John, Frank M and Doves,
 
Thank you all for your responses to my last post about O. I still am not sure but I have recieved the most amazing portion of peace that I now, do not feel the need to know. I just need to rest easy and trust the Lord because He loves me perfectly.
 
Please find below a portion of a letter sent to me by a friend, Buck. I am posting it below, with his permission. John, if possible could you keep the font coloring? I hope it encourages you like it did me.
 
Lets look at 2 Thessalonians 2: 1-8. and see what Paul has to say.

"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and [by] our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that d! ay shall not come], except there come a "falling away" first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as god sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is god. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what "withholdeth" that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only "He" who now letteth [will let], until "He" be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall des troy with the brightness of His coming:" KJV.

Notice above that I have placed into quotations the translated English "falling away", from verse 3, "withholdeth" from verse 6, and "He" from verse 7.

The reason that I have done this is because I believe that these 3 are intimately interconnected.

Up until just a few days ago, I was one of the many people that have had difficulty in understanding the sequence that these passages describe.

Does, (as verse 3 implies), the "falling away" happen first and then the "son of perdition" is revealed? Or does what "withholdeth" happen first, as verse 6 would imply? However while in prayer, I believe that I was perhaps given some revelation concerning them.

It is my hope that you will read the following with ! an open heart and consider its content.

Does the possibility exist, that "the falling away", the "withholdeth" and the "He" in verse 7, are all one and the same? If one were to read these passages under this understanding, and context, then they would then make perfect sense in respects to sequence.

See for yourself. Read the above as if all of these three "things"are referring to the same thing. The confusion regarding sequence simply disappears.

"Something happens", and then the "son of perdition" is revealed.

So.... what happens?

As you are probably aware, "falling away" is derived from the transliterated Greek "a! postasia", Strong's 646.

It is defined as, "a falling away" and also as a "defection or apostasy". The word is only utilized one other time in Scripture within Acts 21:21. and is translated there into English as "forsake", within the King James, (a synonym would be "depart").

Its root word etymology is from the transliterated Greek, "apostasion", Strong's 647.

And its definitions mean, "divorce, "repudiation", a bill of divorcement" this could bring to mind the "wise and foolish virgins", of Matthew 25:1-13, and also the church of Laodicea in Revelation 3:14-19., as well as the others that did not overcome the world.

"Apostasion" is derived from the transliterated, "aphistēmi", Strong's 868. It is defined as, "1) to make stand off, cause to withdraw, to remove. a) to excite to revolt. 2) to stand off, to stand aloof. a) to go away, to depart from anyone. b) to desert, withdraw from one. c) to fall away, become faithless. d) to shun, flee from. e) to cease to vex one. f) to withdraw one's self from, to fall away. g) to keep one's self from, absent one's self from."

From the above we see the falling from the faith being substantiated.

"Aphistēmi" is derived from two root words. One being the transliterated "apo", Strong's 575, which is defined as, "1) of separation. a) of local separation, after verbs of motion from a place. i.e. of departing, of fleeing. b) "of separation of a part from the whole." 1) "where of a whole some part is taken." c) "of any kind of separation of one thing from another by which the union or fellowship of the two is destroyed." d) "of a state of separation, that is of distance." 1) "physical, of distance of place." 2) of temporal, of distance of time. 2) of origin. a) "of the place whence anything is, comes, befalls, is taken." b! ) of origin of a cause."

With "apo" we see a conformation initially regarding a "separation from the faith", but then we also see a distinction made within the definitions that express, "a part or portion being taken".

"Aphistēmi" is also derived from the transliterated "histēmi", Strong's 2476, which is defined as, "1) to cause or make to stand, to place, put, set. a) to bid to stand by, [setup]. 1) in the presence of others, in the midst, "before judges", before mem! bers of the Sanhedrin. 2) "to place. b) to make firm, fix, establish." 1) "to cause a person or thing to keep his or its place". 2) "to stand, be kept intact, (of family, a kingdom) to escape in safety." 3) "to establish a thing, cause it to stand." a) to uphold or sustain the authority or force of anything." c) "to set or place in a balance." 1) to weigh: money to one, (because in very early times before the introduction of coinage, the metals used to be weighed). 2) to stand. a) to stand by or near. 1) to stop, stand still, to stand immovable, stand firm. a) of the foundation of a building. b) to stand. 1) continue safe and sound, stand unharmed, to stand ready or prepared. 2) to be of steadfast mind. 3) of quality, one who does not hesitate or wavier."

