Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com
Dr. Troy Day’s Quote: Irenaeus on the pre-Trib Rapture
Anonymous
Link Hudson I am very pleased to offer you my own quote on Irenaeus’ pre-trib rapture. I’ve marked it specifically tagging both you and me so there will be NO confusion. Hit me with whatever you’ve got on Irenaeus and I will make sure to get J.D. King Dale M. Coulter to join with their comments too (NO promises there)
Anonymous
Troy Day is there an English version?
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs you wish 🙂
Anonymous
Troy Day
It’s a Roman Catholic site. I don’t know Latin, but Roman Catholics seem to have a lot of people who do. What problem do you have with that translation.
The context is talking about Christians being tried, but you assume he is talking about being caught up before the tribulation rather than after it… after the gold is refined, after the last contest of the righteous, as Irenaeus interpreted it.
“…so far useful and serviceable to the just, as stubble conduces towards the growth of the wheat, and its straw, by means of combustion, serves for working gold. And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be. Matthew 24:21 For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.”
The quote from Matthew 24:21 he mentions is this:
For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.
If we read the chapter he refers to, the gathering of the elect happens AFTER the tribulation. Why would Irenaeus call the tribulation the last contest of the righteous if he thought the rapture would occur before the tribulation? You assume that his reference to the church being caught up from this means the church being caught up before the tribulation. That doesn’t make sense given the statements that follow.
If Irenaeus was not comparing the tribulation to refining fire it could be that Irenaeus believed in:
– tribulation
– rapture
– conflagration (elements melting with fervent heat.
If this is the case, his first statement above could refer to the final destruction which he sets at the end of the tribulation, that the church is caught up as the elements are destroyed by fire after the tribulation.
If you read on, Irenaeus believed that ‘the righteous’ would have to deal with the beast
“And [Antichrist] also sums up every error of devised idols since the flood, together with the slaying of the prophets and the cutting off of the just. For that image which was set up by Nebuchadnezzar had indeed a height of sixty cubits, while the breadth was six cubits; on account of which Ananias, Azarias, and Misaël, when they did not worship it, were cast into a furnace of fire, pointing out prophetically, by what happened to them, the wrath against the righteous which shall arise towards the [time of the] end. ”
I suppose a broken-record style pre-trib supporter could insist that ‘the righteous’ here are tribulational saints after the rapture. Of course, that would be anachronistic interpretation, reading an interpretation system from the 1820’s and later into Irenaeus– but if it is done with the Bible, why not Irenaeus. ‘Evidence’ for pre-trib consists of assuming pre-trib then interpret other passages in line with the theory.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103529.htm
Source. Translated by Alexander Roberts and William Rambaut. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight. <http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103529.htm>
Anonymous
Link Hudson I am not too familiar with this website and dont see your point here but the link you sent has this text word for word
And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be. Matthew 24:21 For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.
Anonymous
Troy Day Cutting off the non-pre-trib sounding parts of the quote before and after the part you focus on will not persuade me of pre-trib.
What do you think is the last contest of the righteous he is referring to? isn’t it the tribulation? What is ‘this’ that the church will be caught up from? Either the tribulation mentioned after or the fiery scenario mentioned before. Either the tribulation or a conflagration by fire he may set after the tribulation.
I’m thinking there was a ‘conflagration’ quote from Irenaeus I came across a while back, but I cannot find it with Google. Google is not an effective search engine for finding specific information these days.
Anonymous
There it is in the next paragraph, not conflagration, though, but cataclysm.
“Thus, then, the six hundred years of Noah, in whose time the deluge occurred because of the apostasy, and the number of the cubits of the image for which these just men were sent into the fiery furnace, do indicate the number of the name of that man in whom is concentrated the whole apostasy of six thousand years, and unrighteousness, and wickedness, and false prophecy, and deception; for which things’ sake a cataclysm of fire shall also come [upon the earth].”
I found this on another site.
From http://gnosis.org/library/advh5.htm
It may be he sets the destruction of fire right after the tribulation and believes the church will be caught up right before the fire.
Anonymous
Link Hudson this OP is to show what Irenaeus wrote on the pre-Trib Rapture. Not to persuade you into anything per se. Also, if you have taken the time to compare the “translation” is NOT chronological and also picks from certain parts of the Latin #GoFigure BUT it is up to you to believe or ignore all warnings including Irenaeus, Polycarp, Papias, since you believe you know better than them AND you doubt they quoted John rightly 🙂
Anonymous
Troy Day Are all your ‘pretrib’ passages from these other gentlemen as ‘pretrib’ as this one?
Anonymous
Link Hudson you tell me since you’ve never even read them BUT they are in your own quote 🙂from your friends @ the GNOSTIC society who cant even type borne instead of bone
4. And these things are bone witness to in writing by Papias, the hearer of John, and a companion of Polycarp
Anonymous
Troy Day Not my friends. I was searching for the quote from Irenaeus. I saw gnosis in the URL. No big deal. I didn’t catch ‘Gnostic’ at the top. It’s the same book. But you are distracting from the point.
How can you interpret that as pre-trib in context? If he calls the tribulation the last great trial of the righteous, why would you think the saints are caught up before it rather than after it?
Anonymous
Link Hudson well you proposed a GNOSTIC translation with obvious typos in it and wants us to believe your interpretation of that 🙂 To my scholarly approach to the text and direct quote from the author, which BTW you will not find in Latin on the internet, you offered a quick search with the wrong text and from even more questionable source AND J.D. King likes/loves your gnostic fake translation too 🙂 #GoFigure
Anonymous
Troy Day I think you are just throwing up a smoke cloud to dodge the issue. Both sites appear to site the same source, Alexander Roberts, for their source, probably badly cited on the gnosis source. It looks like the same translation to me. I’m not going to go word for word and verify that or the spelling errors you allege..
If you are a great Latin expert, you can make your case that Roberts and his co-authors and editors are mistaken and suppress a true pre-trib interpretation if you wish.
I was trying to find the word conflagration in Irenaeus’ works, but it was the word cataclysm I’d seen before, right below where I was reading. I searched in Google, and that didn’t work. Yandex brought me to this site, which had the same text as the previous one, so I just quoted it because it was there.
Anonymous
Link Hudson all this is irrelevant when you dont have the actual text. They cite it as source, but present only excerpts and with errors. And no, I am not throwing up a smoke when I am showing you that you are making conclusions based on your bias and not on the actual text 🙂
Anonymous
Troy Day I don’t have a legible copy of the text, and I do rely on translations for this. I do not see how what you posted about the text or any translation I’ve seen of this support your pre-trib contention.
Btw the portions I looked at looked the same as the New Advent page.
Anonymous
Link Hudson I provided you an actual copy in the comments
Anonymous
Link Hudson I think it is high time you look at the actual text before we go with other authors. And at least TRY to explain why he wrote
“and for this reason thereafter in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this (tauta here could refer to the world or the tribulation – same case, gender, etc. parsing), it is said, There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be. Matthew 24:21”
and perhaps WHY is this terminology consistent across the board with so many early church fathers citing and interpreting John and The Revelation ?
Anonymous
Troy Day The picture of the Greek you posted is too fuzzy. Do you have a link to a legible Greek text of Irenaeus work? I also do not find this chapter in all translations of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History/History of the Church.
quote:
If tauta refers grammatically to the tribulation, that is an argument against pre-trib, since pre-tribbers argue we get caught up before the tribulation, instead of suffering through it and then be caught up from it.
Compare to II Thessalonians 1
6 since it is a righteous thing with God to repay with 👉tribulation those who trouble you👈, 7 and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe, because our testimony among you was believed.
(NKJV)
Here, we see those ‘tribulating’ the church, are to get repaid with tribulation (θλίβουσιν ὑμᾶς θλῖψιν) when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven. It indicates the church will be going through ___tribulation___ and that Christ will relieve it.
Ireneaus’ quote fits with a post-trib or mid-trib scenario, rather than a pre-trib scenario.
Anonymous
Link Hudson No it is not too fuzzy as we made sure the resolution is over 2400px. How can we depart from discussing your personal drama all the time and focus on the actual text – the quote in question is in Latin BTW – there is no known Greek text of this passage at this time
The only problem I see with the Latin is the possible omission of hic/hinc in the footnote per location. The fact that he then starts talking about the antiChrist establishes the timeline pretty clearly WHEN is the Church suddenly taken [from here] This language is consistent among many fathers and cannot be mistaken to be anything else
Anonymous
Troy Day your comment did not make the text less fuzzy.
Anonymous
Link Hudson click on the page I’ve posted then on the actual picture to enlarge Then the little + glass to maximize it A fairly larger image opens on your screen. Explaining internet 101 to a PhD first thing in the morning after I wake up is what I live for Philip Williams And this is the source, or a version of it hereafter https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=njp.32101074938968&view=1up&seq=416
Anonymous
Troy Day I was enlarging the fuzzy picture on the website. This link is clear, but this is a different page, all Latin, no Greek. I do not know Latin. Why don’t you type out the sentences you think prove pre-trib. If you need an online tool, https://greek.typeit.org/
Anonymous
Link Hudson You are wrong again or just dont want to get it.
1. Against heresies
Book V
ch 29 (XXIV) has only 3 known MSS that have reached us
2. some of the text is Latin, some Greek, some both.
3. There is also some annotations that could be important
4. I have provided THIS particular copy because the scholars actually took time to collate and annotate the MSS (as in footnote 5 which I mentioned above)
5. There is a very important variant of the latin word mentioned. We cannot be sure if the text is wrong there OR the footnote is simply a SIC typo/misprint
6. I therefore proposed, that this is not a determining factor because the Greek word expected from the original would be TAUTA and it would work in both cases of the translation; therefore the original MSS has no textual problems
7. I have a further point here on the chronology the text establishes as you already noted with loose terms LIKE before/after antiChrist. However, this particular point cannot be just stated from _blank space as you did – it really needs to be drawn from the actual text while following the text where it becomes explicate in the intended by the author culmination. Furthermore, it is consistent with the Mt 28 quote both LXX/Vulgate mentioned by the author – this you can easily check for yourself with both even on the internet
8. The Latin wording used is striking as a very particular phraseology (perhaps even Greek) referring to a definite doctrinal terminology that was understood by the audience without further clarification, which is also validated by many authors across the board
9. As clearly seen on the snapshot of the page I have provided, v.1 is only in Latin – this is about the 10th time I am repeating this with the hope you finally get it and remember it for sake of an actual discussion
10. Following, v. 2 is in Greek and so on – I have provided a very well scanned and readable copy. This could be relevant for you to establish the chronological context (as stated above), as you have already attempted twice to escape the actual meaning of the text by your own personal conviction/belief but not an actual interpretation of the text, which you have not yet read. I cannot call your stance a doctrine either, because you have not yet stated an actual doctrine
NOW, that I have taken my time to explain point by point for about the 5-6 time here, what is your question(s) on the actual text? Which point is SO hard for you to understand OR are you just acting dumb cause you see the evidence is all against your pseudo-point?
John Mushenhouse I also would like to hear from Dale M. Coulter J.D. King Oscar Valdez Neil Steven Lawrence on this one, as the expected way this discussion was proposed to go has now departed into quite deeper linguistic and otherwise exegesis
Anonymous
Troy Day I haven’t seen these posts of yours where you say you have explained these issues in detail. Even the Latin issue. Maybe you did in some unclear way, or maybe there are posts of yours I have seen. I’m wondering if this is gaslighting, though. Could you tag me wherever these detailed posts are.
I figured chapter 29 had a manuscript/language issue. As I recall one of Irenaeus other’s works survived in Armenian. You hardly address anything in detail, and this post I am responding to is probably the longest most detailed response I have seen from you on any topic in years.
You didn’t go into much detail or explain that clearly, but I gather your argument is that ‘tauta’ (a word in Greek I’ve studied) in context grammatically refers to a reference to the tribulation. Feel free to quote the section of the Greek and explain why you think this argues for pre-trib.
If we get caught up from tribulation, that means we are in tribulation when we get caught up. In II Thessalonians 2, the chuch is here when Jesus comes back, and the Lord gives the church rest from tribulation. II Thessalonians doesn’t use the phrase ‘great tribulation’, but the idea that the earth is experiencing tribulation when Jesus returns is consistent with the idea that Jesus comes back after the tribulation starts.
I am wondering if these scholars who wrote that Irenaeus is using specific theological language that align with a common eschatological understanding he had with the audience are pretribbers. Historically, that seems rather anachronistic since there is no evidence for pretrib before Irenaeus. At least I haven’t seen any. If it were taught in scripture, that might lend weight to the idea. But based on your own argument, the tribulation would need to start before the rapture if Irenaeus has it right?
Anonymous
actually what you just wrote is just plain lie Link Hudson You did not just post from gnosis you posted this link that clearly says with caps THE GNOSTIC SOCIETY LIBRARY and it has no less than 4 references of being gnostic – Ecclesia Gnostica | Gnostic Society and more
Anyone who has dealt with internet libraries of church of fathers – there are but a few – knows who operates gnosis org
http://gnosis.org/library/advh5.htm
Troy Day
HobbyLink Japan this is a FINE post discussion to start the new year with WITHOUT quoting GNOSTIC sources this time
John Mushenhouse ONLY if Dale M. Coulter takes time to see how this convo did NOT go in the direction he expected at all
perhaps our resident Dr. Tony Richie will include this source in his eschatology class AND I can even produce an online talk with him about Greek phrasing of pre-trib rapture accross virtually ALL church fathers When does the class start, doc? https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/the-ancient-church-fathers-believed-in-pre-trib-rapture/
Troy Day
wish more pre-tribbers look into this TerryandNita Wiles Gary Micheal Epping Joe Dobbins Peter Vandever Joseph D. Absher Jerome Herrick Weymouth Frank Macchia Robert Cox Neil Steven Lawrence Michael Chauncey James Pinkerton James Philemon Bowers David Willaim Faupel David Bundy Jeffrey Snyder Brett Dobbs Ray E Horton Roscoe Barnes III James C. Morris
Troy Day
Link Hudson Oscar Valdez our dear brother James C. Morris has written a FINE book answering many of your questions – just a brief quote here J.D. King would want to consider as well
Two Comings and Two Gatherings to Two Places
Some have very incorrectly called the doctrine of the rapture a “theory.” It is not a theory, but an explicitly stated doctrine of scripture. For it is clearly stated in two scriptures.
The first place where we find it in the Bible is:
“Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed– in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: ‘Death is swallowed up in victory.’ ” (1 Corinthians 15:51-54)
And the second place is:
“But I do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who have fallen asleep, lest you sorrow as others who have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus. For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words.” (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18)
As a side note, we should mention here that the words “caught up” in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 are a translation of a form of the Greek word ἁρπἁζω, which is harapzo in our alphabet. The Latin translation of this Greek word, as given in the Vulgate text, is “rapiemur.” And the English word “rapture” is derived from this Latin word. So, even though the word “rapture” does not occur in any English translation of the Bible, yet it is indeed a scriptural term.
