the midst”.ginemai (1096) it comes
ek (1537) out of
mesou (3319,3326) the midsthttp://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html (online strongs)
look up each word to check me
In my Strong's concordance, there are 709 instances of verses containing Strong's number 1096, ginomai. Out of these 709 occurences, the word is translated as “taken” only one time by the King James translators, and that's in our study verse, 2 Thessalonians 2:7. Why they translated it this way I don't know because the REAL GREEK WORDS for “taken” and “way” ARE NOT LISTED IN THE VERSE. Yet, “taken out of the way” is used in quite a number of Bible translations besides the KJV. Those who use this phrase mention the phrase “until it comes out of the midst,” but then always use the phrase “taken out of the way.” What we have heard for years is that something is removed or “taken out of the way,” and that has been variously applied to the removal of a restrainer, such as the rapture of the Church before the tribulation, the Holy Spirit, and good government. Green's translation paints a totally different picture. I believe it is right because of the 709-1 ratio. What “until it comes out of the midst” means is that something comes to be, it becomes, or is birthed out of the midst of something else. In this case, the full-fledged apostasy would come on the scene out of the working of lawlessness, its secret goal. Notice the definitions for genomai. Its various shades of meaning point to something that comes into existence, begins to be, or receives being; something arises and so appears in history, coming upon the world stage, etc. The idea and implication of something being “taken away” or “being removed” is not present at all in this section of the verse. In fact, it depicts the opposite: it becomes and remains, i.e., until the Lord returns in the day of the Lord.
In HIM
What you posted is interesting. Thank you Mercy. It does go along with the understanding the Lord gave me through the unction of the Holy Spirit as to when the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was removed from the church.
I believe the time that this occurred was when the Catholic church changed the way of the baptisms and stopped the practices of the gifts of the spirit. The Lord had pressed this on my heart, but it wasn't until recently that he opened my eyes to 2 Thess. 2. And with this scripture, it solidified what he was trying to tell me in the spirit.
Something else to mention is the early and latter rain. It makes much more sense now. The early church had the Holy Spirit, then the Holy Spirit was taken away, and then at the end of the Church age, the latter days, the Holy Spirit is restored within the church.
As for reguarding 1 John 5:7, you have arguments both ways. I believe that there is more proof that supports it's validity then not. And the majoritiy text KJ bible is it's biggest supported since it complies with doctrine and not the contrary. I will post an article that supports this verse.
1 John 5:7: The Johannine “Comma”
© 1997 by T.L. Hubeart Jr.——————————————————————————–
1Jn. 5:7 (KJV) For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
——————————————————————————–
The underlined words are the famous “Johannine comma.” It is sometimes erroneously asserted that this text originated close to the time of Erasmus. However, the UBS Greek NT (4th ed.) notes that the “comma” is attested by the Latin church fathers Cyprian (d. 258), Pseudo-Cyprian (4th century), Priscillian (d. 385), the Speculum (5th century), Varimadum (UBS date “445/480”), Pseudo-Vigilius (4th or 5th century), and Fulgentius (d. 533), as well as a few manuscripts.
Cyprian's reference (in Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 5, Treatise 1, paragraph 6) deserves quotation in full. I have highlighted the citation of this verse:The spouse of Christ cannot be adulterous; she is uncorrupted and pure. She knows one home; she guards with chaste modesty the sanctity of one couch. She keeps us for God. She appoints the sons whom she has born for the kingdom. Whoever is separated from the Church and is joined to an adulteress, is separated from the promises of the Church; nor can he who forsakes the Church of Christ attain to the rewards of Christ. He is a stranger; he is profane; he is an enemy. He can no longer have God for his Father, who has not the Church for his mother. If any one could escape who was outside the ark of Noah, then he also may escape who shall be outside of the Church. The Lord warns, saying, “He who is not with me is against me, and he who gathereth not with me scattereth.” He who breaks the peace and the concord of Christ, does so in opposition to Christ; he who gathereth elsewhere than in the Church, scatters the Church of Christ. The Lord says, “I and the Father are one;” and again it is written of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, “And these three are one.” And does any one believe that this unity which thus comes from the divine strength and coheres in celestial sacraments, can be divided in the Church, and can be separated by the parting asunder of opposing wills? He who does not hold this unity does not hold God's law, does not hold the faith of the Father and the Son, does not hold life and salvation.
In discussing the “Comma” on pp. 60-2 of his book The King James Only Controversy, James White does not mention any of the patristic testimonies; instead, he makes the following amazing statements:. . . If indeed the Comma was a part of the original writing of the apostle John, we are forced to conclude that entire passages, rich in theological meaning, can disappear from the Greek manuscript tradition without leaving a single trace. In reality, the KJV Only advocate is arguing for a radical viewpoint on the New Testament text, a viewpoint that utterly denies the very tenacity that we discussed in chapter 3. Even “liberal” scholars will admit the outstanding purity of the NT text and the validity of the belief in the tenacity of that text . . . . (p. 62; emphasis White's.)
