Is The Holy Spirit Or The Church The Restrainer Of 2 Thess.?

I have shown that Iraneus taught that the future antichrist would indeed sit in and desecrate a temple of God at Jerusalem. A real temple, not an allegorical temple.

If you can show that there was a temple of God in Jerusalem in 538 AD that was desecrated, I'm all ears.
And if you would be so kind to show a quote of Irenaus stating that the 4th beast with ten kings was the Roman Empire, I'm all ears.

Even a casual surface reading of scripture tell us that the 10 horns (10 kings) of the beast are 10 kings that have power with the beast for 1 hour. (Revelation 17:12)
Indicating that all 10 kings have this power at the same time, not just 1 of them as if there was succession of them over several years in which all the others were past tense.
Not to mention that is these 10 horns (10 kings) together that hate the whore (Mystery Babylon) and desecrate her (Revelation 17:16), not just 1 of a succession of 10.
Likewise, in Daniel, the statue with the feet of 10 toes is not destroyed until the stone smashes the feet with the 10 toes. Indicating that both feet are presently in power when the smashing takes place (Daniel 2:42-44).

And there is the added indication that the 4th beast of Daniel is said to be "different" from the other 3.
The first 3 are given descriptions of known earthly animals (lion, bear, leopard).
But the 4th is not given any description of a known earthly animal.
Why?
This 4th beast is so much more fierce than any earthly kingdom. And rightly so, as the 4th beast (the beast of Revelation) will be empowered with signs and wonders that are non-earthly. The Roman Army did not exhibit those kinds of signs and wonders. They were an earthly army with earthly power as the rest were.
While the Roman army certainly had control of and even devastated Jerusalem, they did not do it with the sort of powers that that the beast of Revelation speaks of. They did it by regular old earthly power. In other words, there was really nothing "different" to speak of with the Roman Army than any other army earthly army.
No, there was something really really different about this 4th beast.


Everything needs to line up. And it's not lining up with the Roman Army theory.
The world has not yet seen an army that demonstrated the miraculous signs and wonders that the 4th beast does.
But it will.
Yes, he believed there would be a rebuilt temple, BUT soon after the fall of the Roman Empire, because as I have shown, he said that the empire "then ruling over the earth", the Roman Empire, would be divided into 10 kingdoms, among which his expected Antichrist would arise, and we cannot escape this. Please re-read chapter 26, section one.

The "hour" of Revelation is the Greek word from which we get "era", which is exactly what history reveals - the simultaneous reign of the little horn and the other kingdoms which became Europe for 1260 years.

The diverseness of the 4th beast is clearly seen in that the Roman Empire absorbed the various gods of those it conquered, which resulted in such a pantheon of dietys which can hardly be numbered today. However, the "little horn" is said to be diverse from the other ten horns, in that the Papacy was a Religio/Political kingdom, which it is again today.

Again, Irenaeus taught that Rome would fall and be divided into ten kingdoms among which the Antichrist would arise back then, not in the future, as I have shown from his very own writings.
 
I would be curious to see any quotes of Irenaus that H. Grattan Guinness provided for his conclusion, for I have personally read Against Heresies written by Irenaus for myself.

And as a courtesy to any reading this thread, I will find the exact quotes from Irenaus confirming that he taught about the FUTURE antichrist.
It may take me a several minutes, but I will do it so as to lay the matter to rest.

Stay tuned.

You go girl!
 
I thing you are reading into it what you want to.
The part I made red in your quote is not part of the quote from Irenaus, but was added by whoever was trying to make this appear as if Irenaus was a historist rather than the futurist that he was.

Here is the entire section 1 that you posted part of (and I'm going to bold an important part):