We need to notice that these two scriptures plainly state that there will be a time when the Lord will come and at that time the dead in Christ will rise first, and then we which are still alive will be “caught up” “together with them in the clouds,” to be with our Lord forever. But now we must ask, where will we be taken to be with Him? This is not left to our imagination. For Jesus said:
‘Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.” (John 14:1-3)
Here, our Lord plainly said where He was going. It was to “My Father’s house.” And He told us why He was going there. It was “to prepare a place for you.” So the place He was preparing for us was in “My Father’s house.” And He said “I will come again and receive you to Myself.” But why will he do this? “That where I am, there you may be also.” But where was He going? To “My father’s house.” So “My Father’s house” is the place where He will take us.
This is again plainly shown by the fact that in Matthew 25, in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins, “while” the foolish virgins “went to buy,” oil for their lamps, “the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding.” (Matthew 25:10) Where did the wise virgins go? They “went in with him to the wedding.” And where will “the wedding” take place? In Revelation 19:7-9, “the marriage of the Lamb” takes place in heaven, just before the Lord goes forth from heaven as the “KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS,” to punish the world for its wickedness in Revelation 19:11-21.
But there is another coming of Christ, with another gathering, described in other scriptures. We find this other coming clearly described as taking place after “the marriage of the Lamb” in Luke 12:35-37, where we read, “Let your waist be girded and your lamps burning; and you yourselves be like men who wait for their master, when he will return from the wedding, that when he comes and knocks they may open to him immediately. Blessed are those servants whom the master, when he comes, will find watching. Assuredly, I say to you that he will gird himself and have them sit down to eat, and will come and serve them.” As this scripture very clearly says that the coming described here will be “when” the “master” “will return from the wedding,” this clearly has to take place after “those who were ready went in with him to the wedding.”(Matthew 25:10) So ths is unquestionably a different coming. And this different coming involves a different gathering, which will be to a different place. We find this coming and gathering described in the last chapter of Isaiah, along with the location to which the people will be gathered.
“ ‘For behold, the LORD will come with fire
And with His chariots, like a whirlwind,
To render His anger with fury,
And His rebuke with flames of fire.
For by fire and by His sword
The LORD will judge all flesh;
And the slain of the LORD shall be many.
‘Those who sanctify themselves and purify themselves,
To go to the gardens
After an idol in the midst,
Eating swine’s flesh and the abomination and the mouse,
Shall be consumed together,’ says the LORD.
‘For I know their works and their thoughts. It shall be that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come and see My glory. I will set a sign among them; and those among them who escape I will send to the nations: to Tarshish and Pul and Lud, who draw the bow, and Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands afar off who have not heard My fame nor seen My glory. And they shall declare My glory among the Gentiles. Then they shall bring all your brethren for an offering to the LORD out of all nations, on horses and in chariots and in litters, on mules and on camels, to My holy mountain Jerusalem,” says the LORD, “as the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the LORD. And I will also take some of them for priests and Levites,’ says the LORD.” (Isaiah 66:15-21)
Here, there is no mention of anyone rising from the dead, or of anyone being “caught up.” Instead, there is mass killing, and people being gathered, not to “My Father’s house,” but “to my holy mountain Jerusalem.”
We see this again in the words of the prophet Jeremiah:
“ ‘Therefore behold, the days are coming,’ says the LORD, ‘that it shall no more be said, “The LORD lives who brought up the children of Israel from the land of Egypt,” but, “The LORD lives who brought up the children of Israel from the land of the north and from all the lands where He had driven them.” For I will bring them back into their land which I gave to their fathers.
‘Behold, I will send for many fishermen,’ says the LORD, ‘and they shall fish them; and afterward I will send for many hunters, and they shall hunt them from every mountain and every hill, and out of the holes of the rocks. For My eyes are on all their ways; they are not hidden from My face, nor is their iniquity hidden from My eyes.’ ” (Jeremiah 16:14-17)
https://www.amazon.com/Ancient-Dispensational-Truth-Refuting-Dispensationalism/dp/1945774290/
Troy Day
SO basically Link Hudson up to this point you have NOT actually read the text but just its gnostic rendering that changes it and from my way of looking at it corrupts it Cant help but wonder which rendering Dale M. Coulter read on this one…
Dale M. Coulter
Troy Day I’ve already given my take. I’ll only add that the text you keep using is not the best available right now. There are Syriac and Armenian editions of Irenaeaus that need to be taken into account. As I said, John Behr is working on a new critical edition of the text.
Until then, the best edition is Sources Chrétiennes. It’s what I use when I’m reading Irenaeus.
https://www.sources-chretiennes.mom.fr/index.php?pageid=auteurs_anciens&id=72&sourcepg=auteurs_anciens&expandall=ok
Troy Day
Dale M. Coulter That is correct. It is not the best and I’ve repeated this to Link Hudson over and over again in the past month alone.
I would not simply trust the online source you gave either. I’ve had my share of bad luck with online sources which claim to be authentic. I do not believe the Latin is wrong, but I will definitely consult your French source if you insist. The Latin has virtually no difference with the Armenian, apart from the footnote. I spoke to an Armenian priest friend of mine who is a member of their Academy of Science and he found NO difference with the latin; You probably also knew there is a coptic version that was recently translated into English https://ml.coptic-treasures.com/book/against-heresies-irenaeus/ no difference there either. I am not sure what is the deal with John Behr on this one – we are talking about translating a couple of pages in translation which is no big deal for an expert. I used to receive their bulletin when he was dean and editor of St. Vladimir’s Seminary; Anyhow what are you expecting from his translation that will render different in bookVch29 as the text is explicit?
Troy Day
Dale M. Coulter BTW the links on book V from your French source are dead
https://www.sources-chretiennes.mom.fr/upload/doc/SC153-p.352-353.pdf
https://www.sources-chretiennes.mom.fr/upload/doc/SC153-p.354-355.pdf
perhaps they realized they had them wrong 🙂 You know have awaken my curiosity to find book V from this 404-souce in 2023 🙂 Would anyone @ SBL have access to them. Usually SBL helps greatly with such
Anonymous
Nostradamus predictions for 2023
1. Resignation of Pope Francis
2. Explosion of a nuclear bomb
3. Mission to Mars
4. Great crisis in the United States
5. New world order
https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/2023-in-bible-prophecy/
Troy Day
Link Hudson Philip Williams John Mushenhouse I just spent time in the last few days talking to some Coptic bretheren I know from my time studying the chester beatty mss back in my days in Dublin. I was interested about the coptic sources used to translate book5 in their 2019 translation of against heresies They were unaware of any Armenian sources at this time Dale M. Coulter can you give some more specific reference to your statement on this? Coptic scholars claim IF antying there may be only armenian fragments, initials at best and most certainly nothing new on book5 Also the french source you gave is a 404 dead end on book5 as their pdfS have been taken down for uncertain reasons https://www.sources-chretiennes.mom.fr/index.php?pageid=auteurs_anciens&id=72&sourcepg=auteurs_anciens&expandall=ok&fbclid=IwAR3PbF9HsTUsZKuaHGx2fJxbuUY1U5MIL7vtKQPS6oEHafWRiH3Aq8LRmc0
Dale M. Coulter
Troy Day Irénée de Lyon. Nouveaux fragments arméniens de l’Adversus Haereses
et de l’Epideixis. Introduction, traduction latine et notes par Charles
Renoux (PO tome XXXIX. fascicule 1. No. 178). Turnhout, Brepols,
1978
Dale M. Coulter
The fragments were published in 1910. Only the Sources Chretiennes edition takes them into account. Obviously, I have not examined the Armenian but it’s books 4-5 of Against Heresies. I have only seen it referenced in French scholarship and John Behr’s work. Honestly, just read John Behr’s introductory book on Irenaeus of Lyons.
Just because you are Coptic does not mean you are in touch with the latest scholarship. I’ve taught enough Coptic Christians over the years to know.
Philip Williams
So why do you conflate pre-mil with pre-trib?
Troy Day
Dale M. Coulter Sure – A major value of these fragments lies in the fact that some of them
present citations from Adv. Haer. I-III – book5 not represented So what are we expecting such fgraments to add to our topic here? REVIEWS Irénée de Lyon. Nouveaux fragments arméniens de https://brill.com/previewpdf/journals/vc/34/2/article-p193_7.xml
Dale M. Coulter
Troy Day That review says there are fragments of books 4 & 5. My only point is that we need a critical text that takes all of this into consideration. I don’t read Armenian so I can’t answer your question. Maybe you do. I only know that the same manuscript that yielded an Armenian translation of Irenaeus’ Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching became decisive in figuring out what Irenaeus’ thought. So, that causes me to wonder.
Troy Day
Philip Williams what are you talking about?
Philip Williams
Troy Day these fathers, Papias, Ireneaus were pre-mill, expecting an earthly millennium. That allows but doesn’t entail premill.
Troy Day
Dale M. Coulter you are correct – I am checking on this right now
26-52 to books IV-V and 53-65 to the Epideixis. T
books I II III were published last year 2021 https://isbnsearch.org/isbn/1034175955
Did you save bookV from the french website PDFs? post it here so we can access it as well please
Troy Day
Philip Williams of course they were all pre-mill – post-mil and a-mil did NOT exist till Augustine decided to please the king with some kingdom-now theology; dont confuse your self with pre-mil as even father NOAH was taken away from before the Tribulation and just like the Church will be, was brought back after the Tribulation was over
Troy Day
NEVERMIND Dale M. Coulter I just found the PDFs archived here and will be reviewing them today JUST in time for Dr. Tony Richie class 🙂 Would recommend Link Hudson to review them as well https://web.archive.org/web/20210624000948/https://www.sources-chretiennes.mom.fr/upload/doc/SC153-p.354-355.pdf
Philip Williams
Troy Day
Troy Day as I remember, and as Peter remembered, that boat went through the waters of the Flood:
“…long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,”
1 Peter 3:20-21
Dale M. Coulter
Troy Day I have no idea. I have no consulted with him on this point at all. I just had a conversation in which he said he was working on a new critical edition. With texts like this one in which we don’t have the original Greek in a complete manuscript, other versions are very helpful. The Armenian verb may point out something different or suggest a different Greek verb.
Look, the Latin text says nothing about a rapture in my view. The Latin verb assumo (ad-sumo) does not mean “raptured” in some technical pre-trib sense that you are taking it. At best, it means to take up or to receive into. It gets used in Christological contexts to talk about the divinity “taking up” or “assuming” humanity in the context of Incarnation. Of course, this fits extremely well with how Irenaeus understands the incarnation as a recapitulation of human history. It’s a “taking up” of human history into his own history. None of this requires some pre-trib rapture.
The same verb assumo is used of Jesus being taken up into heaven AFTER his resurrection. Irenaeus says that we follow him and so are taken up after the resurrection. But, what he means here is full incorruption and moving into the millennium. Again, no pre-trib rapture.
The noun assumptio is used in Against Heresies 5.28.4 to talk about wheat being taken up into a barn. It’s in the context of the last things where Irenaeus explicitly says that those being saved will undergo tribulation. This is because all humanity is formed in the image and must be shaped and forged into the final end. Irenaeus’s major image for God is a potter. The Son and the Spirit are the two hands of the Father who shaped humanity. It’s like wheat being sifted and then ground into something else. Tribulation is part of that shaping. This is right before 5.29 that you constantly point toward. If anything, Irenaeus thinks that tribulation is absolutely necessary to be molded or shaped into incorruption. It says as much in 5.31 and then repeats it in 5.35.2. You can become incorrupt without being disciplined, which is God’s shaping of his “handiwork” (plasmatio).
To reduce your entire argument to a single verb in one passage that is not even rapio is to build an entire house on a single piece of what you think is pressure treated wood but turns out to be just regular wood that breaks down under the elements. Paul uses the same Greek verb in 2 Cor. 12:2 to refer to being caught up into heaven and rapio is used there as well. In my own studies, rapio/raptus tends to be used for mystical ecstasy or prophetic ecstasy in the Latin Fathers.
You keep trying to “proof text” your way into an argument that some patristic writers taught a pre-trib rapture. It doesn’t work.
There is a reason why you can’t find a patristic scholar defending pre-trib rapture. Chiliasm or millennialism yes, but pre-trib rapture, no.
OK, this is the last time I get sucked in to what I consider a pointless discussion because we keep going around in circles.
Dale M. Coulter
Troy Day I was just pointing to the series. You have to buy the books.
Dale M. Coulter
Troy Day Let me say this for the record. Your skills at finding texts on the internet are amazing to me. I don’t know how you do it but I do appreciate it. I never knew this text was available for free on the internet.
Troy Day
not my skill – archive org archives everything Except your REGENT blog content we are still trying to recover. Surely someone backed-up the data base with your writings MY personal affixation with the REGENT blog was because on that very blog Jon Ruthven told John macarthur WRITE ANOTHER BOOK JOHN after his 2013 Strange Fire – I knew I’ve read it but it only took me a few years to re-find it and show it to Link Hudson We even tried to get Jon to repeated it in our group just for the record – he said he had said it BUT never actually repeated it 🙂
Troy Day
Dale M. Coulter as I’ve been trying to explain to Link Hudson and Philip Williams for weeks now
assumetur
is the very word used by JEROME in Mt 24
unus assumetur, et unus relinquetur.
i.e. 1 taken up 1 left behind
So the translator of bookV had NO another choice here but to use the very Biblical term hew knew well as the precise term: assumetur
In Pau’s record Jerome used
translatus / transtulit illum Deus
but that’s another discussion about interim Hebraisms in the Vulgate
My point is that we see the SAME pre-trib rapio/rapire/assumetur terminology in the Latin JUST in the same way as we see it across virtually all Greek writing church fathers. That should be a starting point of our discussion @ SBL in March 🙂 Apropos, TerryandNita Wiles has pointed out the same usage across the board with Luther and Lutherans (that is to say post-Augustine and post-Vulgate) And also for the record I do not subscribe to the same dispensational Spirit view as Oscar Valdez As once Dr. Synan said in the group – Dake’s and Darby’s (baptitsts) dispensations were 2 different terms. Different terms is what we’ve been getting into with Michael Chauncey and Nate Ridgeway HOWEVER with the rapture greek/latin wording we do NOT see 2 diff. meanings – just 1 usage across the board which speaks of nothing else but well accepted and known teaching
Dale M. Coulter
Troy Day You do realize that there was the Vetus Latina long before Jerome’s translation in the late fourth century. In fact, Jerome’s translation was initially rejected because it was different. So, no, it is not the case that he has no choice. Again, this represents a fundamental misunderstanding of what’s happening.
You would need to go through the translation of Irenaeus to prove that the translator was using assumo in the way you think. I’ve already given several instances where the word is not used that way.
This is what happens when you cherry pick and don’t really dig down into the development of the theology.
You do realize that Jerome was not looked on fondly by several patristic writers. You are assuming Jerome set the standard but he didn’t. Even in the 12th century we still have variant Latin translations of scripture.
Dale M. Coulter
Troy Day That’s so Ruthven.
Dale M. Coulter
Troy Day Also, just to be clear, all we are debating is whether Irenaeus held a position. As I said, you can still argue that it’s biblical. While it’s helpful to find a patristic witness, it’s not absolutely necessary. We don’t find one for baptism in the Spirit as we Pentecostals hold either.
