What does 2 Thess 2:10-12 mean to you? (II)

[seanD]

Do you mean naturalist scientists? Scientists reject God in their "methodology" because God being in their "methodology" is pointless.
Many atheists are hostile about their being no God because of the way many theists try to introduce God into the world system...something that this particular theist is also hostile about.
One can say that accepting temporal reality (which is everything science deals with) as truth is a delusion..hey...wait a minute...that's what I say the verse is all about.
I am very bewildered at you saying very few scientists accept the biblical God. That one literally makes me want to bang my head on the floor. It's insane to say that.
And finally...would someone please explain to me what part of the Bible even remotely suggests that those who do not believe in God should be taking God seriously? I don't know how many times I've read the NT but it's a truckload...how many references are there in the NT regarding people who don't believe in God? How much did Jesus have to say about people not believing in God? Seriously...I'm with hedrick alot on biblical interpretation but of all the things that are interpreted as bad...not believing in God probably ranks somewhere lower than gluttony.

By the way, when I was playing football, God was not in my methodology of covering a wide receiver. There was a reason for that and no...I wasn't going to be asking God for help in covering the wide receiver.

Only reason why I'm really responding to your post is that I feel if I don't say something, your rantings will continue to steer this thread way off topic. I seriously doubt most Darwinists, natural scientists, naturalistic scientists, scientists of naturalism, whatever you want classify them as believe in a biblical God. Seriously doubt that. The few who do typically dwell in the IDer camp, and they definitely receive heaps of derision and scorn from the rest of the establishment and their secular peers for advocating it.

But back on topic, I'm not trying to make this a fight between TEers and creationists. I'm trying to gauge what Christians believe about 2 Thess 2:10-12. And being that Christians are a rather diverse lot, I'm trying to go about this from different angels, which is very difficult for obvious reasons. 2 Thess 2 declares that those who reject the truth will be given over to powerful delusion and believe a lie. We know the delusion is not their rejection of the truth or even a state of disbelief because their rejection was a prerequisite of the delusion or caused the delusion. I'm trying to find out what Christians believe this "truth" is and what this powerful delusion is.

[justsumguy]

I see it as we get what we choose to have and we get it in multiples of what we choose. If we choose to reject the love of truth, then we will have all the more delusion to choose from. In the same vein, if we choose to receive the love of truth, we will have all the more truth to love.

It runs into all facets of life...if I choose to be concerned about the things of tomorrow, it's not that I will be guaranteed more things to worry about, it's that I will see more "reason" to concerned.

Only reason why I'm really responding to your post is that I feel if I don't say something, your rantings will continue to steer this thread way off topic. I seriously doubt most Darwinists, natural scientists, naturalistic scientists, scientists of naturalism, whatever you want classify them as believe in a biblical God. Seriously doubt that. The few who do typically dwell in the IDer camp, and they definitely receive heaps of derision and scorn from the rest of the establishment and their secular peers for advocating it.

But back on topic, I'm not trying to make this a fight between TEers and creationists. I'm trying to gauge what Christians believe about 2 Thess 2:10-12. And being that Christians are a rather diverse lot, I'm trying to go about this from different angels, which is very difficult for obvious reasons. 2 Thess 2 declares that those who reject the truth will be given over to powerful delusion and believe a lie. We know the delusion is not their rejection of the truth or even a state of disbelief because their rejection was a prerequisite of the delusion or caused the delusion. I'm trying to find out what Christians believe this "truth" is and what this powerful delusion is.

The only reason I'm responding to your post is because due to what may be your perspective from your lofty perch, you never chose to respond to what this Christian believes about the verse. Just say it's too trivial a view for you and I'll be on my way.

[justsumguy]

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. (I prefer Young’s Literal Translation here of the day of Christ hath arrived).

I see the usual here from Paul, that Christ has come and that I am gathered together unto him and not to let anything sway me from the fact that Christ has arrived.

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;
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.

I see here that I am to not be deceived by anyone using any means into believing they are gathered unto Christ if they have not first fallen away and recognized that they are sons of perdition, the ones who are above love in their temple, showing that they are God.

Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

It’s pretty much what Paul is always saying.

And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

Paul has made many references as to what prevents some from revealing that they are sons of perdition.

For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
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:
Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. . ( I prefer Young’s Literal Translation here: because the love of the truth they did not receive for their being saved,)

It’s what Paul has gone over and over especially in Romans. The doctrine of not being dead to sin, not being risen and gathered to Christ will be alive and well until the son of perdition is fully revealed. Only then can he truly be destroyed with the brightness of his coming and only then can we truly be gathered unto Christ. They received not the truth for their salvation; they received and perpetuate a lie.