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. For that the kingdom must be divided, and thus come to ruin, the Lord [declares when He] says: "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand." It must be, therefore, that the kingdom, the city, and the house be divided into ten; and for this reason He has already foreshadowed the partition and division [which shall take place]. Daniel also says particularly, that the end of the fourth kingdom consists in the toes of the image seen by Nebuchadnezzar, upon which came the stone cut out without hands; and as he does himself say: "The feet were indeed the one part iron, the other part clay, until the stone was cut out without hands, and struck the image upon the iron and clay feet, and dashed them into pieces, even to the end." Then afterwards, when interpreting this, he says: "And as thou sawest the feet and the toes, partly indeed of clay, and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided, and there shall be in it a root of iron, as thou sawest iron mixed with baked clay. And the toes were indeed the one part iron, but the other part clay." The ten toes, therefore, are these ten kings, among whom the kingdom shall be partitioned, of whom some indeed shall be strong and active, or energetic; others, again, shall be sluggish and useless, and shall not agree; as also Daniel says: "Some part of the kingdom shall be strong, and part shall be broken from it. As thou sawest the iron mixed with the baked clay, there shall be minglings among the human race, but no cohesion one with the other, just as iron cannot be welded on to pottery ware." And since an end shall take place, he says: "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven raise up a kingdom which shall never decay, and His kingdom shall not be left to another people. It shall break in pieces and shatter all kingdoms, and shall itself be exalted for ever. As thou sawest that the stone was cut without hands from the mountain, and brake in pieces the baked clay, the iron, the brass, the silver, and the gold, God has pointed out to the king what shall come to pass after these things; and the dream is true, and the interpretation trustworthy."​


These are the 10 kings (horns) of the beast.
The end of these does not take place until the everlasting kingdom (the millennial kingdom) is raised up (the stone cut without hands).
That has not happened.
Notice that it is the everlasting kingdom that smashes them, and they are referred to as all kingdoms.
It's not just the Roman kingdom of the 6th century, but the end times when all kingdoms come against Jerusalem and make her desolate.
This lines ups with Daniels prophesy of the statue, and the stone (everlasting kingdom) smashes the FEET, and the WHOLE statue (all kingdoms) that the statue represents falls.

While the Babylon empire, the Medo/Persian empire, the Greek empire, and even the Roman empire have all fallen; the 10 horns (10 kings) are not prophetic of any of those particular kingdoms at a particular time in history, but are phrofetic all kingdoms of earth that exist in the end times. And those kingdoms that exist in the end times are going to be accompanied with miraculous powers (signs and wonders) that no army to date has shown.
I thing you are reading into it what you want to.
The part I made red in your quote is not part of the quote from Irenaus, but was added by whoever was trying to make this appear as if Irenaus was a historist rather than the futurist that he was.

Here is the entire section 1 that you posted part of (and I'm going to bold an important part):

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. For that the kingdom must be divided, and thus come to ruin, the Lord [declares when He] says: "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand." It must be, therefore, that the kingdom, the city, and the house be divided into ten; and for this reason He has already foreshadowed the partition and division [which shall take place]. Daniel also says particularly, that the end of the fourth kingdom consists in the toes of the image seen by Nebuchadnezzar, upon which came the stone cut out without hands; and as he does himself say: "The feet were indeed the one part iron, the other part clay, until the stone was cut out without hands, and struck the image upon the iron and clay feet, and dashed them into pieces, even to the end." Then afterwards, when interpreting this, he says: "And as thou sawest the feet and the toes, partly indeed of clay, and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided, and there shall be in it a root of iron, as thou sawest iron mixed with baked clay. And the toes were indeed the one part iron, but the other part clay." The ten toes, therefore, are these ten kings, among whom the kingdom shall be partitioned, of whom some indeed shall be strong and active, or energetic; others, again, shall be sluggish and useless, and shall not agree; as also Daniel says: "Some part of the kingdom shall be strong, and part shall be broken from it. As thou sawest the iron mixed with the baked clay, there shall be minglings among the human race, but no cohesion one with the other, just as iron cannot be welded on to pottery ware." And since an end shall take place, he says: "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven raise up a kingdom which shall never decay, and His kingdom shall not be left to another people. It shall break in pieces and shatter all kingdoms, and shall itself be exalted for ever. As thou sawest that the stone was cut without hands from the mountain, and brake in pieces the baked clay, the iron, the brass, the silver, and the gold, God has pointed out to the king what shall come to pass after these things; and the dream is true, and the interpretation trustworthy."​

(
These are the 10 kings (horns) of the beast.
The end of these does not take place until the everlasting kingdom (the millennial kingdom) is raised up (the stone cut without hands).
That has not happened.
Notice that it is the everlasting kingdom that smashes them, and they are referred to as all kingdoms.
It's not just the Roman kingdom of the 6th century, but the end times when all kingdoms come against Jerusalem and make her desolate.
This lines ups with Daniels prophesy of the statue, and the stone (everlasting kingdom) smashes the FEET, and the WHOLE statue (all kingdoms) that the statue represents falls.