Dale M. Coulter
Troy Day You can consult it or not. It’s just that the Sources Chretiennes volumes probably represent the best text we have right now. I also reached out to John Behr. It’s going to be a long time before he finishes the critical edition. I did mention the text in Irenaeaus. Not sure if he will say anything or not, but if he does, I’ll let you know.
Troy Day
Dale M. Coulter I am just happy we are still talking Always glad to learn more about this 🙂
Troy Day
Of course. There is also the thing that the Greek may be completely different from the Latin – who can tell? My point to Link Hudson was that the language is explicit in the Latin and is repeated across the board AFTER the Latin I may get several Greek sources together to show the same phrases used by Clement of Rome, Eusebius and a few others just as an effort to dig a bit deeper into this before SBL 🙂 I would be very happy to hear/study Behr’s response, but I haven’t followed him since he was dean or whatever they call it at St.Vlad’s which may have been longer than what is socially appropriate nowadays (BTW yall got anything on the topic of 3rd Pentecost in the group?)
Anonymous
STILL true and STILL uncontested Neil Steven Lawrence Michael Chauncey Link Hudson Alan Smith Duane L Burgess Brett Dobbs Kyle Williams Next Augustine…
Anonymous
Troy Day I’ve already contested this before. Irenaeus is being taken out of context.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs contested – in what ways?
out of context? – how?
The text is plain and simple to read
Have you read it in its ORIGINAL form in order to context it?
Anonymous
Troy Day still no evidence for Irenaeus being pretrib. His words fit historical premil, postmil and amil better than pretrib. Why eisegete premil into his words. Is there any evidence at all of anyone believing in a pre-tribulation rapture before Irenaeus? Where is the evidence? you could start with the Bible?
Anonymous
Link Hudson the text itself has plenty of evidence – you can live in denial OR just read the text for what its worth in its original if you know it
Anonymous
Troy Day I have been after you probably for a year to tell us what the secret is in the Greek you mentioned in II Thessalonians 1 that makes it consistent with pre-trib. All the translators must have missed that if that is the case. I wonder how the Greek-speakers missed it, too.
I heard a speaker at a conference say if someone has a revelation, he can just say, “Here’s my revelation” and share it and other people can be blessed. But the mystic, he says, claims to have a revelation, and he just can’t quite share it and tell what it is, and keeps people depending on him and hanging on his every word. (He probably had a certain person in mind.)
Are you an ‘academic mystic’ or a ‘linguistic mystic.’ If the Greek proves pre-trib, why not just explain how it does so, or tell us what verse you have in mind? You haven’t drawn me in to be dependent on you.
Anonymous
Link Hudson SO you change the topic from Augustine 🙂 thatS your regular move when you are out of ammo – stay with OP and seek the answer; Your II Thess 1 answer is finding resurrection in Mt24 if you can
Anonymous
Troy Day you pisted about Irenaeus in this thread, tagged me on it and said Augustine was next. If you want to talk about Augustine next do so, but why tag me if you are going to get on my case for responding?
Anonymous
Link Hudson YES Augustine is next when I get some summer time Right now revisiting Irenaeus with the hope to gain some opposing views but so for opponents have not even read his text. The only person who pointed me to a reasonable text-read WELL that trans.version was in French and taken off line. I took the time to find it and it did NOT say what the opposing view claimed-resembled my transl. in proving pre-trib
Anonymous
Troy Day You never responded to my previous posts, which I think I might have posted about in two different posts, in which I pointed out the problems with trying to read pre-trib into Irenaeus’ writings, and the fact that it fits just as well or better with historical eschatological views that there is actual evidence for in the first several centuries of Christianity. It could fit with a historical pre-mil, post-trib, or amil.
But if the church isn’t here for the last trial, it won’t be a trial.
Anonymous
Link Hudson I have responded to ALL your posts about Irenaeus – including researching your passages from the pro-gnostic website. I do not have any questions from you left unanswered on the topic as it could be easily seen in the archive. I do have ONE question about this from another poster WHO cited a French source which happened to be taken OFF line without his knowledge. It took me some time to find it which I just did having to order a library loan from Marcelle France in order to confirm the online version is the same as the printed one. It was NOT – there was also another question about a footnote in the ENGLISH translation of Irenaeus which I also disputed. As far as I can tell up to this point the text is CLEAR Irenaeus was pre-trib in the chapter passages which were cited. Anything else is fake news or fake gnostic translation
Anonymous
Troy Day hahahaha
Anonymous
Link Hudson of course – the usual copout when we get to the point ONCE AGAIN I will be happy to discuss ANY info from original source
Anonymous
No, you didn’t miss it. Neither did Darby. The article title is not suggesting that the Rapture occurred before the days of John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), but rather is pointing out that a belief in the Rapture of the Church (in particular, a pre-tribulation Rapture) existed and was taught before Darby’s birth. As an example of the allegation that belief in a pre-tribulation Rapture is relatively recent, Michael Bird wrote, “The pretrib view … did not appear on the scene of church history until J.N. Darby in the 1830s.”[1] In this article, we will examine some of the references in biblical works pre-dating Darby that either explicitly taught or appear to teach a pre-tribulation Rapture.
Early Witnesses
After the time of the apostles, a number of writings indicate belief in the imminence of Christ’s return, which is consistent with pre-tribulationism. Clement of Rome (35-101), Ignatius of Antioch (died 110), The Didache (a late first-century anonymous Christian treatise), The Epistle of Pseudo-Barnabas (circa 70-130), and The Shepherd of Hermas (second century) all reference Christ’s imminent return.[2] Even though it appears that the apostolic fathers were largely post-tribulational (because they believed the persecution they were enduring was the tribulation itself), they held to the doctrine of imminency. J. Barton Payne (a post-tribulationist) concluded that “belief in the imminence of the return of Jesus was the uniform hope of the early church.”[3]
But it appears that Irenaeus of Lyon (120-202) was a pre-tribulationist. Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp (who was a disciple of the apostle John) and articulated his eschatological views in Against Heresies, Book 5. First, he referred to Enoch’s translation and Elijah’s being “caught up” as previews of the Rapture. “For Enoch, when he pleased God, was translated in the same body in which he did please Him, thus pointing out by anticipation the translation of the just. Elijah, too, was caught up [when he was yet] in the substance of the [natural] form; thus exhibiting in prophecy the assumption of those who are spiritual, and that nothing stood in the way of their body being translated and caught up.”[4] Second, Irenaeus refers to the Church’s being “caught up” before the tribulation. “And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, ‘There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be’ (Mat 24:21). For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.”[5] The italicized “this” in his quotation is clearly a reference to the tribulation, which he then introduces.
Victorinus of Petrovium (died 304) was a bishop in modern Slovenia, martyred during Diocletian’s reign. In his commentary on Revelation (6:14), he writes, “And the heaven withdrew as a scroll that is rolled up.] For the heaven to be rolled away, that is, that the Church shall be taken away.”[6] Later, while explaining Revelation 15, he writes, “And I saw another great and wonderful sign, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is completed the indignation of God.] For the wrath of God always strikes the obstinate people with seven plagues, that is, perfectly, as it is said in Leviticus; and these shall be in the last time, when the Church shall have gone out of the midst.”[7] Therefore, Victorinus believed the Church would be raptured before the breaking of the seventh seal (and therefore, before the seven trumpet judgments and the seven bowl judgments), making him, at least, what we refer to as “pre-wrath” in his eschatology.
In a sermon entitled “On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World,” Syrian church father Pseudo-Ephraem (fourth to sixth century) wrote, “For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.”[8] The gathering Pseudo-Ephraem mentions appears to refer to a pre-tribulation Rapture of the Church.
The Middle Ages
Admittedly, the influence of Origen and Augustine was successful in turning the established church to a belief in amillenialism by around the fifth century. This view would dominate the Medieval period, with little-known exceptions. However, one exception was the Apostolic Brethren in northern Italy. This new (and thus, persecuted) ecclesiastical order eventually numbered in the thousands and evidently held a pre-tribulation Rapture position. In 1316, an anonymous treatise entitled The History of Brother Dolcino articulated some of the beliefs of the Apostolic Brethren.[9] Their leader, Brother Dolcino, believed he and his followers would be taken to heaven and protected from the actions of the Antichrist before later descending back to earth, thus holding to a belief in a pre-tribulation Rapture.
The Archives Open
Johannes Gutenberg’s movable-type printing press in the 15th century made books more widely available. With more Bibles accessible to read and study, more biblical works were printed, especially following the Protestant Reformation. Many of these works were shelved and have been gathering dust in the antiquity sections of libraries across the world for centuries. But within the last two decades, some of these works have been converted to digital (and thus, searchable) formats. One Christian historian, William Watson, has taken advantage of these available works, spending hundreds of hours reading and searching Puritan writings from the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. A simple word search for “rapt,” “rapture,” and “left behind” yielded at least two dozen findings, from notable authors such as Increase Mather, Cotton Mather, Philip Doddridge and John Gill.[10] Unquestionably, some of the uses of “rapture” by these writers refer to the act of being taken up to heaven. A few examples of William Watson’s findings will have to suffice, given the length of this article.
William Sherwin (1607-1687, minister at Wallington) wrote, “The Saints … at the sounding of that last Trumpet at the end of the world shall be changed in a moment, at the twinkling of an eye … rapt up to meet Christ in the air.” He even refers to the early church fathers’ agreeing with him: “This Doctrine many of the ancient Fathers acknowledged … Justine Martyr … Irenaeus … Tertullian … even Augustine sometime held it, though by the subtlety of Satan, forgeing lyes to asperse the Millenary opinion, and stirring men up to foist in offensive errours … in these latter times hath again discovered it, after so many hundred years of its lying hid for the most part in the Church, to be a doctrine really embraced by his faithful people [who] will doubtless certainly know, that upon their rapture to meet Christ, they shall be perfected in glory evermore in heaven.”[11]
Boston Puritan Increase Mather (1639-1723), father of Cotton Mather, wrote, “When Christ comes, Believers shall see the King … in all his Glory, and shall go with him to the Land that is very far off. Heaven is the Land that is very far off. Christ has assured believers it shall be thus, John 14.2 …. He will not go back to Heaven and leave them behind him. No, they shall sit with him in Heavenly places … [later] they shall come down from Heaven …. They shall be with him when he comes to Judge the World.”[12]
Anonymous
Troy Day it’s officially contested.
https://youtu.be/KfZcs_ZCOBw
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs WHAT is officially contested? And most importantly by WHO? Surely theology is now not contested by Joel Richardson is a New York Times bestselling author, film-maker, and teacher of limited theological background The same one here? JOEL RICHARDSON // EPISODE 12: WILL JESUS BEAT UP HIS BRIDE BEFORE THE WEDDING? – answer is NO of course Neil Steven Lawrence Michael Chauncey YES they do https://www.faistudios.org/mgbs/rapture-endurance-11 Alongside what Duane L Burgess stated for John Mushenhouse + Oscar Valdez => Biblical eschatology is exclusively Premillennial, and many in the churches have moved steadily away from that Truth since the first century.
Anonymous
Troy Day just take an hour and watch it.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs I saw both – did not really see anything scholarly as a counter proof. It basically twisted the facts in some Western way – everything else BUT theology – what and which part did you feel this video defeated Irenaeus on the pre-Trib Rapture ???
do they know the early church better than Irenaeus
did they read Irenaeus in the original tongue
were they able to point out exactly where Irenaeus was wrong
what was in the video deserving our deep theological attention ?
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs on a second read your vid says NOTHING about this OP-if it did I missed it-NOT scholarly @all-more of a pop pep talk
Anonymous
Troy Day did you only read the description or did you watch the video?
He addresses the Irenaeus quote directly. If you don’t want to watch the whole thing or don’t have time, skip to the 31:00 minute mark and start right there.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs WHICH Irenaeus quote? From what source?
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs What,is the source of this translation? Does not look like the quote discussed in this OP-do you have proof this is the same translation used in the video?
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs SOURCE pls DID he translate it himself?
Anonymous
I guess you dont know
do you know why you dont know/
cause he dont tell you in the vid
Do you know why he dont tell you
cause he dont know his source
never read the original which
assures he dont know what he is talking about
Plain and simple
Anonymous
OK Brett Dobbs this is the 3rd time you have me watch this video to no avail The speaker does NOT and I repeat does NOT address between min 30-40 the quote from this OP On the subject of the Rapture, in Against Heresies 5.29-actually he avoids it on purpose 🙂 to disprove my point here Link Hudson used a wrong gnostic source which was easily disqualified with all its grammatical typos Dale M. Coulter cited a french source that was taken off line and for a good reason He then referred to yet another NEw translation from stVladimires seminary we are waiting on-SO.I repeat AND would LOVE for the speaker from the video to address NowThis
Against Heresies 5.29,:
And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.”(2) For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.”
the last contest of the righteous IN HIS CONTEXT obviously being suddenly caught up FROM this tribulation such as has not been since the beginning-If you can link in the video comments the speaker to this discussion I would love to see him address THIS https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/dr-troy-days-quote-irenaeus-on-the-pre-trib-rapture/
Anonymous
Troy Day he addresses that very quote at the 46:00 minute mark.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs well first you said in 30 now in 46 getITtogether already
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs upon your 5 or is it 6th recommendation now I re-watched the video @ min 46. It is well understood why you did not point to this 46th min earlier
1. the speaker is thoroughly confused what is going on in the text
2. we have already agreed with Link Hudson Dale M. Coulter the english translation at this point is a MESS
3. the speaker has NOT consulted original source. He is simply clueless as of the original language. You can tell this confusion by watching his face and eyes
4. he mumbles something being dishonest – I agree; if you have not seen the original do not know the source you are simply repeating lies in a dishonest way trying to get out of it
5. speaker needs to find a SOURCE for his claim ; one such does not exist in Greek so he will have to consult LATIN as we already did
6. when he finally getS to the source he will honestly find out THAT the first part of V29 in Latin honestly speaks of a pre-trib rapture; part2 speaks of this rapture-test as the last test of the saints – in the same context that NO other test will be endured after the rapture
7. I would also direct the speaker to my comment on the footnote in the English translation. There are also multiple errors in the gnostic version Link Hudson quoted – – – I admit the LATIN here is NOT easy because it is rendered from Greek but one thing is clear both parts 1 and 2 of V.29 speak of pre-trib rapture. I would also urge Dale M. Coulter to provide a reversed translation latin-Greek from st.VladS which I believe will clarify this verse from Irenaeus for the common level English reader
pls comment under his video with a request to COMPARE and review his source with the original here
https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/dr-troy-days-quote-irenaeus-on-the-pre-trib-rapture/
Anonymous
Troy Day he starts addressing Irenaeus at around the 30:00 minute mark. He addresses 4 sections of Irenaeus writings between 30:00 and 50:00. I apologize that I didn’t tell you how long to watch. I just told you when to start watching. I just assumed you would watch it until he was finished talking about Irenaeus.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs irrelevant @ best ; you post snapshots but he has NO clear source on this; has NOT consulted original – just some site on the internet. And it draws blank on V.29 – what else is to watch there? I would like you to post the URL of our discussion in the comments under the video and challenge a MORE scholarly approach on V.29 – as of now his video is mediocre as Philip Williams calls it – pop culture likes and click bate approach at best TO something he has not really studied and clarified for himself. Very very disappointing – who is the speaker?