And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
(I prefer Young’s Literal Translation here and because of this shall God send to them a working of delusion, for their believing the lie, that they may be judged -- all who did not believe the truth, but were well pleased in the unrighteousness.)

They have believed a lie unto salvation. They want judgment – that’s what they will get. They are pleased to live with the unrighteous alive and kicking inside of them, they are pleased to go to war with the unrighteous everyday, their entire existence revolves around unrighteousness and their setting themselves up as being righteous. They cling to their inner man for their salvation.

But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Gotta love how it transitions from this supposedly mysterious cloud into Paul giving thanks again and mentioning sanctification and belief in truth that is the obtaining of my Lord Jesus Christ. What is the truth Paul is referring to?
The same one he always refers to…that through Christ, we are saved. The thing we need saving from is dead and buried and we are resurrected in Christ. Anything else is a lie.

I really like when one proceeds one finds Paul addressing work. It's not some mysterious work...it's the same sort of work I do everyday to earn my keep.

You don’t need to respond to this one. It's just my view and I realize it isn't on the same playing field you're looking for here.
I've said my piece and I'll leave the thread alone.

[justsumguy]

Do you deny a bodily future coming of Christ altogether, or do you just fail to find it in 2 Thessalonians?

To the best of my knowledge I have never said anything that would begin to suggest I don't believe in a bodily future coming of Christ and I certainly see how 2 Thessalonians could be speaking of such.

[RBerman]

To the best of my knowledge I have never said anything that would begin to suggest I don't believe in a bodily future coming of Christ and I certainly see how 2 Thessalonians could be speaking of such.

OK. Because your exegesis of 2 Thess 2 seemed to change Christ's future coming to be Christ's continuing presence through the church.

[justsumguy]

OK. Because your exegesis of 2 Thess 2 seemed to change Christ's future coming to be Christ's continuing presence through the church.

That would be because you are seeing 2 Thess 2 as speaking of Christ's future coming and I am seeing it as Christ's presence.
Keep em comin Berman.

[RBerman]

To the best of my knowledge I have never said anything that would begin to suggest I don't believe in a bodily future coming of Christ and I certainly see how 2 Thessalonians could be speaking of such.

That would be because you are seeing 2 Thess 2 as speaking of Christ's future coming and I am seeing it as Christ's presence.

I cannot reconcile these two statements. In the first one you say that 2 Thessalonians (presumably including chapter 2) does speak of the future coming of Christ. Then in the second statement you deny that very thing. Can you help me out here?

[justsumguy]

I cannot reconcile these two statements. In the first one you say that 2 Thessalonians (presumably including chapter 2) does speak of the future coming of Christ. Then in the second statement you deny that very thing. Can you help me out here?

Well...I guess it's because different people read different things. You seem to read what I don't say when you read what I write. Well...could be people do that with the Bible. Could be people see what they want to see or that God has something God wants to say to the individual.

I never said that 2 Thess. was speaking of the future coming of Christ. What is that...3 different things in a few sentences that you can't read literally? And you are a literal translation guy?

[RBerman]

OK. Let's talk about when you said, "To the best of my knowledge I have never said anything that would begin to suggest I don't believe in a bodily future coming of Christ and I certainly see how 2 Thessalonians could be speaking of such."

1) You never said you don't believe in the bodily future coming of Christ.
2) You certainly see how 2 Thessalonians could be speaking of a bodily future coming of Christ.

Are those true statements?

[justsumguy]

OK. Let's talk about when you said, "To the best of my knowledge I have never said anything that would begin to suggest I don't believe in a bodily future coming of Christ and I certainly see how 2 Thessalonians could be speaking of such."

1) You never said you don't believe in the bodily future coming of Christ.
2) You certainly see how 2 Thessalonians could be speaking of a bodily future coming of Christ.

Are those true statements?

Well...
1. I said to the best of my knowledge. I said anything that would begin to suggest.
But I'll help you out and say that I believe in a bodily future coming of Christ. I wouldn't make a creed out of that belief but I'm not into belief at this point in my life. My existence is not dependent on whether Jesus has a nose when he returns.
2. Yeah, could be.
If you have something to say...spit it out.

[justsumguy]

Science is absolutely based on philosophical presuppositions, which must be accepted prior to investigation.

That one is hilarious.
Guy sees an apple fall from a tree. Starts thinking about why it falls to earth from the limb. The guy thinks to himself...because God made it that way. Ok...but then the guy gets to thinking about the physical aspects involved. At that point, the guy isn't trying to prove that God did or did not make it that way. The guy simply starts dealing with the physical aspect.