While the Babylon empire, the Medo/Persian empire, the Greek empire, and even the Roman empire have all fallen; the 10 horns (10 kings) are not prophetic of any of those particular kingdoms at a particular time in history, but are phrofetic all kingdoms of earth that exist in the end times. And those kingdoms that exist in the end times are going to be accompanied with miraculous powers (signs and wonders) that no army to date has shown.
If you re-read my last post, you'll see that I specifically stated that my remarks were in brackets. The phrase "last times", which Irenaeus refers to, is specifically defined in the Bible as including Irenaeus' day, so any insistence by Futurists that Irenaeus' use of it was meant to only refer to the days in which we now live is a purely subjectively imposed idea.

Question 1: Did Irenaeus expect the Roman Empire to fall and be divided into ten kingdoms?
Answer: Yes, in his own words he states just that:

"...and concerning the ten kings who shall then arise, among whom the empire which now rules [the earth] shall be partitioned."​

Question 2: Did Irenaeus expect the Antichrist to arise among those ten kingdoms?
Answer: Yes, in his own words Irenaeus expected the "little horn" Antichrist to arise among the ten horns of the fallen Roman Empire and uproot three horns spoken of by both Daniel and John:

"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 kings one hour (Greek 'hora' - "any definite time period") 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 (the "LITTLE HORN") who is to come shall slay three, and subject the remainder to his power, and that he shall be himself the eighth among them."
Please read Daniel 7 where Daniel sees the fourth kingdom divided into ten kingdoms and the "little horn" Antichrist rise up among them, which is EXACTLY what Irenaeus is referring to in his above excerpts. If this is not enough to convince you, then we will be at "premise" impasse'.
 
Last edited:
And I have shown that Irenaus taught that there were be a future temple in Jerusalem at the future time that the antichrist is revealed and desecrates that temple.
And I have shown that Irenaus believed this to all happen in 3 1/2 years in the end times (which he taught would be the conclusion of the 600th year), just before the millennial kingdom of Christ which would be the 7000th year.
And I have shown that he taught that the 10 kings (horns) represented all kingdoms of the earth at the future time at the conclusion of the 6000th year.
And to top it all off, I have shown that he taught that the antichrist would be an Israelite of the tribe of Dan.

I can further show that he taught it was useless to speculate on the specific name/number of the beast. And it is why Irenaus never specifies any name of the future empire. He never specifically connects it to the Roman Empire (or any other empire name). You have added that to his words.
Irenaus was a man of details. He didn't have any reservations of mentioning specific names or places. But not once will you find him mentioning Rome, or the Roman Empire, or the Roman Army in connection with the end time antichrist.

So yep. we are at an impasse, because I am not going to put words in his mouth that he did not say.
 
And I have shown that Irenaus taught that there were be a future temple in Jerusalem at the future time that the antichrist is revealed and desecrates that temple.
And I have shown that Irenaus believed this to all happen in 3 1/2 years in the end times (which he taught would be the conclusion of the 600th year), just before the millennial kingdom of Christ which would be the 7000th year.
And I have shown that he taught that the 10 kings (horns) represented all kingdoms of the earth at the future time at the conclusion of the 6000th year.
And to top it all off, I have shown that he taught that the antichrist would be an Israelite of the tribe of Dan.

I can further show that he taught it was useless to speculate on the specific name/number of the beast. And it is why Irenaus never specifies any name of the future empire. He never specifically connects it to the Roman Empire (or any other empire name). You have added that to his words.
Irenaus was a man of details. He didn't have any reservations of mentioning specific names or places. But not once will you find him mentioning Rome, or the Roman Empire, or the Roman Army in connection with the end time antichrist.

So yep. we are at an impasse, because I am not going to put words in his mouth that he did not say.
Are you kidding me? Just what Empire do you think Irenaeus refers to when he says "...among whom the Empire which now rules..." refers to? Hint: It was the one ruling at the time he wrote that statement. Yes, we are at an impasse' but it seems for reasons more disturbing than I originally thought.
 