Anonymous
Troy Day what’s his source???
There’s a Pretty good chance that he’s using the same source as you since his quote and your source are word for word identical in the English.
Troy Days quote:
Against Heresies 5.29,:
And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.” (2) For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.”
Joe Richardson’s quote:
Irenaeus (c.120-202)
And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.” For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.
(Against Heresies, V, 29, 1)
Anonymous
Troy Day throughout the video, and I can’t pinpoint exactly where without re watching the entire thing. He does mention a couple of names of some Greek scholars who agrees with him. Maybe they are his source. If you want to dig deeper watch the whole thing. Listen for the names, write them down and go investigate their work.
Also, he did give an open invitation for anyone to debate him on this subject. So shoot him an email or send him a message through facebook messenger. I would love to see it.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs yes he mentioned Tom Ice and 1 other – the PROBLEM once again is that V.29 does not exist in Greek – just look at my citation. We only have it in LATIN – he is not even aware of this to start with
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs who is HE to know his source?
My source is in the post with the error in the footnote
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs There’s a Pretty good chance that he’s using the same source as you since his quote and your source are word for word identical in the English – I very strongly doubt that I have seen NO evidence he is looking @ the actual text More like some very strange modern day rendering
Anonymous
Troy Day if you have a English translation that you think is more accurate, then let’s see it.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs I posted 2 already – and here is the LATIN https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015036943101&view=1up&seq=402
Anonymous
here are the explanations on irenaeus Link Hudson I reviewed the topic and do not see where you bunk or debunk anything ACTUALLY I was reminded you failed to prove you have even read the text in question V.29 much like the speaker from the video Brett Dobbs provided – The speaker does NOT and I repeat does NOT address between min 30-40 the quote from this OP On the subject of the Rapture, in Against Heresies 5.29-actually he avoids it on purpose 🙂 to disprove my point here Link Hudson used a wrong gnostic source which was easily disqualified with all its grammatical typos Dale M. Coulter cited a french source that was taken off line and for a good reason He then referred to yet another NEw translation from stVladimires seminary we are waiting on-SO.I repeat AND would LOVE for the speaker from the video to address NowThis
Against Heresies 5.29,:
And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.”(2) For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.”
the last contest of the righteous IN HIS CONTEXT obviously being suddenly caught up FROM this tribulation such as has not been since the beginning-If you can link in the video comments the speaker to this discussion I would love to see him address THIS https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/dr-troy-days-quote-irenaeus-on-the-pre-trib-rapture/
I do recommend what Dale M. Coulter pointed to Irénée de Lyon. Nouveaux fragments arméniens de l’Adversus Haereses et de l’Epideixis. Introduction, traduction latine et notes par Charles Renoux (PO tome XXXIX. fascicule 1. No. 178). Turnhout, Brepols, 1978
I also spent time in the last month talking to some Coptic bretheren I know from my time studying the chester beatty mss back in my days in Dublin. I was interested about the coptic sources used to translate book5 in their 2019 translation of against heresies They were unaware of any Armenian sources at this time? Coptic scholars claim IF anything there may be only armenian fragments, uncials at best and most certainly nothing new on bookV
Anonymous
Troy Day and once again I will tell you that between the 45-55 minute he addresses the very text that is in question.
Against Heresies 5.29,:
And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.”(2) For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs AND ONCE AGAIN I will tell you again THAT upon your 5 or is it 6th recommendation now I re-watched the video @ min 46. It is well understood why you did not point to this 46th min earlier
1. the speaker is thoroughly confused what is going on in the text
2. we have already agreed with @Link Hudson @Dale M. Coulter the english translation at this point is a MESS actually Link just cited a gnostic one
3. the speaker has NOT consulted original source. He is simply clueless as of the original language. You can tell this confusion by watching his face and eyes
4. he mumbles something being dishonest – I agree; if you have not seen the original do not know the source you are simply repeating lies in a dishonest way trying to get out of it
5. speaker needs to find a SOURCE for his claim ; one such does not exist in Greek so he will have to consult LATIN as we already did
6. when he finally getS to the source he will honestly find out THAT the first part of V29 in Latin honestly speaks of a pre-trib rapture; part2 speaks of this rapture-test as the last test of the saints – in the same context that NO other test will be endured after the rapture
7. I would also direct the speaker to my comment on the footnote in the English translation. There are also multiple errors in the gnostic version Link Hudson quoted – – – I admit the LATIN here is NOT easy because it is rendered from Greek but one thing is clear both parts 1 and 2 of V.29 speak of pre-trib rapture. I would also urge Dale M. Coulter to provide a reversed translation latin-Greek from st.VladS which I believe will clarify this verse from Irenaeus for the common level English reader
pls comment under his video with a request to COMPARE and review his source with the original here
https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/dr-troy-days-quote-irenaeus-on-the-pre-trib-rapture/
Anonymous
Troy Day what do you mean by “it’s well understood why I didn’t point out the 46 minute mark earlier”? I said to begin watching at the 30 minute mark. And there is a reason. Because we need to examine all of Irenaeus’s quotes and not just the one.
Irenaeus (c.120-202)
And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.” For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.
(Against Heresies, V, 29, 1)
We can look at this and say okay maybe this is talking about pre trib rapture. But what else does he have to say.
Irenaeus (c.130-202)
“And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, who have received no kingdom as yet, but shall receive power as if kings one hour with the beast”… And they shall lay Babylon waste, and burn her with fire, and shall give their kingdom to the beast, and put the Church to flight. After that they shall be destroyed by the coming of our Lord.
(Against Heresies, V, 26, 1)
How can the church be put to flight if the church has already been raptured?
Irenaeus (c.130-202)
It is therefore more certain, and less hazardous, to await the fulfillment of the prophecy [concerning the revealing of the Antichrist], than to be making surmises, and casting about for any names that may present themselves, inasmuch as many names can be found possessing the number mentioned; and the same question will, after all, remain unsolved. … But he indicates the number of the name now, so that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is.
(Against Heresies, V, 30, 3, 4)
He’s saying the church will become aware of who he is, so that they can avoid him. Meaning that the the church will still be here.
And then there’s this quote.
Irenaeus (c.120-202)
“For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule; in which the righteous shall reign in the earth, waxing stronger by the sight of the Lord” (Against Heresies, V, 35, 1)
So clearly the just is the church. So now we can look at the first section again and know that he isn’t talking about a pre trib rapture he’s referring to the church being called up out of the great tribulation itself. Not before but some time during. So at best only a fool could come up with a conclusion that he believed something different from either a mid or post tribulation rapture.
So now the best conclusion you can offer is that Irenaeus doesn’t know what he believes and is contradicting himself.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs you cannot state that clearly the JUST are the church
you dont even know the exact word he used for “just” there
What is clear from the text in V.29 is the following in his exact words
in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this…. tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.”
everything else yall’ve said is pure speculation
for crying out loud – found the actual source and READ it first before arguing using some gnostic and false translation. It is THAT simple
Anonymous
Irenaeus (c.120-202)
“For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule; in which the righteous shall reign in the earth, waxing stronger by the sight of the Lord” (Against Heresies, V, 35, 1) = pretty sure refers to ISRAEL – we can check the text if I have not already done and forgotten about it THIS in NO way disprove
V.29 in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this…. tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.”
Anonymous
Irenaeus (c.130-202)
It is therefore more certain, and less hazardous, to await the fulfillment of the prophecy [concerning the revealing of the Antichrist], than to be making surmises, and casting about for any names that may present themselves, inasmuch as many names can be found possessing the number mentioned; and the same question will, after all, remain unsolved. … But he indicates the number of the name now, so that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is.
(Against Heresies, V, 30, 3, 4)
we may avoid him, being aware who he is.
(Against Heresies, V, 30, 3, 4)
is coherent with the Church raptured pre-trib and avoiding the antiChrist
Obviously a church during Trib will NOT be able to avoid the antiChrist
REVELATION states 50% of World population will be killed
pre-trib rapture of the church TO AVOID the antiChrist is also seen in
V.29 in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this…. tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.”
Anonymous
V.34 explains your misquote from V.35 1. Then, too, Isaiah himself has plainly declared that there shall be joy of this nature at the resurrection of the just, – Isaiah plainly refers to ISRAEL of course https://www.jpost.com/christian-in-israel/comment/irenaeus-and-israel-318416
Anonymous
Troy Day the just shall be saved by faith. And all of the just will be resurrected at the same time. And the unjust will be resurrected at the same time.
Anonymous
Troy Day Why would the rapture be the last trial? How does that make sense at all. Especially considering that there is no historical evidence for anyone being pre-trib before this point.
It makes sense to call this last great tribulation the final trial of the church. Indeed, II Thessalonians 2 uses the word ‘church’ when it speaks of the church receiving rest from tribulation at the Lord’s return. The church will be going through tribulation when Jesus comes according to Paul. Paul also teaches in he same epistle that the lawless one will be destroyed at the brightness of the Lord’s coming. In I Thessalonians 4, he teaches that the rapture and resurrection in connection with the coming of the Lord.
Anonymous
Link Hudson I do not know why but when you read the latin the phrase clearly reverts to the taking Not to anything past the Trib. And Irenaeus remains coherent with pre-trib rapture in the other 3 passages Brett Dobbs showed It’s a good question you can ask Irenaeus about in heaven BTW you are STILL arguing about a text you havent even read
Anonymous
Troy Day none of those passages are pre trib. Your seeing what you want to see and not seeing what Irenaeus is actually saying
Anonymous
Troy Day the Greek does not contain the relevant passage Irenaeus wrote this in Greek, not Latin so the Latin is is not evidence for Irenaeus’ viewpoint.
I have not read the Latin but when have you even addressed the Latin translation until now? What does it say?
Anonymous
Link Hudson What is in Greek? Show me so we can talk about it – I have addressed namely book V in Latin b/c most of the parts cited by Brett Dobbs we have in Latin only. I’ve discussed Coptic and Armenian sources with Dale M. Coulter as well – LINK, your comment from months ago on the Gnostic site was that you found a Roman Catholic source and Roman Catholics knew LATIN – it was there an then I demolished your miniature arguments on things you havent even read. You clearly do NOT know what you are talking about – get it together and go read the actual text JUST in this Link the word LATIN occurs 51 times – I can search my other posts on irenaeus too! I have also addressed the FOOTNOTE as well if you had any logical sense you should have looked it up already https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/dr-troy-days-quote-irenaeus-on-the-pre-trib-rapture/
Anonymous
SO TO SUM IT UP Brett Dobbs not sure if you gathered this info from your speaker yourself but as you begin to read the actual Irenaeus text you plainly see that
Book V.29 the church is taken pre-trib before the tribulation
Book V.35 Isiah here refers to the JUST in ISRAEL as stated in V.34
Book V, 30, 3, 4 speaks of the church avoiding the antiChrist which is coherent with the pre-trib rapture of the church Irenaeus describes in Book V.29 – I do urge you to see my comments on V.29(2) and the wrongly translated footnote in the so called English translation from whereAS this whole discussion emerged
Anonymous
Troy Day you didn’t address this one:
26:1. In a still clearer light has John, in the Apocalypse, indicated to the Lord’s disciples what shall happen in the last times, and concerning the ten kings who shall then arise, among whom the empire which now rules [the earth] shall be partitioned. He teaches us what the ten horns shall be which were seen by Daniel, telling us that thus it had been said to him: “And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, who have received no kingdom as yet, but shall receive power as if kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and give their strength and power to the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them, because He is the Lord of lords and the King of kings.” It is manifest, therefore, that
of these [potentates], he who is to come shall slay three, and subject the remainder to his power, and that he shall be himself the eighth among them. And they shall lay Babylon waste, and burn her with fire, and shall give their kingdom to the beast, and put the Church to flight. After that they shall be destroyed by the coming of our Lord.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs You only cited
Book V.29
Book V.35
Book V, 30, 3, 4
NOW that is clear that they refer to pre-trib SURE we can discuss 26:1
pls give me URL or book volume of the Greek/Latin you are using to read 26:1 and I will be happy to look it over BTW the iron of the post by Link Hudson was that he posted a gnostic source claiming to translate irenaeus whereAS Against Heresies was written namely to defeat all gnostics during his time 🙂 It getS no more satanic than this – the devil trying to defeat JESUS-the WORD by falsely using the WORD in Mt4 and gnostics trying to defeat Against Heresies (which demolishes them) by falsely translating Against Heresies 🙂
Anonymous
Troy Day it’s book 5-26:1
Or 5- XXVI 1.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs source pls – are you reading it in Greek or Latin?
Anonymous
Troy Day I’m reading it in English. I’m blindly trusting that the translator did a good enough job with it. So I’ll let you check the Greek or Latin and see if it’s correct or not.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs link to that English pls – if it aint William Wigan Harvey · 1857 probably is not worth messing with https://www.google.com/books/edition/Adversus_haereses/9hhGAAAAcAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs also pls see here p511
how put to light is rendered as drive out
and then we can look at the actual original when you find it
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Five_Books_of_S_Irenaeus_Bishop_of_Lyons/WsQUAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=put%20the%20church%20to%20flight
Anonymous
Troy Day I’m having a little trouble navigating through this. Do you know what page book 5 chapter 26 is on?
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015036943101&view=1up&seq=402
Anonymous
Troy Day quid sum pati cum hoc? nescio latina vel graeca
Anonymous
Troy Day the pdf on my phone is this.
Against Heresies
by Irenaeus
translated Philip Schaff
This text was designed to accompany Roman Roads Media’s 4-year video course Old Western Culture: A Christian Approach to the Great Books.
For more information visit: http://www.romanroadsmedia.com.
Anonymous
Troy Day That’s a very low brow arguing tactic. I was looking up a phrase from Irenaeus and quoted it from the first site I found. I didn’t know it was a gnostic site. I just did a quick search and that site is 24 years old. Back in the day, if you wanted to copy text with a scanner into a usable text or word format, there was a high percentage of copy error. I did that with some kind of ‘Omni’ software myself in the 1990’s. So if Irenaeus book was copied way back when, it could be full of spelling errors just for that reason.
It is very low-class move to keep bringing that up, when you don’t mind quoting from a wide variety of sites yourself. What typo of the Ireneaus docs on their site promoted gnosticism?
Anonymous
Link Hudson I agree that for the gnostics to use Irenaeus’ book against the gnostics to justify their gnosticism is a very low brow arguing tactic but they did it and you failed for it and you have done the same before
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs did you find reference for your last quote?
Anonymous
Troy Day are you wanting me to navigate through the Latin or Greek text to find book 5 chapter 26 section 1, from the links that you posted?
Someone who knows Greek or Latin would have much better luck then me. I couldn’t make much of the content you sent me.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs I gave you p511 with a Link I am looking at the latin as well but the sources are not easy to locate WHAT was the exact reference you LAST mentioned on church removed?
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs sorry this is unreadable – what is the reference ?
Anonymous
Troy Day source:
Against Heresies
by renaeus translated Philip Schaff
This text was designed to accompany Roman Roads Media’s 4-year video course Old Western Culture: A Christian Approach to the Great
DOORS.