Guy sees stars moving from here to there. Guy starts thinking about why the stars move from here to there. The guy thinks to himself...because God made it that way. Ok...but then the guy gets to thinking...

Pretty soon we are boarding a flight to Tokyo and watching satellite tv.
Hey! I love to wax philosophical but saying science is based on philosophical presuppositions is rather comical. Philosophical suppositions can definitely be useful to science but we all know what this is about…
If someone wants to study how things are “put” together…wonderful!!!! Study away. It’s really interesting. Then we find that this came from that. Wonderful!!! Study away. Answer every question there is to be asked. Science has figured it all out. Science has proven there is no God and science has committed suicide.
We are rid of both. Science has absolutely proven there is no God and there is nothing other than what science knows.
So…I wonder how long that’s going to take?

[RBerman]

Well...
1. I said to the best of my knowledge. I said anything that would begin to suggest.
But I'll help you out and say that I believe in a bodily future coming of Christ. I wouldn't make a creed out of that belief but I'm not into belief at this point in my life. My existence is not dependent on whether Jesus has a nose when he returns.
2. Yeah, could be.
If you have something to say...spit it out.

I'm just trying to understand what you believe. It seemed to me that you said 2 Thessalonians 2 was about the current presence of Christ, and not the future bodily return of Christ. That made me wonder if you interpreted the whole book, and perhaps the whole BIble, that way. So i asked, and you seemed to deny what you had just asserted. Now it sounds like you simply don't have a fixed opinion on the matter but are open to several different interpretations. Is that right?

[seanD]

That one is hilarious.
Guy sees an apple fall from a tree. Starts thinking about why it falls to earth from the limb. The guy thinks to himself...because God made it that way. Ok...but then the guy gets to thinking about the physical aspects involved. At that point, the guy isn't trying to prove that God did or did not make it that way. The guy simply starts dealing with the physical aspect.

Guy sees stars moving from here to there. Guy starts thinking about why the stars move from here to there. The guy thinks to himself...because God made it that way. Ok...but then the guy gets to thinking...

Pretty soon we are boarding a flight to Tokyo and watching satellite tv.
Hey! I love to wax philosophical but saying science is based on philosophical presuppositions is rather comical. Philosophical suppositions can definitely be useful to science but we all know what this is about…
If someone wants to study how things are “put” together…wonderful!!!! Study away. It’s really interesting. Then we find that this came from that. Wonderful!!! Study away. Answer every question there is to be asked. Science has figured it all out. Science has proven there is no God and science has committed suicide.
We are rid of both. Science has absolutely proven there is no God and there is nothing other than what science knows.
So…I wonder how long that’s going to take?

But that isn’t how it works. Guy #1 doesn’t say “Ok… but…” Guy #1 says… “Because God made it that way.” But then Guy #2 says… “We can’t accept that because it’s not falsifiable.” These days, Guy #2 will even become hostile and hurl scorn or ridicule at Guy #1 for even thinking of mentioning God in the equation. As a result, the very thought of God is excluded altogether, which then fulfills what Paul described in Romans 1:18-25. Guy #2 begins looking for mechanisms within nature itself for the origins of life (looks to the creation instead of the creator). The lines between God and naturalism become blurred until the former is overshadowed all together, thus Guy #2's ideology becomes centered more and more on naturalism. Because Guy #2 has insulted the creator in his efforts to evaluate nature, he then “becomes vain in his imagination and his foolish heart is darkened.” So his whole thinking and those of his peers becomes skewed. As he fools himself into thinking that he finds these mechanisms for our origins, he becomes more and more convinced that God is not needed in this equation. Now you can dismiss that interpretation of Romans 1, which I’m sure you will, but that is clearly what the scriptures are saying. This I believe becomes the slow festering that Paul describes in 2 Thess 2:9-10, where the self-deception from Romans 1:21-23 becomes an actual delusion, which then will finally result in the ultimate delusion of 2 Thess 2:12 that is to come, the delusion that God himself will send.

I’m trying to apply the reality of what you said to scripture and to get this subject back on topic.

And now the world worships science as an infallible marvel, and to question it or show suspicion of where it's heading automatically subjects you to much scorn and derision -- you're old fashioned, a fundamentalist religious kook, wackjob, paranoid, unintellectual, dangerous, a threat to reason and human progress, etc. -- and though it does not provide an epistemological truth now, this scenario is vastly changing as we're approaching this philosophy in human genetic engineering and transhumansim, where eventually it will give mankind a defined purpose for life, something for moderns to strive for that will far exceed the purpose given in the superstitious old religion of the bible.