I have no idea what you are asking. Could you elaborate?
Why is it that everyone wants to pick "Rome" as the endtime religion/beast that came back to life? Why not the Ottoman empire? They ruled Israel (~1400 years) more than Rome (~200 years) did and they the one from which the "eighth" comes from the 7th, which was the Ottoman empire. They ended in 1924 and Turkey is making a comback in Islam. They are the 7th rulers. The Ottoman empire fulfilled a lot of prophecies. So with all this evidence, why "Rome"?
 
Why is it that everyone wants to pick "Rome" as the endtime religion/beast that came back to life? Why not the Ottoman empire? They ruled Israel (~1400 years) more than Rome (~200 years) did and they the one from which the "eighth" comes from the 7th, which was the Ottoman empire. They ended in 1924 and Turkey is making a comback in Islam. They are the 7th rulers. The Ottoman empire fulfilled a lot of prophecies. So with all this evidence, why "Rome"?
I think the reason you can't see it is b/c you don't accept the principle in prophecy of "repetition and enlargement", where God gives a prophecy (Dan 2), and then repeats it with parallel symbolism while enlarging it (Daniel 7 and subsequent prophecies). Even secular atheist historians have scratched their heads as to how in the world a 6th century B.C. Hebrew could have possibly known that Babylon would be followed by Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome, and then the barbarian divisions of Rome which became Europe, yet it seems that Christians resigned to Jesuit Futurism cannot see what even atheists admit is remarkable:

Dan 2 Dan 7.jpg
 
Why is it that everyone wants to pick "Rome" as the endtime religion/beast that came back to life? Why not the Ottoman empire? They ruled Israel (~1400 years) more than Rome (~200 years) did and they the one from which the "eighth" comes from the 7th, which was the Ottoman empire. They ended in 1924 and Turkey is making a comback in Islam. They are the 7th rulers. The Ottoman empire fulfilled a lot of prophecies. So with all this evidence, why "Rome"?
Brother, in all due respect to you as a fellow Christian I mean you no harm, but your "evidence" is based on the idea that "Jerusalem which is below" retains some significance in prophecy instead of allowing "Jerusalem which is above" (the church that is in Jesus) to be the fulfillment of such. Besides, the Ottoman Empire never "came up among the ten horns"; was not "diverse from the other horns" in that it was not only a secular power as they, but a religious power; never "spake great things/blasphemies" (claim to be God and the power to forgive sin); never to the degree of the Papacy "made war with the saints"; did not exist PRECISELY for a "time, times, and half a time" (1260 literal years according to Revelation 12) from 538-1798; never again re-emerged as a religio/political kingdom as the Vatican has done to which ALL the world seems to be "wondering after" including even Protestants who reject Protestant Historicism for Jesuit Futurism.
 
Last edited:
Brother, in all due respect to you as a fellow Christian I mean you no harm, but your "evidence" is based on the idea that "Jerusalem which is below" retains some significance in prophecy instead of allowing "Jerusalem which is above" (the church that is in Jesus) to be the fulfillment of such. Besides, the Ottoman Empire never "came up among the ten horns"; was not "diverse from the other horns" in that it was not only a secular power as they, but a religious power; never "spake great things/blasphemies" (claim to be God and the power to forgive sin); never to the degree of the Papacy "made war with the saints"; did not exist PRECISELY for a "time, times, and half a time" (1260 literal years according to Revelation 12) from 538-1798; never again re-emerged as a religio/political kingdom as the Vatican has done to which ALL the world seems to be "wondering after" including even Protestants who reject Protestant Historicism for Jesuit Futurism.
See I believe the word of God for what it says, not what I think it says. Prophecy is of no private interpretation. To say a private interpretation is the only one is just pure ego. I accept a LOT of things about the word of God including dual meaning verses like the known day and the unknown day. When you demand people to believe a certain way you’re pushing them to become stuck in tradition, just like the nativity scene. Ask anyone in the word, Christian or not, to describe the nativity scene and they’ll throw in the “3 wise men”. The truth is, the number of men is not known only the type of gift they gave is which is three. Also, the scriptures state they met Jesus in His home, not the manger. Rome was a part of Daniel’s prophecy, yes, I believe that, but I do not believe it’s part of the end time because Islam fits much MUCH better into all the verses, especially when you line up the list of places the Messiah will exact vengeance on. If you lock yourself into one dogmatic belief, you’ll miss it when it happens, just like the Pharisees. Even John the Baptist had doubts, “are You the One”. You must leave the door open to more information otherwise you’ll be looking in one place and you’ll miss the whole thing in another.