For more information visit: http://www.romanroadsmedia.com.
Other video courses by Roman Roads Media include:
Grammar of Poetry featuring Matt Whitling
Introductory Logic taught by James Nance
Intermediate Logic taught by James Nance
Copyright © 2015 by Roman Roads Media, LLC
Roman Roads Media
739 S Hayes St, Moscow, Idaho 83843
Anonymous
yes yes I saw this – I responding with Link to 2 19 century ENGLISH renderings which I do not see in the comments now – did you ever get them yesterday Last one had it on p511 – then you posted a 4th book V reference – what was it?
Anonymous
Troy Day the text in question from book 5 chapter 26 section 1:
He teaches us what the ten horns shall be which were seen by Daniel, telling us that thus it had been said to him: “And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, who have received no kingdom as vet, but shall receive power as it kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and give their strength and power to the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them, because He is the Lord of lords and the King of kings.” It is manifest, therefore, that
of these (potentates], he who is to come shall slay three, and subject the remainder to his power, and that he shall be himself the eighth among them. And they shall lay Babylon waste, and burn her with fire, and shall give their kingdom to the beast, and put the Church to flight. After that they shall be destroyed by the coming of our Lord.
Anonymous
OK Brett Dobbs TO SUM IT UP
Yesterday you posted 3 Link statement at first from the video – 3 references to book V which I explained as clearly referencing PRE_trib rapture by Irenaeus and this is in against heresies ALONE not to mention Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, also written in Greek, which also is extant only in an Armenian translation
we also explained well and have been explaining that against heresies was in fact written in Greek about 180, HOWEVER we do not have it all today – only 3 MSS of against heresies have survived and today it is only known in its entirety only in a Latin translation, the date of which is AD200 Dale M. Coulter have suggested a NEW translation coming from StVlad’s seminary in NY and we have also examined some COPTIC and Armenian versions which are all coherent with the above finds HOW the known Greek and Latin interject is seen well on my original OP
THEN you posted ANOTHER find book 5 chapter 26 section 1
I responded with 2 variants of the section on the particular phrase as rendered by 2 scholars in the 19th century English
how put to flight is rendered as drive out
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Five_Books_of_S_Irenaeus_Bishop_of_Lyons/WsQUAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=put%20the%20church%20to%20flight
Anonymous
THEN I suggested we look at the actual original when you find it WHICH I was able to locate here in LATIN only – Link Hudson responded the text was written in Greek THEREFORE I suppose we should discard the Latin? – asking for clarification. If we discard completely the LATIN of book 5 chapter 26 section 1 then basically we are left with your 3 previous quotes which clearly proved pre-trib rapture https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015036943101&view=1up&seq=406
Anonymous
Troy Day okay i my internet was being wonky yesterday or something because I was having no luck so I tried that one link again and went to page 511 in the English version. So I’m now up to speed.
So here we have your source:
give their Kingdom unto the Beast, and drive out the Church: then afterwards they shall be destroyed by the coming of our Lord.
And then my source:
And they shall lay Babylon waste, and burn her with fire, and shall give their kingdom to the beast, and put the Church to flight. After that they shall be destroyed by the coming of our Lord.
Anonymous
just FYI Brett Dobbs when you follow the Link I posted WE only have this part of the book in LATIN for now – it is on p406 from the latin source I posted – the word rendered in English as drive out in one place = flee in another place is the NOT so latin word effugabunt
effugabunt means to ESCAPE 🙂
Lit. and the Church shall effugabunt/escape
or in the context WHICH the CHURCH shall effugabunt/escape
but someone more knowledgeable in Latin exeg. like John Mushenhouse Dale M. Coulter Oscar Valdez Duane L Burgess is needed here – my latin she is no so good
Anonymous
Driving out the church vs putting the church to flight.
I’m thinking the meaning is the same here.
The beast is going to put the church on the run is basically what Irenaeus is saying.
Anonymous
Troy Day right, so the beast coming after the church causing them to escape.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs my source is posted on the Link just above this comment of yours Here it is again https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015036943101&view=1up&seq=406
the numerous variants you quoted as
put to flight or another rendering drive out
in the ORIGINAL text is written as
et effugabunt Ecclesiam
and/which the Church shall escape
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs NOPE – a list of things WHICH the church shall escape Going through the Trib is obviously NO escape
Anonymous
Troy Day it’s really looking like Irenaeus believed that the church is going to go through at least some of the great tribulation. And the goal is to endure and remain in the faith, and to be patient until Jesus returns to call up the church so that then they may escape so that some flesh will still be saved.
Also you have every right to disagree with Irenaeus. But given all 4 statements that I originally posted, and from what was in the video I posted. I just don’t see how anyone could think Irenaeus believed in a pre trib rapture.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs YES all 4 statements show pre-trib rapture
There is absolutely NO doubt when you read the original
The guy from the video dont have a clue of the actual text
All it takes is open mind and read the original text
You cannot see anything but pre-trib in the whole book V
Anonymous
Troy Day so in the original text it’s pre trib, but in English it’s not pre trib?
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs how is it NOT pre-trib in English ? He says plainly
WHEN is the Church suddenly taken [from here]
Book V.29 the church is taken pre-trib before the tribulation
Book V.35 Isiah here refers to the JUST in ISRAEL as stated in V.34
Book V, 30, 3, 4 speaks of the church avoiding the antiChrist which is coherent with the pre-trib rapture of the church Irenaeus describes in Book V.29 – I do urge you to see my comments on V.29(2) and the wrongly translated footnote in the so called English translation from whereAS this whole discussion emerged
Anonymous
Troy Day It feels like you are gaslighting, but I suppose it is possible for someone to be so convinced of the conclusion, he cannot see that the evidence contradicts it.
Anonymous
Link Hudson yes this seems to be your case while ignoring the actual text One can really help so much when the language is disregarded
Anonymous
Link Hudson thatS all you had of course PLUS a ha ha Thats it! Sorry I will not agree with your google, gnostic or jesuit source theology No one will! See the 4 quotes by Brett Dobbs and how they are all pre-trib
Anonymous
Address the ideas, not the website used to quote the same texts of Irenaeus we are all discussing. If a YouTube video is made by a non-Latin reader, that doesn’t make his points invalid.
Anonymous
Link Hudson I have address the writings of Irenaeus in the original latin – have you taken the time to read ANY of them yet? If a YouTube video is made by a non-Latin reader, that means he has not look into the source yet – so what is the point of making the video I do not know #soSad
Anonymous
Why don’t you explain the Latin in English, break it down, and show us where all the translators went wrong.
You could also explain, in detail, all the passages, such as this one:
“4. But he indicates the number of the name now, that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is: the name, however, is suppressed, because it is not worthy of being proclaimed by the Holy Spirit. For if it had been declared by Him, he (Antichrist) might perhaps continue for a long period. ”
Why would Irenaeus propose that we may avoid the Antichrist, if he believed that ‘we’ would already be up in heaven after a pre-tribulational rapture (that hadn’t been introduced as an eschatological theory yet at that point in history)? Can you explain, in detail, so that non-Latin-readers can follow you, how the translators missed it on this one.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm
Anonymous
Link Hudson I already did several times – did you not read it in my comments ? all 4 quotes explained 3-4 times already Whats up?
Anonymous
I saw no commentary along the lines of which I requested. You asked about the video poster’s source, talked about whether he knew Latin.
Irenaeus said that in the end, the church should be caught up, and quoted a passage, which, if we continue reading, speaks of the gathering of the elect ___after___ the tribulation.
Anonymous
Link Hudson you expect to do a quick search and to find it all 🙂
link to your source pls As already shown to Brett Dobbs Duane L Burgess the ELECT in Irenaeus is Israel John Mushenhouse wow to the wanna be theologians who do not consult the actual source #soSilly
Anonymous
Troy Day I’ve clicked on the Irenaeus source. If you want to make your case, type it out. Don’t just say check the source.
Anonymous
Link Hudson what source have you checked 🙂 post link here pls
Anonymous
I don’t have time to redo all that stuff today. Doing sermon prep
Anonymous
Link Hudson hahah of course you do 🙂 but there is nothing to re-do You have not posted ANY source here. Just talk Check the archive 1st
Anonymous
I read sources. I did quote from ireneaus in a number of posts also. I’m not going to post everything I read. If you want to make a case, make a case.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs as you can too see Now lesson 2 around Link Hudson has also given up on posting an actual SOURCE; all and while my sources are always posted for ALL to read as John Mushenhouse already did; so general conclusion – not having a source is not a good thing
do the RIGHT thing – get the actual source of your theology
or like ol Link you will come 50 comments later and re-do a source you never actually found or red or understood. Now back to SysTh101
Anonymous
Link Hudson my case has been made for weeks now
my sources are clearly posted in my comments and you can see them
I’ve translated to the best of my abilities
I’ve confirmed with coptic and armenian scholars as Dale M. Coulter recommended when he posted his french library sources
My conclusion stands strong
all and while you are refusing to post an actual source for reasons well understood
Anonymous
Link Hudson yes my sources have been posted clearly – correct
yours not so clearly – actually they are not in this discussion 🙂
conclusion 1 – author is pre-triib
conclusion 2 – you make him post-trib havent even read his work
#soSad silly at best You shall be known as No-link (of the source) Link
Anonymous
no-link Link still has no source link to post #soSad and #soSilly
Anonymous
My sources have been posted clearly, the same document we keep discussing. I linked to the page I got the quotes from. The idea that Irenaeus is pretrib is laughable. He has the ‘church’ fleeing the antiChrist’s 10 horn alliance. Knowing about 666 and the Antichrist’s name are supposed to help us be able to avoid him. He believed the church will be caught up at the end.
Where would Irenaeus have gotten the idea of the rapture being pretrib? It’s not in the Bible. Show me some evidence for pre-trib from the Bible… besides John being told in a vision to ‘come up hither.’
Anonymous
where has your source been posted clearly?
post the URL here or be known as no-link Link
the idea youre talking about Irenaeus without having read Irenaeus is laughable indeed
Anonymous
Read through the thread and find it yourself or be known as the pompous buffalo.
Anonymous
there is no Latin Link of Irenaeus posted by you in the thread #soSad
Anonymous
Btw, click on the bell on the top right, look up the notifications for when I tagged you. Look up the references.
Anonymous
Link Hudson no need 🙂 got it way more automated than needed
good luck and GOD speed !
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs p275 here as well https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/public/gdcmassbookdig/accountoflifewri00beav/accountoflifewri00beav.pdf
Anonymous
But why do I refer to these men? For Enoch, when he pleased God, was translated in the same body in which he did please Him, thus pointing out by anticipation the translation of the just. Elijah, too, was caught up (when he was yet] in the substance of the (natural] form; thus exhibiting in prophecy the assumption of those who are spiritual, and that nothing stood in the way of their body being translated and caught up. For by means of the very same hands through which they were molded at the beginning, did they receive this translation and assumption.
CHAP. V.–THE PROLONGED LIFE OF THE ANCIENTS, THE TRANSLATION OF ELIJAH AND OF ENOCH IN THEIR OWN BODIES http://www.clerus.org/bibliaclerusonline/en/b0u.htm
YouVE got to LOVE the use of THE JUST as the ones who are caught up raptured taken translated for the author here Brett Dobbs TTM Dale M. Coulter Link Hudson oh someone pls TTM bout the eternal hope in glory John Mushenhouse Duane L Burgess Michael Chauncey Neil Steven Lawrence Robert Shepherd Ricky Grimsley
Anonymous
Troy Day the JUST does get raptured. The JUST being Israel like you said. They’ll be raptured at the same time the church is raptured. Their both equally Gods people. Who has both put their faith and trust in Jesus Christ. The natural and wild branch connected to the same tree. That is Jesus Christ.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs not what he says now is it? Says just raptured before Trib
Anonymous
Troy Day no he doesn’t say raptured before trib
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs as far as I read the 4 quotes you gave us that is precisely what he says. Maybe you can get a 2nd opinion on the latin? This quote here says also the same – otherwise how are Enoch, Moses and Elijah, returning after Trib if they were NOT raptured before the trib?
Anonymous
Troy Day of course those 3 were raptured before the tribulation. When else could they be since that took place 1,000’s of years ago. In like manner we will also be raptured. But their rapture is not being used as an example of timing. The context is the preservation as they wait in paradise until the consummation.
Wherefore also the elders who were disciples of the apostles tell us that those who were translated were transferred to that place (for paradise has been prepared for righteous men, such as have the Spirit; in which place also Paul the apostle, when he was caught up, heard words which are unspeakable as regards us in our present condition), and that there shall they who have been translated remain until the consummation [of all things], as a prelude to immortality.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs why would GOD rapture 3 before Trib
and then rapture the rest after Trib
No where in Scripture we read about rapture after trib
Anonymous
Troy Day when else could God show us an example of a translation to paradise. Especially when the great Tribulation is the end of the age.
Anonymous
you gotta be joking… no man has gone to heaven said jesus.
jesus lying.. maybe the translation is way off?
you just ignore what jesus said when you claim enoch and elijah were morphed off the planet.
enoch was translated just like elijah, to another part of the planet.
elijah:
chariots of fire were going to heaven, elijah didnt take one of those, he took a whirlwind which is an earthbound feature. Also, 10 yrs later elijah wrote a letter<<<< to king rehaboram. You can google that information. ya cant ignore what jesus said, because yer church said.
Anonymous
John Digsby nope as serious as it gets when talking about the originals
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs just to respond to the comment made today by Joel Richardson MANY in the means of large number not simple majority but many as in MOST and Virtually ALL Church Fathers Believed in Pre-Trib Rapture https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/the-ancient-church-fathers-too-believed-in-pre-trib-rapture/
the 4-5 quotes from Irenaeus taken out of context do NOT make him post-trinb He believe ISRAEL the elect will be here after rapture but only because Irenaeus BELIEVED in a pre-Trib rapture of the NT Christian Church – against heresies informs of this without any doubt and no one so far has been able to prove other wise from the original text. Sure some twisted western translations have pushed Irenaeus into the reformed post-mil but when reading the available Greek and Latin Irenaeus is pre-trib without question. AND even the so called translators of his writ have left footnotes to assure us the original text is explicitly pre-trib
I strongly doubt once again Joel Richardson has even read the original text by Irenaeus none less translated it but should he accept he can try his lick in our FB discussion group where many have failed before him doing attempting the same COME ON – https://www.facebook.com/groups/pentecostaltheologygroup/
Anonymous
JUST to clarify once again Brett Dobbs the very FIRST quote by Joelstrumpet Richarson is simply wrong
Against Heresies, V, 26, 1 in the original SIMPLY does not have
put the Church to flight.
put to flight is simply not in the text
it will do well to the author to read the original text
OR if NO access to it to read our prior comments explaining the used latin in full
Anonymous
just to remind once again Brett Dobbs I responded with 2 variants of the section on the particular phrase as rendered by 2 scholars in the 19th century English
how put to flight is rendered as drive out
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Five_Books_of_S_Irenaeus_Bishop_of_Lyons/WsQUAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=put%20the%20church%20to%20flight
Anonymous
Troy Day
Media: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10232171350653659&set=p.10232171350653659&type=3
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs NO this is some English sample
Obviously NOT the Latin original
SO just to reiterate this particular point
my source is posted on the Link just above this comment of yours Here it is again https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015036943101&view=1up&seq=406
the numerous variants you quoted as
put to flight or another rendering drive out
in the ORIGINAL text is written as
et effugabunt Ecclesiam
which means literally –
and/which the Church shall escape
has nothing to do with drive out or put to flight
these are simply NOT in the text
et effugabunt Ecclesiam from the text
means literally –
and/which the Church shall escape
Anonymous
Troy Day so your saying both renderings drive out and church to flight is wrong?