[justsumguy]

I'm just trying to understand what you believe. It seemed to me that you said 2 Thessalonians 2 was about the current presence of Christ, and not the future bodily return of Christ. That made me wonder if you interpreted the whole book, and perhaps the whole BIble, that way. So i asked, and you seemed to deny what you had just asserted. Now it sounds like you simply don't have a fixed opinion on the matter but are open to several different interpretations. Is that right?

Nope. My sentences were pretty simple. Everything I say on this site is simple.
Here's the first verse...
KJV Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
YLT And we ask you, brethren, in regard to the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of our gathering together unto him
Here's the last part of the second verse...
KJV as that the day of Christ is at hand.
YLT as that the day of Christ hath arrived;
verse 16
KJV Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,
YLT and may our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and our God and Father, who did love us, and did give comfort age-during, and good hope in grace,
I think much of the Bible and much of our story runs parallel to itself.
I see 2 Thess. 2 as talking about the current presence of Christ and I see the same in much of the Bible.
I am open to you seeing it however you see it but I would invite you to look at it the way I see it. I can see how you would see it the way you do. I’ve seen that view presented, many, many, many, many, many, many, many times.

[justsumguy]

But that isn’t how it works. Guy #1 doesn’t say “Ok… but…” Guy #1 says… “Because God made it that way.” But then Guy #2 says… “We can’t accept that because it’s not falsifiable.” These days, Guy #2 will even become hostile and hurl scorn or ridicule at Guy #1 for even thinking of mentioning God in the equation.

The reason for the hostility is because of hostile religious attempts to scorn and ridicule science going back to Darwin. Nobody who calls themselves a follower of Christ should have had anything to do with what that poor guy and his family had to go through. And believers who did not support religious attempts to have ID introduced into the schools in Kansas were also submitted to the same hostile religious ridicule.

As a result, the very thought of God is excluded altogether, which then fulfills what Paul described in Romans 1:18-25. Guy #2 begins looking for mechanisms within nature itself for the origins of life (looks to the creation instead of the creator). The lines between God and naturalism become blurred until the former is overshadowed all together, thus Guy #2's ideology becomes centered more and more on naturalism. Because Guy #2 has insulted the creator in his efforts to evaluate nature, he then “becomes vain in his imagination and his foolish heart is darkened.” So his whole thinking and those of his peers becomes skewed. As he fools himself into thinking that he finds these mechanisms for our origins, he becomes more and more convinced that God is not needed in this equation. Now you can dismiss that interpretation of Romans 1, which I’m sure you will, but that is clearly what the scriptures are saying. This I believe becomes the slow festering that Paul describes in 2 Thess 2:9-10, where the self-deception from Romans 1:21-23 becomes an actual delusion, which then will finally result in the ultimate delusion of 2 Thess 2:12 that is to come, the delusion that God himself will send.

Well…I see Romans chapter 1 the same as I see 2 Thess.
They are written about those who hold the truth in unrighteousness, Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
I realize the propensity for thinking Romans 1 is directed at them who don’t believe but that’s not how I see it. I see Romans getting started right off dealing with the problems amongst believers. I don’t see any pause between chapters 1 and 2 and we are right into not judging and talking about the law and the relationship between Jew and Gentile. I suppose we might want to argue that those who were new to the story of Jesus (hearing it for the first time) were holding the truth and that God had shown that which may be known to them and that they knew God but didn’t glorify him and weren’t thankful and I guess we could apply that to everyone around the world but I’m not buying it. I can’t help it but I see it everywhere in all these letters to the believers. There was some sort of divide amongst believers…some were getting it…others were not and those who were not were slowly festering into something that Paul certainly wasn’t a fan of.

I think believers applying these things to people of the world is not a good thing at all. I think it’s letting themselves off the hook.

And now the world worships science as an infallible marvel, and to question it or show suspicion of where it's heading automatically subjects you to much scorn and derision -- you're old fashioned, a fundamentalist religious kook, wackjob, paranoid, unintellectual, dangerous, a threat to reason and human progress, etc. -- and though it does not provide an epistemological truth now, this scenario is vastly changing as we're approaching this philosophy in human genetic engineering and transhumansim, where eventually it will give mankind a defined purpose for life, something for moderns to strive for that will far exceed the purpose given in the superstitious old religion of the bible.

[/QUOTE]
What the heck do you expect the world to worship??????????????
It’s the world.
Of course it’s purpose far exceeds the purpose of the Bible. The Bible is meaningless to the world.
I can’t wait for what you are describing. Personally, I’ve had it up to here with the marriage of “the church” to the world. The church is not the world. The world is not the church. It’s high time that the body of Christ gets out of bed with the world and fixes it’s eyes on Heaven. And no…Heaven is not the next galaxy.