I’m not saying believe me, just consider it. I may be wrong, but for you to say I AM definitively wrong and that I don’t want to see the “truth” is just pure unadulterated pride. We don’t know 100%, it’s all interpretation with the facts we have. Before 1948 the Christian world believed in replacement theology. Then Israel became a nation. What then? (a rhetorical question – don’t answer). The perfect example is 666. No one can find it. There are tons of theories which I’m sure wars have started over some interpretation in churches. Everyone swore on their mother’s grave it was bar codes. Now we’re moving on to QR codes… what are they going to do with that new info which destroys their entire premise? I’ve presented MY idea, but even then, I do not believe I’ll ever see it because it’s implemented by the AC and I won’t be here to even know who he is. That is my belief. So present your case, as you have, but don’t judge me because I choose to not piece the puzzle together your way and say I don’t want the truth, that’s just flat wrong.
 
Why is it that everyone wants to pick "Rome" as the endtime religion/beast that came back to life? Why not the Ottoman empire? They ruled Israel (~1400 years) more than Rome (~200 years) did and they the one from which the "eighth" comes from the 7th, which was the Ottoman empire. They ended in 1924 and Turkey is making a comback in Islam. They are the 7th rulers. The Ottoman empire fulfilled a lot of prophecies. So with all this evidence, why "Rome"?
Ahh, I see what you mean now.

It is my speculation that each generation looks at the current situation and tries to tie it into if it could be the catapult of the end times.
We even have folks today claiming that America is the beast and New York City is the whore of Babylon.
And I've seen many speculate on the RCC. Everything from the RCC being the beast, being the 10 horns, and being the whore Mystery Babylon. (Make up your mind already! Which is the RCC?)

But scripture explains that until you see the abomination of desolation in the holy place, that is when you know the time has come and THE antichrist is revealed.
Before that time comes, there will be many wars and rumors of war, and there will be many antichrists.
There is a difference between antichrists and THE antichrist.

So, since Islam is a concern for us today, we do speculate as to if it could be the catapult.
I know I have!

So if you would like to start a thread on the speculation of Islam being the catapult (((hint hint))), I can add a lot to it!
 
See I believe the word of God for what it says, not what I think it says. Prophecy is of no private interpretation. To say a private interpretation is the only one is just pure ego. I accept a LOT of things about the word of God including dual meaning verses like the known day and the unknown day. When you demand people to believe a certain way you’re pushing them to become stuck in tradition, just like the nativity scene. Ask anyone in the word, Christian or not, to describe the nativity scene and they’ll throw in the “3 wise men”. The truth is, the number of men is not known only the type of gift they gave is which is three. Also, the scriptures state they met Jesus in His home, not the manger. Rome was a part of Daniel’s prophecy, yes, I believe that, but I do not believe it’s part of the end time because Islam fits much MUCH better into all the verses, especially when you line up the list of places the Messiah will exact vengeance on. If you lock yourself into one dogmatic belief, you’ll miss it when it happens, just like the Pharisees. Even John the Baptist had doubts, “are You the One”. You must leave the door open to more information otherwise you’ll be looking in one place and you’ll miss the whole thing in another.

My burden is not to push my beliefs, but to challenge convention thinking by presenting the eschatological view that was held by Protestants worldwide for centuries until its recent replacement by modern interpretations. Proverbs 17:18 says that the man who speaks first seems right until another comes to challenge him. For several generations, the only voice that has been heard is that of Jesuit Futurism. :)
 
My burden is not to push my beliefs, but to challenge convention thinking by presenting the eschatological view that was held by Protestants worldwide for centuries until its recent replacement by modern interpretations. Proverbs 17:18says that the man who speaks first seems right until another comes to challenge him. For several generations, the only voice that has been heard is that of Jesuit Futurism. :)

I really don't know what you're going on about... I use the word of God for what I believe.
 
Back
Top