Well, for 1 John 5:7 we have already seen the “trace” appearing as early as the 3rd century in the church fathers. But White presumably knows this, which is why (without disclosing the whole truth of the matter) he restricts the witness for this passage to “the Greek manuscript tradition.” But this glosses over the fact that we have a reading at 1 Jn. 5:7 attested to by Cyprian in the third century (bear in mind, in comparison, that the codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, so esteemed by modern scholars as “ancient authorities,” date from the fourth century), seemingly dropping out of the manuscript tradition for 1,000 years and only resurfacing in Erasmus' time!It is only too clear that the mythical “tenacity” of White (for which see his book, p. 48; basically it is an alleged preservation of Greek textual readings–apparently without the Holy Spirit's intervention, since He is not mentioned) must give way to the facts here. Since we know that there are variant NT readings that have not come down to us in any Greek MSS, and others that are only in very late ones (cf. Wilbur Pickering, The Identity of the New Testament Text, rev. ed. , pp. 214-5, footnote 5 to ch. 4; the application of Pickering's comments to this context is solely mine), it seems odd that White would claim that New Testament readings do not “disappear.” That some of these variants are the result of deliberate alterations is evident from certain citations of the church fathers (especially Tertullian, who went so far as to say that the Marcionites “are daily retouching their work, as daily they are convicted by us” [Against Marcion, Book IV, ch. 5]). Given that the “Comma,” whether or not it is authentic, is the clearest notice in the New Testament of the Oneness of the Three Persons of the Trinity, it would not be hard to envision a scenario in which this passage was authentic but was removed by those who disbelieved in the Trinity.
White considers this a “radical viewpoint” on this verse, but it was clearly embraced by the translators of the Geneva Bible and KJV. For, although Tyndale had placed the debated passage in italics and parentheses, both Geneva and the KJV offer not a shred of doubt in their presentations of this passage (either in the main text or the margin) that it was in the original manuscript of the apostle John. In doing so, one surmises that they felt that, in the words of Thomas Scott, it was–
. . . somewhat more likely that the Arians or Anti-Trinitarians [in the early church] should silently omit in their copies a testimony which was so decisive against them, or that it should be left out by the mistake of some ancient transcriber, than that the Trinitarians should directly forge and insert it. The Trinitarian, in fact, would be deprived only of one argument out of very many, with which he might attempt the conviction of his opponent, if this text were wholly regarded as spurious; for his doctrine is supported by other Scriptures: but if this testimony were admitted as the unerring word of GOD; all the ingenuity and diligence of opponents, would scarcely suffice to explain it away, or to avoid the inference, which must naturally be drawn from it.
In other words, the Geneva and KJV men presumably felt that such an omission was made to grind a “doctrinal axe” in the early days of the church, and that the original text read with the passage included. In fact, John Wesley accused the Roman Emperor Julian (“the Apostate”) of “erasing this text out of as many copies as fell into his hands” in order to promote Arianism (Sermon 55, “On the Trinity”)! Whatever we may think of Wesley's identification of the culprit, a clear motive for the “erasing this text” appears from Scott's remarks above.And what of the sense of the passage? The Geneva Bible (1599 ed.) offers the following:
Hee prooueth the excellencie of Christ, in whom onely all things are giuen vs[,] by sixe witnesses, three heauenly, and three earthly, which wholly and fully agree together. The heauenly witnesses are: the Father who sent the Sonne, the worde it selfe which became flesh, and the holy Ghost. The earthly witnesses are, water, (that is our sanctification) blood, (that is our iustification) the Spirit, (that is, acknowled[ging] of God the Father in Christ by faith through the testimonie of the holy Ghost.)
In other words, we are justified by Christ's blood, we are sanctified by obeying His command to be baptized, and we receive the indwelling of the Spirit, and these “earthly witnesses” prove that Jesus is the Son of God. Furthermore, we have the heavenly Witnesses, who all testified of Him during His time on earth: the Fa
ther (Matt. 3:17, 17:5, Jn. 12:28), the Spirit (Matt. 3:16), and most of all the Son in dying and rising again. It would be more than strange, in my opinion, to think of John writing the present passage without the so-called “Comma,” given the fact that Father (Jn. 5:31-32, 37), Son (Jn. 5:36), and Spirit (Jn. 15:26) all have an ongoing role in bearing witness of the Christ.Those who wish to find it a “radical viewpoint” to accept a text whose external evidence is so ancient, and whose internal evidence is so compelling, may do as they please. For my own part, I find the text to be worthy of all acceptation.
Dear Nick,
I posted it here because I believe it is complimentory to this post also.
Please hear my explaination.
When the apostles died, the church prospered and spread throughout the civilized world. The Romans, no matter how hard they tried could not stop the spread of Christianity. It was then an emporer of Rome claimed he had a vision and that he had became saved. For one thing, the vision he claimed in itself is spurious in my opinion.
I believe it was just a ploy. If you examine what happened as time progressed, the influence of christianity was used to expunge money and create war in the name of religion. The called themselves the Holy Roman Empire. I do not believe that the Roman Empire has ever ceased to exist, but has hid as the son of perdition, behind the catholic church.
