The Coming Great Apostasy

[Phoneman777]

It's WAY BEYOND the papacy etc.
Listen- every person who hath NOT the Holy Spirit of God, IS none of His. Rom. 8:9
Therefore, for all who do NOT HAVE the Holy Spirit, they " remain" to be "the natural man" , "that man of sin, the son of perdition (destruction is their reward).
See John 3:18 about who is condemned and who is not, and why!

No, the "man of sin, the son of perdition" is specifically a system that would be held down by a specific restraining power (Pagan Rome), arise at a specific time (after Pagan Rome was taken out of the way), and sit down in the temple of God (exalt its authority over the church), show himself that he is God (by falsely claiming to "take the place of Christ" and sit as "Jesus Christ, hidden under the veil of flesh", etc.), and war against God and His saints until the time of Christ's return.

No single dude could have arisen way back after the fall of Pagan Rome and continued all the way down to the Judgment...but papal Rome has fulfilled every single identifying mark of this Antichrist system, as the Reformers correctly reasoned.

 

[Phoneman777]

Book, chapter and verse, please. Interestingly, Judas is never recorded as calling Jesus "Lord" like the other disciples. He seems to refer to Jesus as, "rabbi".

Doesn't the Bible mention "the disciples" or "His disciples" collectively when referring to their accomplishments by miraculous power? I'm sure I could find examples if I looked. As far as I know, there's no mention of anything like "and the disciples - EXCEPT JUDAS - went about healing all manner of sickness and disease..."

Matthew 10:5-8 seems to suggest Judas did some miracle working. I think the others would have become suspicious if he didn't.

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

Doesn't the Bible mention "the disciples" or "His disciples" collectively when referring to their accomplishments by miraculous power? I'm sure I could find examples if I looked. As far as I know, there's no mention of anything like "and the disciples - EXCEPT JUDAS - went about healing all manner of sickness and disease..."

Why would it say that even though "one of them was a devil"? John 6:70 It is clear that Judas wasn't fooling John at all.

 

[CoreIssue]

So are you saying that you do select the JW bible over the KJV?
Yes, please continue listening to the "scholarly learned religious" (aka Pharisees) and ignore what God says in Isa. 55:8-9; John 16:13.

I select the NIV over both.

 

[Earburner]

They were, in my opinion, beast systems but they were symbolized by fantastical creatures--therefore, appropriate to use the pronoun "he".

Correct! Please notice also that " the false Prophet" is also of the masculine gender. And is described as "he" , which clearly defines it to not be a church or churches.
If then masculine, it is a beast, a worldly empire! Namely the 2 Horned beast, who had two horns LIKE a lamb (depicting youth) and "he" SPAKE as a dragon (deceptively).

 

[Earburner]

I select the NIV over both.

But NIV is synonymous with the JW bible, whereas the KJV is not.

 

[CoreIssue]

But NIV is synonymous with the JW bible, whereas the KJV is not.

Absurd and false statement.

 

[Earburner]

Why would it say that even though "one of them was a devil"? John 6:70 It is clear that Judas wasn't fooling John at all.

Correct! Everyone who is not of faith in the Lord Jesus,
is "condemned already",
is "a child of the devil",
is "the natural man",
is "that man of sin",
is "the son of perdition",
is "none of his".

 

[Earburner]

Absurd and false statement.

How so?
Both the NIV and the JW are translated from the Greek text of "Westcott & Hort".
The KJV is not!

 

[CoreIssue]

They really messed up the NIV with the most recent edition. You have to go to the previous edition to get the better one. The old NIV is especially good at translating the Hebrew from the OT. I have a Jewish-Christian friend who says that the NIV reads the most like the Hebrew. I agree that the NASB is the best Greek to English translation--or so my Greek Cypriot friend says. But, for narrative flow, you would need to go to a "dynamic" translation, like the NLT.

I only use the old NIV. That gender neutral version is an abomination. Same as with the other bibles that produced gender neutral versions.