Anonymous
Troy Day check your Latin.
Media: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10232171373894240&set=p.10232171373894240&type=3
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs Ive checked my latin and checked it twice BUT if we are gonna bring this discussion to google machine translation I am out – there is no point of wasting time with non sense IMHO As a matter of fact I already stated earlier when you brought joels trumpet that what was said in the video was clearly NOT informed by the original text
Anonymous
Troy Day I don’t know Latin, but I asked the Bing AI chatbot and it said, ““Et effugabunt” means “and they shall flee”.
Anonymous
Troy Day I don’t know Latin so it’s all I’ve got. I guess I’m going to need an unbiased reading of the original.
Anonymous
Link Hudson thank you Link.
Anonymous
Troy Day It looks like you are grasping at straws. Irenaeus lays out this end time scenario, then you interpret his comment about the church fleeing… after all that to mean the church escaped a long time before… and the translators of Irenaeus got it wrong, and you are the one who understands the Latin? Why should we believe you? Are you a Latin scholar who translates Latin documents for a living, like the type of people whose translations we are using of such documents?
Read Revelation 17. Why shouldn’t we interpret Irenaeus words to mean that he is identifying ‘the saints’ in Revelation 17 with the church? This looks like very, very strong evidence that He did not consider the church to be gone by Revelation 17. It’s not looking pre-trib at all.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs Ecclesiameister is a term meaning the master of the synagogue that was used in GERMAN – FB auto spell took my phrase
et effugabunt Ecclesiam
and made it Ecclesiameister
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekklesiameister
here is the LATIN original with
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015036943101&view=1up&seq=406
” et effugabunt Ecclesiam : ”
NOT sure how to highlight or count the lines for you 🙂
but the phrase is on the line right above Quoniam
and one line down from Babylonem
cant really miss it …
Anonymous
Troy Day
Media: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10232171501177422&set=p.10232171501177422&type=3
Anonymous
Troy Day
Media: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10232171502137446&set=p.10232171502137446&type=3
Anonymous
Link Hudson put this in your AI
Manifestum est itaque, quoniam ex his tres interficiet ille
qui venturus est, et reliqui subicientur ei, et ipse octavus in eis :
et vastabunt Babylonem, et comburent eam igni, et dabunt reg-
num suum bestize, et effugabunt Eclesiam : post deinde ab ad-
ventu Domini nostri destruentur. Quoniam enim oportet dividi M. 324.
latt. xii. 25. regnum, et sic deperire, • Dominus ait: Omne regnum divisum in
se, desolabitur: et omnis civitas vel domus divisa in se, non stabit.
Dividi igitur et regnum, et civitatem, et domum oportet in decem:
et propterea jam partitionem et divisionem prefiguravit. Et dili-
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs I dont have AI sorry Just my personal I
Anonymous
oh I see what happened here Brett Dobbs the author Joel Richardson decided to pick a fight but NOT under the post with my name under it 🙂 INSTEAD it was easer to attack an undefended post here https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/irenaeus-believed-in-a-pre-trib-rapture/
SO we are not re-posting his comment under the proper post SO he can review prior comments and pick it up from there and we do not have to repeat the whole discussion just because he is late for the party 🙂
this is a response to what Joel Richardson wrote earlier today here as following =>
Irenaeus’ has the Church facing the Antichrist:
“And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, who have received no kingdom as yet, but shall receive power as if kings one hour with the beast”… And they shall lay Babylon waste, and burn her with fire, and shall give their kingdom to the beast, and put the Church to flight. After that they shall be destroyed by the coming of our Lord. (Against Heresies, V, 26, 1)
Irenaeus sought to prepare his readers to be able to identify the Antichrist when he arrived:
“It is therefore more certain, and less hazardous, to await the fulfillment of the prophecy [concerning the revealing of the Antichrist], than to be making surmises, and casting about for any names that may present themselves, inasmuch as many names can be found possessing the number mentioned; and the same question will, after all, remain unsolved. . . . But he indicates the number of the name now, so that when this man comes WE may avoid him, being aware who he is.” (Against Heresies, V, 30, 3, 4)
Irenaeus stated that the general resurrection of the just happens after the Antichrist:
“For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule; in which the righteous shall reign in the earth, waxing stronger by the sight of the Lord”
(Against Heresies, V, 35, 1)
Irenaeus refers to the tribulation as the last contest of the righteous, which they will overcome and be crowned with life.
“When in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, ‘There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.’ For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.” (Against Heresies, V, 29, 1)
Anonymous
I DID respond with 2 variants of the section on the particular phrase as rendered by 2 scholars in the 19th century English
how put to flight is rendered as drive out
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Five_Books_of_S_Irenaeus_Bishop_of_Lyons/WsQUAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=put%20the%20church%20to%20flight
Anonymous
Troy Day whether it’s put to fight or drive out, does either one rendering change the context of that statement?
“Give their kingdom to the beast put the church to flight” vs “give their kingdom to the beast and drive out the church”.
I don’t think it makes a difference in this passage.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs YES it does make difference as I have already explained in detail the original HOWEER, as noticeable the past couple of weeks I myself am teaching several classes on other topics this summer so my time is not easy to spear but I do not mind pointing in the right direction AS long as the discussion is one where we all learn with John Mushenhouse and not one that ignores the simple proof of the original language and its translation
Anonymous
Troy Day is the correct original?
Media: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10232171355733786&set=p.10232171355733786&type=3
Anonymous
Troy Day trying to find a way to word the translation to remove just one little piece of the many pieces of evidence that Irenaeus was not pretrib does not constitute evidence that Irenaeus was pretrib.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs I will give your friend the author 24-48 hrs to respond to the first quote translation BUT if there is NO interest I will probably not waste time repeating myself. Drive-by comments like his are OK but they do not establish anything new in the discussion. He/she is MORE than welcome to join the group and comment here
Anonymous
so far absolutely nothing Brett Dobbs more silence = more defeat
Anonymous
Troy Day did you send him an invitation?
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs not sure if you or Link Hudson posted this
>>>>> Troy Day I don’t know Latin, but I asked the Bing AI chatbot and it said, ““Et effugabunt” means “and they shall flee”.
but yall may wanna recheck the meaning of the word effugabunt
with your preferred google trans tools 🙂
effugabunt = they will escape
SO even if you do NOT know latin your source is still ambiguous if not erroneous
IT will be hard to argue they will escape means run, hide, put to run or drive through
https://www.google.com/search?q=google+translate&rlz=1C1ONGR_enUS972US972&oq=google+&aqs=chrome.0.69i59l2j69i57j69i60j69i65l2j69i60l2.1487j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Anonymous
Troy Day I checked google translate and Link Hudson checked bing AI
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs google translate returns
effugabunt = they will escape
AI is probably what the antiChrist would use anyways
NOW can anyone please tell me why are we talking google/AI translate in a theological discussion on Irenaeus? – how misinformed is this?
Anonymous
Troy Day It’s irrelevent. You can escape by running away. You can translate a word for flee as escape in Greek, too if you wish. In context, your pre-trib rapture interpretation doesn’t make sense. It’s pretty obvious Irenaeus is thinking of the war on the tribulational saints there in revelation 17, maybe combining it with another passage to come up with escaping or fleeing away. I don’t know Latin, but even with ‘escape’ what kind of case do you have?
Anonymous
Link Hudson correct – your free AI interpretation is irrelevant
when the text clearly says
WHEN is the Church suddenly taken [from here]
effugabunt = they will escape
everything that follows connected to the antiChrist
Only an absurdly illogical person can suggest THAT going through the tribulation where 4 mil. ppl will die in about 2yrs is ANY type of escaping Let’s NOT be illogical here Brett Dobbs John Mushenhouse Dale M. Coulter We have a clearly written text by Irenaeus that calls foe pre-trib rapture
yes
one can make a video and twist what it says out of context and NOT knowing the original language
yes one can use gogle trans or AI if they dont have the understanding
but none of this is theology proper in any possible sense
WHEN is the Church suddenly taken [from here]
effugabunt = they will escape
is MORE than clear as of what Irenaeus teaches here
everything else is someone else AI – not Irenaeus’
Anonymous
I also wonder if that is cognate with ‘flee’ in Greek. Ekfuego, or something like that.
Matthew 24:16 says φευγέτωσαν
I wonder if Latin translators would have used cognates or similar sounding words in Latin that have the same meaning to translate a Greek document.
The Vulgate says, ‘tunc qui in Iudaea sunt fugiant ad montes’ but isn’t htat after the Irenaeus translation?
Anonymous
Link Hudson you should check it out
Anonymous
Troy Day Well, I checked it out with the Bing AI/search combo. But it disagrees with your understanding of the Latin term. Supposedly the words are derived from the same Proto-Indoeuropean root.
“Sure! “Effugabunt” is a Latin word that comes from the verb “effugio” which means “to flee” or “to escape”. The word “effugio” is derived from the prefix “ex-” which means “out of” and the verb “fugio” which means “to flee”.”
I hope this helps!
“The Latin word “effugio” comes from the prefix “ex-” which means “out of” and the verb “fugio” which means “to flee”. The word “fugio” is derived from the Proto-Italic word “*fugiō” which comes from the Proto-Indo-European root “*bʰewg-” which means “to flee”.
The Greek word “φεύγω” (pronounced “pheúgo”) comes from the Proto-Indo-European root “*bʰewg-” which means “to flee”.
I hope this helps!”
I also asked about ‘flee’ which is supposed to be from the same root:
“The word “flee” comes from the Old English word “fleón” which means “to flee” or “to run away”. The word “fleón” is derived from the Proto-Germanic word “*fleuhaną” which comes from the Proto-Indo-European root “*bʰewg-” which means “to flee”.
I hope this helps!”
Anonymous
Link Hudson so basically it told you flee is not effugio since effugio means to escape; which I also have been saying for sometimes now
Anonymous
Link Hudson sure – already explained why this is wrong translation
literally from the LATIN as already told Brett Dobbs and his video friend
and these the church shall escape – consistent with pre-Trib which Irenaeus already mentions 3-4 times in the text (also shown over 10 times here)
as to your inconsistent citation of various Jesuit/gnostic sources which for some reason you prefer as your grassroots or something
There are ONLY 2 published/printed translation in English of this
They are BOTH made from Latin
I have posted them both in this discussion if you would like to check them as Brett Dobbs checked them – they differ from your digital internet sources because they actually have the FOOTNOTES whereas my point is well explained. Both English translators struggled with Irenaeus pre-trib and twisted the word ESCAPE as per their reformed theory or something – who knows? – but their footnotes of both of them are consistent with what I am saying here. Any average Latin scholar will tell you the same
Brett Dobbs realized what I was explaining a week or 2 ago and figured it out. His video friend just came to the forum with a single comment as he has figured it out but he has also never read the Latin – – – he’s got less than 24hrs to come back with a response to his debunked theory which is not even a translation
NOW if you would like to talk Irenaeus more I advise you to read ALL FOUR 4 quotes Brett brought from the video. I have given the sources the translation and the explanation – they all link Irenaeus to pre-trib NO question whatsoever. There was 1 Link Brett showed on who Israel is in the text which I also proved from Irenaeus when he refers to church and when to Israel so there is NO confusion. All 4 quotes are pre-trib and you cant just take 1 out of context and try to make it post-trib or post-mil when the text clearly states the church shall escape all these #over Even Philip Williams is quite on this point cause he knows well the Latin Pope
Anonymous
Troy Day you would have to have the Latin dictionary makers in on the attempt to make Irenaeus’ comment in the section I quoted be about the rapture, since they translate/gloss the word in question as ‘flee.’
The idea that the word in question inheres the meaning of being caught up into the sky would seem rather unrealistic. When would such a word have an occastion for usage to make it a part of the language. People would usually escape by fleeing, and it makes sense that a word that means escape by fleeing could be glossed as flee.
Past on recent and past experience I don’t trust you to give an accurate description of what Latin (or Greek) words mean when you have an eisegetical objective. You don’t generally make your case in detail or explain weaknesses of your argument…or even acknowledge them when they are pointed out?
Why would the dictionaries include flee if that is not part of the range of meaning?
I choose a copy of Irenaeus that shows up on a Google search, btw, something cut and pastable in the language I am looking for.
Anonymous
Troy Day Just looking at the Latin phrase and running it through a translator. It seems like your argument seems a little stronger (if we don’t actually read the context) just based on the turn of phrase used in the standard english translation ‘caught up from this.’ But where is the ‘from this’ in Latin?
I am looking at “et propterea cum in fine repente
hine ecclesia assumetur: erit, inquit…” and I cannot find where ‘hine’ means anything in Latin. The footnote says AR ‘hie’ is ommited and asummitir is used.
So is that n in hine a typo? So should it read:
“et propterea cum in fine repente
hie ecclesia assumetur: erit, inquit”
or
“et propterea cum in fine repente ecclesia assumitur: erit, inquit”
It should not be ‘caught up from this’ in translation, should it?
But the church is caught up, according to Ireneaus, after the last great trial, the tribulation. And it is clear later that Irenaeus thinks the church will flee from the Antichrist’s alliance.
Anonymous
Link Hudson what translator?
Anonymous
Google translate has a Latin translator. I used that one.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs I would like to establish once again
where does the speaker get his knowledge on Irenaeus?
where does Link Hudson get his knowledge on Irenaeus?
Dale M. Coulter has clearly stated his knowledge on Irenaeus will come from a brother who is translating the original @ St.Vlad’s. That I would too consider scholarly source
I would like to see an actual scholarly source in yalls interpretation of Irenaeus
for crying out loud none of yall has actually seen Irenaeus original till I posted and all of a sudden yall are google/AI experts on the subject. Silly @ best if not ridiculous WHAT is yall specialty anyway Link + Brett – let me know so I can bring arguments against what you know from the free AI – future brain of the antiChrist
Anonymous
Troy Day Your translation of Irenaeus doesn’t back up your pre-trib claims. It is a moot point. A reference to the church escaping the Anti-Christ in reference in Revelation 17 is not a pre-trib rapture scenario.
Anonymous
Link Hudson there is NO reference to Rev 17 by Irenaeus here
you are just making this up as you go – no real logic in your comments which means you are out of arguments once again. And likely so since you are still refusing to look into the actual original text #ohWell
Anonymous
I don’t know Latin. I thought you wre referring to the section on the beast.
Anonymous
Let’s look at the section. Is this still the one you have in mind?