With "histēmi" we see the same thing, regarding some or a portion "standing or keeping its place", yet others with specific charateristics, "continuing safe and sound", as well an aspect of "Judgement" is introduced.

Now my proposal for "falling away" then, in utilizing all of the applicable definitions above, would not only be the "indifference" that some demonstrate regarding their Salvation, but also the "act" of the "judgement thereof". Therefore, what Paul was referring to in utilizing the word "apostasia" was not only the "falling away" from the Faith by some, but also the "end of the Age of Grace" and the ensuing judgement regarding this age". Lets see if the following would add credence to that particular theory? I will highlight the applicable definitions in respects to what He that withholdeth or restrains does in red.

The English words "what withholdeth" that are utilized in verse 6, are derived from the transliterated Gr! eek "katechō"! , Strong's 2722. It is defined as the following;, "1) to hold back, detain, retain. a) from going away. b) to restrain, hinder, (the course or progress of). 1) that which hinders, anti-Christ from making his appearance. 2) to check a ships headway, i.e. to hold or head a ship. c) to hold fast, keep secure, to keep possession of. 2) to get possession of, take. b) to possess.

Therefore, whatever the "power" is that "katechō" represents, one of the primary objectives is to "hold and restrain" evil, and has the authority to do that.

"Katechō" is derived from two root words, "kata", Strong's 2596 & "echō", Strong's 2192.

"Kata" is defined as, "1) down from throughout. 2) according to, toward, along."

Above we see by these definitions that this "power" is "down from somewhere and throughout, and perhaps "according to" could be relevant to having "authority".

Lets see what the definitions may reveal regarding "echō" now, (the other root word for "katechō"). For in doing so it may reveal further characteristics and attributes of what exactly "katechō" represents, which would then perhaps allow for us to actually identify this "entity" and "power".

Many scholars believe that "katechō" represents the "Holy Spirit". So with that in mind, I would like for you to consider the duality aspects of the following definitions. For not only would the "Holy Spirit" have the authority to "withhold or restrain" evil, but also being "the Seal of Promise" and indwelling believers, He would also "hold or possess" believers as well.

"Echō" is defined as, "1) to have, i.e. to hold. a) to have, (hold) in the hand, in the sense of wearing, to have, (hold) possession of the mind, (refers to alarm, agitating emotions etc.) to hold fast keep, to have or comprise or involve, to regard or consider or hold as. 2) to have, i.e. own or possess. a) external things, such as pertain to property or riches or furniture or utensils or goods or food etc. b) "used of those joined to anyone by the bonds of natural blood or marriage or friendship or duty or l! aw etc., of attendance or companionship." 3) to hold one's self or find one"s self so in so, to be in such or such a condition. 4) to hold one's self to a thing, to lay hold of a thing, to adhere or cling to. a) to be closely joined to a person or a thing."

So, though the above would also confirm by definition the authority to withhold and restrain, if indeed this "power" is the "Holy Spirit", then these definitions would also be applicable within the context of the believer.

Now within verse 7 of the text, this "power and entity" has been translated into English as the words "He who now", and is obviously referring! to "katechō", for the word "katechō" has been translated into the English "letteth" within that verse in the King James. Therefore the definitions of that word should also reveal attributes and characteristics of that same "power or entity" and help us discover an identity to that "power". What is interesting is that the translated "He" that letteth, (or withholdeth), in verse 7, or specifically, "He who now", is not translated from the Greek transliterated word "autos". Though there are 6 Greek words that "could" pos! sibly be translated into the English as "He", (with the transliterated ! "autos" being the most utilized), here we have the transliterated "arti", Strong's 737. The question is, "Why would Paul be inspired to utilize the word "arti" to refer to "katechō" rather than the word "autos"?"

Lets look at the definitions of "arti" to see what attributes and characteristics they present, with the hopes that they will help lead us to the true identity of this "power".

"Arti" is defined as, "1) just now, this moment. 2) now at this time! , at this very time, this moment."

Above we see that this "power" is "present at this time". However, with the inclusion of the word "moment" the definition may also possibly suggest that there will be a "change at this specific time"? Perhaps an "end of an Age"? Lets look at the root words for "arti" to see if they can provide us more specificity as to the identity of this "power or katechō".