The NIV vs NASB is preference, not accuracy..

 

[CoreIssue]

How so?
Both the NIV and the JW are translated from the Greek text of "Westcott & Hort".
The KJV is not!

Betty
That is false. The end of the NWT was written 20 years before the NIV.

 

[Phoneman777]

The word "wax" in the English language also means "to increase in strength"- "to wax and wane"- Antiochus desired to increase in strength, to the point of "exceeding (beyond) great"

The phrase "exceeding great" is not a "direction of growth", it is a destination achieved.

 

[Phoneman777]

Why would it say that even though "one of them was a devil"? John 6:70 It is clear that Judas wasn't fooling John at all.

God often speaks of things that are not yet as though they were, so since Jesus knew he would betray him, this may be another case of that, which allows for Judas to be included among the 12 as belonging to Christ but eventually falling away in apostasy.

 

[Earburner]

To "wax" means to "grow", so if someone says a tree "grew" 10 feet tall, it doesn't mean it started growing and stretched its limbs to gather as much sunlight as possible but only reached 6 feet -- it means the thing achieved 10 feet, right or wrong?

The little horn "waxed" (or "grew") to the height of "exceeding great", as much as that tree achieved 10 feet.

OK. But how about this:
Antiochus, as a king, sought to achieve the height of exceeding (beyond) great, through his campaigns against his enemies. It's not that he reached his goal, but rather he attempted to do so.

 

[Copperhead]

That Day will come upon everyone the whole world over

Indeed! Those that remain on the earth and are not hidden from that time as per the Prophets, King David, and Paul at least. I follow the example of the Bereans in Acts. They relied on the OT to see if what Paul taught them was true. There are many, many passages in the OT that allude to a removal and protection of the righteous before all these things come upon the earth.

There is a definite allusion to something unique about those referred to as "on the earth" or "earth dwellers". it is a condemnation. The best example is Yeshua and the woman caught in the act of adultery. The religious leaders that brought her and tested Yeshua is in focus. Yeshua wrote in the earth, but John didn't say what it was. Well, there is quite a bit there.

It is the day after the feast of tabernacles as mentioned in John 7. This is a special day called Simchat Torah. The high priest would take "living water' from the pool of Siloam and offer it at the temple alter.

So now we can know what Yeshua wrote in the ground when these religious leaders confronted Yeshua about the adulterous woman. He wrote the names of those guys who confronted Him in the ground, these guys had forsaken the fount of living water, Yeshua, at the time of the "living water" being offered at the temple.

Jeremiah 17:13 O Lord, the hope of Israel,
All who forsake You shall be ashamed.
“Those who depart from Me
Shall be written in the earth,
Because they have forsaken the Lord,
The fountain of living waters.”

This goes back to who will go into the tribulation period. The scripture is replete that those who are the earth dwellers, on the earth, in the earth, etc will suffer that period. And throughout scripture, those that are called earth dwellers are those who are condemned. The Believers are never once referred to in scripture as earth dwellers.

King David, Isaiah, Jeremiah and many other locations give allusion to the righteous (both dead and living) being hidden and protected in the tabernacle of Yahweh during the calamities of the tribulation period. They didn't say "church" only because the mystery of the church had not been revealed to them.

And then it becomes an issue of what and who is the focus of the tribulation period. Scripture is clear about that also. And there is one unique and solitary condition that has to be met before Yeshua will return. And it has nothing to do with church, saints, etc. And the focus of the tribulation period is to bring about that event. Yeshua in Hosea said what it is and reiterated it in Matthew. Now go and study.

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

How so?
Both the NIV and the JW are translated from the Greek text of "Westcott & Hort".
The KJV is not!

It would be nice if someone would translate the KJV into the modern vernacular.

 

[Enoch111]

Erasmus, a a catholic, wrote the Textus Receptus.