1. In a still clearer light has John, in the Apocalypse, indicated to the Lord’s disciples what shall happen in the last times, and concerning the ten kings who shall then arise, among whom the empire which now rules [the earth] shall be partitioned. He teaches us what the 👉ten horns👈 shall be which were seen by Daniel, telling us that thus it had been said to him: And the ten horns which you saw are ten kings, who have received no kingdom as yet, but shall receive power as if kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and give their strength and power to the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them, because He is the Lord of lords and the King of kings. 👉Revelation 17:12👈, etc. It is manifest, therefore, that of these [potentates], he who is to come shall slay three, and subject the remainder to his power, and that he shall be himself the eighth among them. And they shall lay Babylon waste, and burn her with fire, 👉and shall give their kingdom to the beast, and put the Church to flight👈. After that they shall be destroyed by the coming of our Lord.
That’s from https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103526.htm and no I’m not Roman Catholic for quoting from that site.
Are you saying the part translated above as ‘put the church to flight’ means the church escaped? Are you saying that after all this Revelation 17 stuff, the church goes back in time and gets pre-trib raptured around chapter 4?
Or do you think another word in Irenaeus work, in a different section, uses the word to refer to a pre-trib rapture, and Irenaeus switched between eschatological views to a non-pretrib view in the quote above. I don’t see how you can make a pretrib case form it. Here he is clearly not pre-trib since he’s got the church still there in Revelation 17.
Chapter 17 doesn’t mention the church fleeing. It mentions the whore drunk on the blood of the saints. He may be thinking of ‘flee to the mountains’ in Matthew 24. Maybe combining his interpretation with an interpretation of chapter 13, which mentions war on the saints, but not the saints fleeing here. Maybe he has the woman from the manchild passage fleeing into the desert. But lets look at sections in chapter 13 and 17.
Revelation 17
11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are 👉ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
13 These have one mind, and 👉shall give their power and strength unto the beast.👈
14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
Revelation 13
13 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his 👉horns ten crowns👈, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
4 And they worshipped the 👉dragon👈 which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7 And it was given unto 👉him to make war with the saints👈, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
Revelation 12
3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red 👉dragon, having seven heads and ten horns👈, and seven crowns upon his heads.
4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
6 And 👉the woman fled into the wilderness👈, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
Anonymous
such distractions…
have ye received the holy Ghost?
Anonymous
Media: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10218828574063999&set=p.10218828574063999&type=3
Anonymous
Link Hudson anywhere else the great red dragon is mentioned?
Anonymous
good question Christopher Lockhart
Anonymous
Link Hudson you are correct – you do not know Latin
Anonymous
Troy Day The translator could have added in the verse reference based on what Irenaeus wrote.
Irenaeus 👉”And the ten horns which you saw are ten kings, who have received no kingdom as yet, but shall receive power as if kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and give their strength and power to the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them, because He is the Lord of lords and the King of kings. Revelation 17:12👈, etc. It is manifest, therefore, that of these [potentates], he who is to come shall slay three, and subject the remainder to his power, and that he shall be himself the eighth among them. And they shall lay Babylon waste, and burn her with fire, and shall give their kingdom to the beast, and 👉put the Church to flight👈.
from https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103526.htm#:~:text=Against%20Heresies%20(Book%20V%2C%20Chapter%2026)&text=John%20and%20Daniel%20have%20predicted,Father%20different%20from%20the%20Creator.
Looky there. Ireneaus thinks the church will still be there after Babylon is laid waste, not raptured up years prior.
And the text I am using references:
Revelation 17
12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, who have not yet received their royal title, but are to enjoy such power as kings have, for one hour, in succession to the beast.
I suspect you do not know Latin as well as you are trying to make us think you do. Either you do not know enough to know the full range of meaning of the words in question, or else you know it so well that you know better than the translators and dictionary writers, and they are just plain wrong.
Anonymous
BTW Link Hudson Irenaeus never says the church is on earth
He speaks of ISRAEL as I already showed Brett Dobbs from a number of Irenaeus quotes
Anonymous
Troy Day Irenaeus probably views the Israel and church relationship the same way I do.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs so now you actually know HOW Irenaeus views the Israel and church relationship?? pls enlighten us – guess last time wasnt enough so tomorrow may turn to re-run of the 4 passages + the church
Anonymous
he no-link Link you cannot challenge anything if you havent read the source So far on this OP you are talking about texts you havent yet read or even seen #soSad
Anonymous
Troy Day Okay, so this is about me not reading Latin. Well, I did read some of the Latin during our conversation. I just don’t know Latin. But that appeal-to-power logical fallacy doesn’t work on me. I don’t believe you know better than the translators.
I also do not believe the dictionary authors are in on some kind of amil conspiracy to make people think a word means flee instead of rapture.
Anonymous
OK all it takes is for you to post your link Link or you are no-link?
Anonymous
Troy Day Btw, lots of them on of the threads today. I’m not sure if this is the thread, honestly. I’ve bounced between whatever Irenaeus link I found the quote on. I’ve done new advent for chapter 26, I think, and 35. Same old stuff over and over again.
This is a red herring. You know where to find copies of Against Heresies online. If you had a solid argument, would you be offering such challenges? This is immature.
Anonymous
go prep your msg Link hope you do better than you eisegesis here
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs you are left alone again my brother
too bad your 4 points were debunked 2 weeks ago
no-link Link has left for an urgent non-pEntecostal non-missionary non-cog sermon
your video author dropped 4 erroneous quotes and run away 🙂
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs since your video friend did not respond for over 48hrs and it is clear he never used the writings in their original I am reposting my debunking of his fake the previlous theory once again as I did last week from my source: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015036943101&view=1up&seq=406
[1] (Against Heresies, V, 26, 1)
et effugabunt Ecclesiam
means literally –
and/which the Church shall escape
has nothing to do with drive out or put to flight
these are simply NOT in the text
[2] Against Heresies, V, 30, 3, 4)
He’s saying the church will become aware of who he is, so that they can avoid him. Meaning that the the church will still be here.
your VIDEO friend is saying this about the church but the word CHURCH
or saints or believers is/are not even mentioned in V, 30, 3, 4 #sorry
[3] (Against Heresies, V, 35, 1)
refers to the JUST – never stated the church, believers, Christians or anything like this
here is the actual proof from Against Heresies V.34 explains your misquote from V.35 1. Then, too, Isaiah himself has plainly declared that there shall be joy of this nature at the resurrection of the just, – Isaiah plainly refers to ISRAEL of course https://www.jpost.com/christian-in-israel/comment/irenaeus-and-israel-318416
[4] Irenaeus refers to the tribulation as the last contest of the righteous is absolutely WRONG – THE rapture is their final test as Jesus declared in Rev 3:10
whoSOever fails it shall not be raptured
“When in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this,
it is said, ‘There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning,
neither shall be.’ For this is the last contest of the righteous,
in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.” (Against Heresies, V, 29, 1)
Anonymous
Troy Day did you personally invite Joel Richardson to this forum in order for him to respond to your statement regarding Irenaeus?
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs he responded to the actual page and is able to read and respond here. I also invited him to the group 2 days ago WhatS up?
Anonymous
Troy Day oh okay I never saw his direct response to you.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs there was the initial response in the general discussion under his comments here to which I presented the 48hr timeline and my take. It is open and free for ALL to read and learn NOT rocket science https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/dr-troy-days-quote-irenaeus-on-the-pre-trib-rapture/
Anonymous
Where did you get your doctorate from, Dr. Day?
Anonymous
Ben Bottke which one?
Anonymous
Troy Day – Maybe you could list what field of study each doctorate is in and what school you received it from.
Anonymous
Ben Bottke its been listed on my profile for many long years
Anonymous
SO just like last time Brett Dobbs once your quotes were defeated you run away. More unfortunately your expert who to this day holds his wrongly quoted texts and also run away from the discussion has not come out with the TRUTH when exposed
WHAT is the problem – the expert quoted from some GREEK source translation as we well know these quotes have reached us ONLY in Latin. The first one that is so often cited is easily explained in the footnote of its English translation – not the gnostic one, from whereas it is clear it refers to pre-trib The ONLY argument I have encountered about this was from Dale M. Coulter and we agreed to wait for a new Coptic translation to compare since the French sources online were removed (though I found them). I also checked the Coptic translation with some Coptic scholars I knew back in the day and they confirmed in their Coptic texts he states Church is taken BEFORE the Tribulation
Thus we arrive to your 2nd quote which is a copout but let me address it once again – this being 4-5th time translating it and explaining. I am doing this in great hope that your expert who spreads untruths about this finally grows some to come in the group and discuss it personally and not via proxies who also have not read the original
[2] Against Heresies, V, 30, 3, 4
“It is therefore more certain, and less hazardous, to await the fulfillment of the prophecy [concerning the revealing of the Antichrist], than to be making surmises, and casting about for any names that may present themselves, inasmuch as many names can be found possessing the number mentioned; and the same question will, after all, remain unsolved. . . . But he indicates the number of the name now, so that when this man comes WE may avoid him, being aware who he is.” (Against Heresies, V, 30, 3, 4)
<<< He’s saying the church will become aware of who he is, so that they can avoid him. Meaning that the the church will still be here. Irenaeus sought to prepare his readers to be able to identify the Antichrist when he arrived >>>
He’s nowhere here saying the church! He is NOT saying ANY of this. BOTH these statements by you/your expert right or wrong do NOT derive from the cited text. Your VIDEO friend-expert-guru is saying this about the church but the word CHURCH or saints or believers is/are not even mentioned in V, 30, 3, 4 #sorry John Mushenhouse Terry Wiles Ben Bottke Charles Lee Causey Sr. Michael Chauncey will tell you the same!
Anonymous
Troy Day thank for addressing the 4th quote. This is the 4th and not the 2nd.
But he indicates the number of the name now, so that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is.
(Against Heresies, V, 30, 3, 4)
Irenaeus says: so we may avoid him when he comes. Who is the “WE”?
And don’t forget there are two more quotes you must deal with.
The resurrection of the JUST taking place after the anti-Christ comes.
Irenaeus (c.120-202)
“For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule; in which the righteous shall reign in the earth, waxing stronger by the sight of the Lord”
(Against Heresies, V, 35, 1)
The beast puts the church to flight, meaning the beast will persecute the church.
Irenaeus (c.130-202)
“And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, who have received no kingdom as yet, but shall receive power as if kings one hour with the beast”… And they shall lay Babylon waste, and burn her with fire, and shall give their kingdom to the beast, and put the Church to flight. After that they shall be destroyed by the coming of our Lord.
(Against Heresies, V, 26, 1)
Anonymous
Troy Day Satan will not be given a free episode with mankind until He who prevents and controls him (Jesus) is taken out of the way. Jesus is the Light. When the light is removed from mankind, mankind will walk in darkness …outer darkness. But, can those of outer darkness still be saved? YES! Read Luke 12:36, Rev.2:10, 14:14, 15:2. Those of outer darkness will know Satan and his workers by who has what mark and what they are teaching.
Anonymous
Troy Day It is this wrangling over the words of men that creates a distraction and diversion in the body of Christ.
Focus on the sound exegesis of Scripture.
Biblical eschatology is Premillennial.
The rapture is Pre-Trib because the Trib is for ethnic national Israel, her time of Jacob’s trouble.
II Tim. 2:15
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs I am not certain you see the textual issue here As Charles Lee Causey Sr. Duane L Burgess also pointed out there is NOTHING in this about the church. I understand you desire to mix them and create face theories but it just aint there. Neither the 1st quote NOR the 2nd quote prove post-trib On the contrary the first quote speaks of pre-trib as clear as day and the 2nd quote dont mention church or rapture. And yes V, 26, 1) is the 2nd quote preceding ch 30 and 34 which I will deal with LATER. I understand how you changing the order may make some since but the author JUST did not see it your way. So on the 2nd quote without the word church or rapture in them HOW do you relate this to any of your fake theories? BTW just to insist THAT V, 26 is AFTER chapters 30 and 34 is just twitting the text to say whatever you wanted it to – this time you may wanna call your friend in here and soon
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs seems like you have departed from the discussion unable to defend your 2nd quote. If you too now feel its irrelevant to your point I will be happy to move to quote #3 but after nagging for a week that you cant find it and now given to you on a silver platter – is the quote just wrong or it simply does not prove your point which was wrong to start with ?
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs I did answer the questioning FULL though you ignored it Your friends argument simply does not fly with the text I will however NOT allow reposting his silly selfish argument in disregard without him ever reading the original text. There is NO point of reposting the same answered argument just to make a living on it. If you have ANY questions on the text I will be happy to discuss when posted orderly. This copy paste of his you keep on pashing is done with HE is more then welcome to come and discuss his silly point if he dares of course. Last time he flew away or was taken before the rapture. SO on quote #2 from (Against Heresies, V, 26, 1) WHAT important question of yours you feel has not YET been done fully answer 4-5 times by Charles Lee Causey Sr. and Duane L Burgess ??? I will be happy to take on it myself BUT first explain where do you see the words church OR rapture in #2 from (Against Heresies, V, 26, 1) so we know how your quote relates to this discussion because for now it does NOT ! And your silly copy pastes aint helping
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs since you got scared again on quote #2 and run away like your ill fated friend who have not even read the originals I would now like to address quote #3 in a separate comment – my previous comment from MAY read that avoiding the antiChrsit is very pre-TRIB but as I Will not again you do not have the words Antichrist] in this quote. You will even have hard time finding the word Antichrist] in Revelation cause it is not there. Your quote has [concerning the revealing of the Antichrist] which is NOT in the original text as seen even in this very poor English rendered https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm even the Gnostic text Link dont have this manipulative [concerning the revealing of the Antichrist] forced in it – I am sure if I consult the original AGAIN we shall not even find it in the text
Irenaeus (c.130-202)
It is therefore more certain, and less hazardous, to await the fulfillment of the prophecy [concerning the revealing of the Antichrist], than to be making surmises, and casting about for any names that may present themselves, inasmuch as many names can be found possessing the number mentioned; and the same question will, after all, remain unsolved. … But he indicates the number of the name now, so that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is.
(Against Heresies, V, 30, 3, 4)
we may avoid him, being aware who he is.
(Against Heresies, V, 30, 3, 4)
is coherent with the Church raptured pre-trib and avoiding the antiChrist
Obviously a church during Trib will NOT be able to avoid the antiChrist
REVELATION states 50% of World population will be killed
pre-trib rapture of the church TO AVOID the antiChrist is also seen in
V.29 in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this…. tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.”
Anonymous
NOW then Brett Dobbs this here is the original V XXX 3-4 and it starts with
Quoniam autem non propter inopitam nominum habentium numerum nominus ejus dicimus hae sed propter timorem eerga deum
meaning in about my relative terms this:
Since we do not say these things from his name because of the unexpected number of names they have, but because of the fear of God
which is MOST certainly NOT
is therefore more certain, and less hazardous, to await the fulfillment of the prophecy [concerning the revealing of the Antichrist],
as you insist, SO his reference is just wrong – perhaps he would like to take the time to check it in the original BEFORE making videos about it AND give us the PROPER reference he is trying to quote
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=njp.32101074938968&view=1up&seq=421
Anonymous
AND Finally your 4th quote Brett Dobbs where you claim it says
“For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule; in which the righteous shall reign in the earth, waxing stronger by the sight of the Lord” (Against Heresies, V, 35, 1)
and you claim it to mean – he’s referring to the church being called up out of the great tribulation itself. Not before but some time during.