"Arti" is derived from the root words "airō", Strong's 142, and "artos", St! rong's 740.

"Airō" is defined as, "1) "to raise up, elevate, to lift up." a) "to raise from the ground, to take up": stones. b) "to raise upwards, elevate, lift up:" the hand. c) "to draw up:" a fish. 2) "to take upon one's self and carry what has been raised up, to bear". 3) "to bear away what has been raised, to carry off". a) "to move from its place". b) "to take off or away what is attached to anything." c) "to remove." d) "to carry off, to carry away with one". e) "to appropriate what is taken". f) "to take away from another what is his, or what is committed to him. to take by fo! rce". (Harpazo?). g) "to take and apply to any use". h) "to take from among the living, either by a natural death or by violence". i) "cause to cease"."

(Now, I find the above very interesting because of the specific topic or subject that this is referring to. Paul is writing to the Thessalonians here regarding the "gathering together", or the transliterated "episynagōgē" to the Lord.

"Episynagōgē", (Strong's 1997), is defined as, "1) "a gathering together in one place." the (religious) assembly (or ekklēsia), (of Christians)."

The root! word for "episynagōgē", is the transliterated "episynagō", Strong's 1996. It is defined as, "1) to gather together besides, to bring together to others already assembled.", (see 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 and specifically verse 14.). 2) to gather together against. 3) to gather together in one place."

There are two root words for "episynagō". They are "epi", Strong's 1909 and "synagō", Strong's 4863.

"Epi" is defined as being, "upon, at, by, or before etc." and does not reveal much. However "synagō" is defined as, "1) to gather together, to gather. a) to draw together, collect. 1) of fishes. 2) of in a net inwhich they are caught. 2) to bring together, assemble, collect. a) to join together, join in one, (those previously separated). b) to gather together by convoking, (call together or summon.) (See 1 Thessalonians 4:16.). c) to be gathered, i.e. come together, gather, meet. 3) to lead with ones self. a) into ones home, i.e. to receive hospitably, to entertain. (again see 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17.)

"Synagō" is also derived from two root words. They are "syn" Strong's 4862, which is a primary preposition! denoting union, and is defined as being "with" and "agō" Strong's 71. "Agō" is defined as, "1) to lead, take with one. a) to lead by laying hold of, and this way to bring to the point of destination: of an animal. b) to lead by accompanying to (into) a place. c) to lead with one's self, attach to one's self as an attendant. d) to conduct, bring. e) to lead away, to a court of justice, magistrate, etc. (Perhaps referring to 2 Corinthians 5:10.?) 2) to lead. a) to lead, guide, direct. b) to lead through, conduct to: to something. c) to move, impel: of forces and influen! ces of the mind. 3) to pass a day, keep or celebrate a feast, etc. to go DEPART.")

Continuing on, above I said that "arti" was derived from two root words. "Artos" would be the other and is defined as the following, "1) "food composed of flour mixed with water and baked". (Brings to mind Leviticus 23 and the waving of the "firstfruit loaves" on Shavu'ot.) a) the Israelites made it in the form of an oblong, or round cake, as thick as ones thumb, and as large as a plate or platter, hence it was not to be cut but broken. b) loaves were consecrated to the Lord. c) of the breads used at the love-feasts and at the Lord's Table. 2) food of any kind."

"Artos" is derived from the transliterated "Airō", which is already defined above.

So we have gone full circle here. Now if you actually took the time to read all of the above in its entirety, and also realize that Father God had a reason for the Apostles to write the New Testament in Greek, then the definitions to the original text and of the root words, should be taken into consideration to derive meaning as they are within Hebrew.

It is my belief that these are all intimately connected as being one event. That the "gathering, rapture, resurrection" will happen First, (as the transliterated "prōton", Strong's 4412,! in verse 3 states.) And that the English "falling away" consists of the "Judgement and the end of the Age of Grace", and that the Lord is Faithful to those that are Faithful to Him.

Can't prove it, nor do I say the above is unadulterated fact, however you have to admit that it is very compelling. No?

Be Blessed in Yeshua HaMashiach, our Most Holy and Precious Savior.

Amen. Buck

 

 

 

YsiC,

Malia