This is a misleading statement by our resident *expert* on the *Catholic King James Bible*! (Erasmus is the whipping boy of all the enemies of the Textus Receptus and the King James Bible.)

So to set the record straight, and also ensure that CoreIssue stops posting UTTER NONSENSE, here are the facts.

1. Desiderius Erasmus -- for all intents and purposes -- was a Protestant at heart. Yet he remained a Catholic outwardly. As a Protestant, he lampooned the Catholic church mercilessly, as seen in The Praise of Folly. And he was a brilliant scholar whose friends were all Protestants.

2. Erasmus was the first Reformation scholar to edit and publish in 1516 the printed Greek New Testament from a small group of manuscripts (which we now know faithfully reflected the Traditional or Byzantine Greek text which is backed by THE MAJORITY of extant manuscripts). His first edition was done in haste because he was competing with the Catholic Complutensian Polyglott (1522) in order to become the first printed Greek text. Therefore it had many typographical errors (which were subsequently corrected). But Erasmus systematically improved his text through five successive editions (until 1535). Also Erasmus was introduced to the corrupt Codex Vaticanus by Sepulvida, but rejected it. However scholars in the 19th century made this ancient and corrupt manuscript their idol, and replaced the Textus Receptus (TR)with their critical texts, Westcott & Hort being the chief culprits (1881).

3. But there were other scholars who were also working on the printed Greek NT for over 100 years at which time it became the printed Textus Receptus. Therefore Erasmus is NOT credited with the Textus Receptus (Received Text) as such. His was the first in a series of editions by several others. Robert Estienne (Stephanus) worked on four editions of the TR between 1546 and 1551. His 1550 edition is generally regarded as the Textus Receptus, and forms the basis of the King James Bible New Testament. After him Theodore Beza took the text of Stephanus and worked on nine editions between 1565 and 1604. Following Beza, The Elzevir brothers printed seven editions of the Greek NT between 1624 and 1678. And it was their edition of 1633 in which the term "Textus Receptus" was found in Latin.

The TR of the King James Bible is itself a slightly modified version of that of Stephanus (1550) as seen in Scrivener's TR (1894), which is a replica of the actual Greek Text of the KJV. The variations among all these editions of the TR are minor (less than 100).

Does the Textus Receptus faithfully represent the MAJORITY of Greek manuscripts (those which have been actually collated)? Absolutely. Dean John William Burgon, (an outstanding conservative textual scholar of the 19th century, and recognized at the time as a true conservative Christian scholar) published several books relating to this, which conclusively show that the King James Bible has the true text of the New Testament.

 

[Phoneman777]

OK. But how about this:
Antiochus, as a king, sought to achieve the height of exceeding (beyond) great, through his campaigns against his enemies. It's not that he reached his goal, but rather he attempted to do so.

If someone says "the tree grew 10 feet" you would not in a million years interpret that to mean anything else but this: the tree was previously 10 feet shorter but it grew 10 feet to the height it is now.

The Little Horn "grew exceeding great" meaning it was previously less than exceeding great but it grew to the exceeding greatness that it is now. Antiochus the Chump cannot ever be confused with having ever achieved such status when compared to "very great" Greece or "great" Medo-Persia.

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

God often speaks of things that are not yet as though they were, so since Jesus knew he would betray him, this may be another case of that, which allows for Judas to be included among the 12 as belonging to Christ but eventually falling away in apostasy.

Or it could be that Jesus knew Judas did not have faith in Him.

 

[Earburner]

If someone says "the tree grew 10 feet" you would not in a million years interpret that to mean anything else but this: the tree was previously 10 feet shorter but it grew 10 feet to the height it is now.

The Little Horn "grew exceeding great" meaning it was previously less than exceeding great but it grew to the exceeding greatness that it is now. Antiochus the Chump cannot ever be confused with having ever achieved such status when compared to "very great" Greece or "great" Medo-Persia.

The problem here is the word "waxed" is in the past tense, and "exceeding" is in the present tense.
He desired to go beyond being great.