This church is responsible for changing the baptisms that was set up by the apostles. They stopped the baptism of the Holy Ghost which rendered the church powerless, by taking the gifts of the spirit from the church. These gifts were given to the church to help the growth and edification of the bride of Christ in the faith.
As for 1 John 5:7, I believe the same people responsible for the trinity doctrine and filling the church with paganistic practices and rituals of men are the same who created misinformation stating that this verse is spurious. I will continue to search for the proof and I believe the Lord will help me find it.
With the corruption and changing of the baptisms as according to how it was suppose to be done and was done by the early church as proven in scripture, the catholic church caused the power that was given to the Church through the baptism of the Holy Spirit to disappear from the church by preventing the actual baptism the way it was suppose to be done.
The catholic church in turn started the belief that the gifts of the spirit had ceased from the church with the death of the apostles. Their argument was that the gifts of the spirit was given to the early church for the formation of the early church.
Hi H,
Is this how you find truth?believe something
believe you are inspired to have reached such a conclusion
Search the scriptures to prove yourself right?“As for 1 John 5:7, I believe the same people responsible for the trinity doctrine and filling the church with paganistic practices and rituals of men are the same who created misinformation stating that this verse is spurious. I will continue to search for the proof and I believe the Lord will help me find it.”
I call it the unction of the Holy Spirit. All who have it, will recognize it.
The Lord gave me the post on 2 Thess. 2. I don't believe there is a man alive that can say this is not true. Unless they are of the Sons of Perdition, in which case, I could see why they would want to deny it. Because it exposes them for who they really are and shows what they have done.
2 Thess. 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Hi H,
And the ways we test the Spirit are according to the Word and according to the reflection we receive from those in Christ.
No man stands alone in Christ.
All share the Spirit.
None is pure light.On this I agree. It is for this reason I posted the words above.
I call it the unction of the Holy Spirit. All who have it, will recognize it.
For those who have the Holy Spirit in them will know and recognize the things of the spirit. Sometimes it does not happen all at once, for God opens eyes when he deems the person ready. It is his timetable. That is why some are on milk, and some on meat. God reveals to whom he pleases when he pleases.
I posted this by the unction of the Holy Spirit. It talks about how the Holy Spirit was removed from the church. Last night, the Holy Spirit gave me something to add so that it will be proven to all it comes from God.
Hebrews 6 KJV
1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
3 And this will we do, if God permit.
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
I believe that with these scriptures, the Lord has revealed the damage done to the church and exposed the ones responsible for the changing of the baptisms.
In Revelations, it speaks more on the son of perdition and I believe the secrets of the above prohetic message given from God can now be used to open the mystery in Revelations. I ask all my brothers and sisters to please read this again and pray and fast. Then read Revelatiions. For I believe the key to understanding Revelations may be found in the past, just as was 2 Thess. 2.
8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
Who is the son of perdition? I believe it is the Roman Empire. I believe that they have always been behind, hiding in the shadows of the catholic church. I believe that if it were not for hiding under the cloak of the Pope of Rome, the Roman Empire would not have survived, but because she disquised herself under the banner of religion, she managed to survive.
So is the ancient Roman Empire the son of perdition? I think so. I believe so. I see none other that fit the discription. Does anyone have any comments on the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition? Can anyone give a list of the empires that this could be referring to?
Rome is one of the heads of the beast and there have been many antichrists, but I would have thought that son of perdition was a person just as Judas Iscariot was.
Dear t8,
If you read in 2 Thess. 2, it says the son of perdition, but then in verse ten it speaks of many sons of perdition. I believe the son of perdition is a government and I believe the government if Rome. I believe that Rome took the disquise of the catholic church for two reasons.
1. To survive by going into hiding.
2. To control a movement that had grown out of their control and they blamed as the main reason for the fall of their empire. For if you examine their empire, much was being taken over by christianity, thus making Rome weak to enemies outside of their empire who where not christian.
Rome could not gather an army to fight. The Roman Empire almost vanished, but under the banner of the Holy Roman Empire, it gained new life.Quote (heiscomingintheclouds @ Aug. 16 2006,23:28) Dear t8, If you read in 2 Thess. 2, it says the son of perdition, but then in verse ten it speaks of many sons of perdition. I believe the son of perdition is a government and I believe the government if Rome. I believe that Rome took the disquise of the catholic church for two reasons.
1. To survive by going into hiding.
2. To control a movement that had grown out of their control and they blamed as the main reason for the fall of their empire. For if you examine their empire, much was being taken over by christianity, thus making Rome weak to enemies outside of their empire who where not christian.
Rome could not gather an army to fight. The Roman Empire almost vanished, but under the banner of the Holy Roman Empire, it gained new life.
Well Rome is Definitely involved.
Hiding in the Catholic church? I believe so.The word Catholic simply means “Universal”.
So instead or “holy roman 'Catholic' church”
Lets call it what it is: The Holy Roman Universal Church. Doesn't sound so holy with it's 'real' name
Much like the church of England
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