Now I would challenge anyone here John Mushenhouse Duane L Burgess to find the word CHURCH which you claim present in the text though it is not. ” the just” could refer to ISRAEL as well during the Trib. => pretty sure refers to ISRAEL – we can check the text if I have not already done and forgotten about it THIS in NO way disprove
V.29 in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this…. tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.”
AND resurrection of the JUST of ISRAEL after Trib is also time-correct:
V.34 explains your misquote from V.35 1. Then, too, Isaiah himself has plainly declared that there shall be joy of this nature at the resurrection of the just, – Isaiah plainly refers to ISRAEL of course https://www.jpost.com/christian-in-israel/comment/irenaeus-and-israel-318416
“But why do I refer to these men? For Enoch, when he pleased God, was translated in the same body in which he did please Him, thus pointing out by anticipation the translation of the just. Elijah, too, was caught up (when he was yet] in the substance of the (natural] form; thus exhibiting in prophecy the assumption of those who are spiritual, and that nothing stood in the way of their body being translated and caught up. For by means of the very same hands through which they were molded at the beginning, did they receive this translation and assumption.”
CHAP. V.–THE PROLONGED LIFE OF THE ANCIENTS, THE TRANSLATION OF ELIJAH AND OF ENOCH IN THEIR OWN BODIES http://www.clerus.org/bibliaclerusonline/en/b0u.htm
YouVE got to LOVE the use of THE JUST as the ones who are caught up raptured taken translated for the author here
=====
SO TO SUM IT UP Brett Dobbs not sure if you gathered this info from your speaker yourself but as you begin to read the actual Irenaeus text you plainly see that
Book V.29 the church is taken pre-trib before the tribulation
Book V.35 Isiah here refers to the JUST in ISRAEL as stated in V.34
Book V, 30, 3, 4 speaks of the church avoiding the antiChrist which is coherent with the pre-trib rapture of the church Irenaeus describes in Book V.29 – I do urge you to see my comments on V.29(2) and the wrongly translated footnote in the so called English translation from whereAS this whole discussion emerged
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs I would GREATLY advise that footnotes 1 and 2 on Against Heresies, V, 35, 1 here are observed carefully as it appears the LATIN text is partial and much is inserted in italics that was NOT in the original text https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=njp.32101074938968&view=1up&seq=435
Anonymous
Troy Day
according to this link that you shared. It doesn’t seem that Irenaeus would have referenced Jews as the Just. That link actually works against your theory.
In the other quote.
Irenaeus is talking about the mystery and number of the name of the beast. So that we can know who he is so we can avoid him.
Your argument about the word anti-Christ not being in the original is 100% irrelevant.
Your arguments are weak.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs my argument is from the ORIGINAL as it has gotten to us. According to the original I shared Irenaeus referenced the Jews as the Just on multiple occasions SO there is NO need to force him saying the just are the Church, since he is clearly saying the JEWS are the just. AND resurrection of the JUST of ISRAEL after Trib is also time-correct:
V.34 explains your misquote from V.35 1. Then, too, Isaiah himself has plainly declared that there shall be joy of this nature at the resurrection of the just, – Isaiah plainly refers to ISRAEL of course
Anonymous
Troy Day according to the original that you shared? Yes I saw the original. That doesn’t help me at all because I can’t read the original. So it might as well be my word vs your word. This is fruitless and pointless.
How is this a misquote?
Irenaeus (c.130-202)
It is therefore more certain, and less hazardous, to await the fulfillment of the prophecy than to be making surmises, and casting about for any names that may present themselves, inasmuch as many names can be found possessing the number mentioned; and the same question will, after all, remain unsolved… But he indicates the number of the name now, so that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is.
(Against Heresies, V, 30, 3, 4)
And please stop posting Latin and Greek without the English. That’s waisting my time and yours. I’m starting to think that you just try giving me very complicated responses In order to annoy me. It’s working lol
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs please read the English rendering I already posted above so you dont waste your time and mine. The text you posted does not correspond with the citation – at least NOT in the original. What is wrong with this quote of yours? Why once again is posted manipulatively wrong so we cannot consult the original and see what it actually states?
Anonymous
Troy Day oh sorry I found the actual quote.
V30:4. But he indicates the number of the name now, that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is: the name, however, is suppressed, because it is not worthy of being proclaimed by the Holy Spirit.
For if it had been declared by Him, he (Antichrist) might perhaps continue for a long period. But now as “he was, and is not, and shall ascend out of the abyss, and goes into perdition,” as one who has no existence; so neither has his name been declared, for the name of that which does not exist is not proclaimed. But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing in for the righteous the times of the kingdom, that is, the rest, the hallowed seventh day; and restoring to Abraham the promised inheritance, in which kingdom the Lord declared, that “many coming from the east and from the west should sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.”
Anonymous
Troy Day I apologize I just realized the quotes that I shared were compiled sections and not the full quotes. So I will post entire sections so that we grab a hold of the entire content and context.
Anonymous
Chapter XXXV.—He contends that these testimonies already alleged cannot be understood allegorically of celestial blessings, but that they shall have their fulfilment after the coming of Antichrist, and the resurrection, in the terrestrial Jerusalem. To the former prophecies he subjoins others drawn from Isaiah, Jeremiah, and the Apocalypse of John.
1. If, however, any shall endeavour to allegorize [prophecies] of this kind, they shall not be found consistent with themselves in all points, and shall be confuted by the teaching of the very expressions [in question]. For example: “When the cities” of the Gentiles “shall be desolate, so that they be not inhabited, and the houses so that there shall be no men in them and the land shall be left desolate.” “For, behold,” says Isaiah, “the day of the Lord cometh past remedy, full of fury and wrath, to lay waste the city of the earth, and to root sinners out of it.” And again he says, “Let him be taken away, that he behold not the glory of God.” And when these things are done, he says, “God will remove men far away, and those that are left shall multiply in the earth.” “And they shall build houses, and shall inhabit them themselves: and plant vineyards, and eat of them themselves.”
For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule; in [the times of] which [resurrection] the righteous shall reign in the earth, waxing stronger by the sight of the Lord: and through Him they shall become accustomed to partake in the glory of God the Father, and shall enjoy in the kingdom intercourse and communion with the holy angels, and union with spiritual beings; and [with respect to] those whom the Lord shall find in the flesh, awaiting Him from heaven, and who have suffered tribulation, as well as escaped the hands of the Wicked one.
For it is in reference to them that the prophet says: “And those that are left shall multiply upon the earth,” And Jeremiah the prophet has pointed out, that as many believers as God has prepared for this purpose, to multiply those left upon earth, should both be under the rule of the saints to minister to this Jerusalem, and that [His] kingdom shall be in it, saying, “Look around Jerusalem towards the east, and behold the joy which comes to thee from God Himself. Behold, thy sons shall come whom thou hast sent forth: they shall come in a band from the east even unto the west, by the word of that Holy One, rejoicing in that splendour which is from thy God. O Jerusalem, put off thy robe of mourning and of affliction, and put on that beauty of eternal splendour from thy God. Gird thyself with the double garment of that righteousness proceeding from thy God; place the mitre of eternal glory upon thine head. For God will show thy glory to the whole earth under heaven. For thy name shall for ever be called by God Himself, the peace of righteousness and glory to him that worships God. Arise, Jerusalem, stand on high, and look towards the east, and behold thy sons from the rising of the sun, even to the west, by the Word of that Holy One, rejoicing in the very remembrance of God. For the footmen have gone forth from thee, while they were drawn away by the enemy. God shall bring them in to thee, being borne with glory as the throne of a kingdom. For God has decreed that every high mountain shall be brought low, and the eternal hills, and that the valleys be filled, so that the surface of the earth be rendered smooth, that Israel, the glory of God, may walk in safety. The woods, too, shall make shady places, and every sweet-smelling tree shall be for Israel itself by the command of God. For God shall go before with joy in the light of His splendour, with the pity and righteousness which proceeds from Him.”
Anonymous
Troy Day I have an idea let’s take an entire section like the one I shared above from 35 section 1 and let’s examine it and break it down. If you like to post an English version that’s different then the one I shared then do so. Copy and paste it. Just like I did. Preferably with out all the links and stuff that make it way complicated.
From this section I’m going to zoom in on a particular section.
“For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule; in [the times of] which [resurrection] the righteous shall reign in the earth, waxing stronger by the sight of the Lord: and through Him they shall become accustomed to partake in the glory of God the Father, and shall enjoy in the kingdom intercourse and communion with the holy angels, and union with spiritual beings; and [with respect to] those whom the Lord shall find in the flesh, awaiting Him from heaven, and who have suffered tribulation, as well as escaped the hands of the Wicked one.”
So now we have this part ““For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule; in [the times of] which [resurrection] the righteous shall reign in the earth”
So first off, we have the resurrection of the “Just” which is short for the “Justified” that will come after the coming of the Antichrist and the destruction of all nations that was under his rule.
So who are the Justified mentioned here? The church, Israel?
Next section, he says that the Just which are the righteous ones will….
“
the righteous shall reign in the earth, waxing stronger by the sight of the Lord: and through Him they shall become accustomed to partake in the glory of God the Father, and shall enjoy in the kingdom intercourse and communion with the holy angels, and union with spiritual beings; and [with respect to] those whom the Lord shall find in the flesh, awaiting Him from heaven, and who have suffered tribulation, as well as escaped the hands of the Wicked one.”
The Just will partake in the glory of God, will get to enjoy the kingdom, and will have communion with angels, spiritual beings, and with those who the Lord shall find in the flesh waiting for him from heaven, who have suffered tribulation and as well as escaped the hands of the evil one.
So there’s the Just, and then there are those who suffered tribulation and escape the hands of the evil one. If the Just is Israel, then who are the ones who suffered tribulation and escaped the hands of the evil one?
This reminds of 1 Thess 4 where some die, and some will be alive and remain at the coming of our Lord.
So I see one rapture and one resurrection. And it’s after the great tribulation.
Now Troy, give your take on this section then we can move on.
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs I cannot find this section as marked in the original. As 3 of your quotes they are mismatch and need to be looked into the actual Latin. So go ahead and translate this section for us and we will be MORE than happy to give you our take – until then, this quote is a mismatch! BTW you did not cite a source but I can only presume it is either the gnostic or the Jesuit site that has this text and I would not trust neither!
Anonymous
boy it hates to bU Brett Dobbs you said :::
stop posting links of the past. You avoiding again. I scrolled through the comments. It makes no sense to me. and so on
thats all youVE done 🙂 havent seen you post ANYTHING new OR read what I posted OR consult the original NOW that we found on of your Link is dead the other misquoted the first one plainly saying pre-trib and the last one referring to ISRAEL Boy I gotS to tell you it pays OFF to read the originals Without them ALL you got left is someone ill done research wrong fake and misleading Now your false teacher @ least made cash from you watching his video multiple times BUT what did you get instead of being misled @ the end?
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs because I have many NEW topics to comment on and it seems for the last days your have run away from this OP as your hoax friend did – I WILL SUM it up here for the next time when you gather your quotes to play with this
quote #1 – which I pointed out from the original speaks of PRE-trib rapture; he states the church is TAKEN – no question asked
quote #2 you posted as refutation does not even mention the CHURCH
quote #3 refers to ISRAEL and has multiple references in the same chapter where saints and chosen refers to ISRAEL including in OT Isiah
quote #4 does NOT correspond with the actual text – I am not sure where it comes from and you have failed to show where in the original it may be so we can translate it
OVERALL the 3 extra quotes you posted from your expertJoel offer a pretty misleading approach toward original – misquotes, misinterpretation, out of context, disregarding the original author – I find it very very disappointing after spending so much time to read, translate and study the original JUST to find out you and expertJoe never read it nor ever seen it to start with
Anonymous
Troy Day I’ve had better things to do then have a meaningless dialogue. I did re-summit quote #3 in a fuller context so that we could have a better discussion over it. Since you pointed out that the original quote that I posted did not match up to the original. So I went to my book to see. And you were right, because Joel took about 4 or 5 lines from that entire passage and crunched them together to show his point. So then I realized that’s why it was matching. That is why in that original quote there is a sequence of numbers at the bottom. I then realized what those numbers meant. Those numbers represent the verses that was selected. We do the same thing with the Bible when we’re reading a passage but we don’t read the entire passage but select the few verses to highlight our point that we’re making. So then I posted the entire section for us to break down and discuss.
You refuse to work through it, you type up statements that don’t relate to that 1 section. Then you attack me or Joel just like you did now. The only actual response in that entire comment above that I’ve been waiting for is “multiple references in the same chapter where saints and chosen is referred to Israel”.
Okay, I can work with that response. I’m going to go read that entire chapter and see if I can see if the “Just” is talking about Israel and not the church. If I don’t see it, then I’m going to come back and ask you to show me where you’re seeing it.
Before I take the time to go read it, are you good with us focusing on this one particular quote and can we have a fruitful dialogue? If not then I’m not going to continue with this discussion. 
Anonymous
Brett Dobbs well if you have BETTER things to do we will call it off until next time you get an itch to be scratched theologically. BUT for NOW the 3 quotes you posted did not prove your point. ThatS all !
Anonymous
YES Brett Dobbs your journey is slow but astonishing when you said
So I went to my book to see. And you were right, because Joel took about 4 or 5 lines from that entire passage and crunched them together to show his point. So then I realized that’s why it was matching. That is why in that original quote there is a sequence of numbers at the bottom. I then realized what those numbers meant. Those numbers represent the verses that was selected. We do the same thing with the Bible when we’re reading a passage but we don’t read the entire passage but select the few verses to highlight our point that we’re making. So then I posted the entire section for us to break down and discuss.
you now realize Joel mixed and matched as I have been telling you
for this reason I worked with you quote by quote and line by line
HOWEVER, I am not inclined to believe or agree with YOUR book – whatever this book may be SO I simply went to the original. Every theology professor in whos class you quote church father would insist you do so from the original
as to your NEXT false claim that I did not point MULTIPLE references
yes I did – and here they are again
According to the original I shared Irenaeus referenced the Jews as the Just on multiple occasions One great example was from Isiah – Isiah talking about Israel and not the church of course calling Israel JUST – there are number of occasions with that example as per quote #3 refers to ISRAEL and has multiple references in the same chapter where saints and chosen refers to ISRAEL including in OT Isiah
SO TO SUM IT UP Brett Dobbs not sure if you gathered this info from your speaker yourself but as you begin to read the actual Irenaeus text you plainly see that
Book V.29 the church is taken pre-trib before the tribulation
Book V.35 Isiah here refers to the JUST in ISRAEL as stated in V.34
Book V, 30, 3, 4 speaks of the church avoiding the antiChrist which is coherent with the pre-trib rapture of the church Irenaeus describes in Book V.29 – I do urge you to see my comments on V.29(2) and the wrongly translated footnote in the so called English translation from whereAS this whole discussion emerged
I would also direct the speaker to my comment on the footnote in the English translation. There are also multiple errors in the gnostic version Link Hudson quoted – – – I admit the LATIN here is NOT easy because it is rendered from Greek but one thing is clear both parts 1 and 2 of V.29 speak of pre-trib rapture.