The Kingdom Come

An eschatologically packed chapter of the Bible is 2 Thessalonians 2, full of references of the "coming" of the Lord Jesus Christ. I'd like to approach the text first by seeing how many of the esteemed theologians [1] of the past have interpreted the text. We'll also attempt to exegetically unpack the text verse by verse as we go. First, let me post the entire text below, utilizing the New King James version. We'll note the significant variances between the more popular English translations; then citing the original Greek variances as needed, as we unpack the text.

A friend has been asking me, for a few years to start a weekly Bible study. I have been resistant, as I have been when others have asked me to start a study, due to many factors. A few being; I don't want to be presumptuous, I don't want them to feel a weekly Bible study could replace fellowship with an actual congregation, and lastly it is very serious business.

But after laying some ground rules, I decided to go forward and to be as transparent as possible, I'll be posting the basic outline of each week's study here online. The actual studies will take place on Wednesday nights in the Indianapolis area if anyone is interested (contact me).

In TKC's continuing effort to bring relevant, useful material and resources that pique the interest of Christians, TKC offers another edifying podcast promoting the work of Christ in the lives of fellow Christians.

In December of 2006 TKC interviewed Charles VanderPool the Editor-in-Chief of a then fledgling Bible translation project called The Apostolic Bible Polyglot (ABP). The project and translation effort has grown tremendously over the years, all glory to God.

Christians have long sought to understand what the "abomination of desolation" is that Jesus references in Matt 24:15 and Mark 13:14, which in turn cross-references back to Dan 11:31 and Dan 12:11. At least for the last 40 years in American "Left-Behindism", we have been told that the Abomination of Desolation is a time in the future when a "revived Roman Empire" is created and that the Devil or Antichrist is worshiped in a rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem. But what has most of historic Christianity thought of these passages?

Let's first look at Dan 11:31 and Dan 12:11

I just wanted to update readers on the TKC Verse-By-Verse Bible Commentary project. As I have related in the past, I am going through the Bible verse-by-verse and writing commentary on each verse. I am working in both the New and Old Testament so that those interested in the OT commentary can follow along there and those interested in the NT will not have to wait until I reach that point.

So far, I have completed the first three chapters of Genesis and the first chapter of Matthew. The commentary is meant to be very basic and more like a tour through the books of the Bible than an exhaustive tome that ends up being four times larger than the Bible itself.

A church in England preached Ephesians 5:22 and Colossians 3:18 and immediately many women members were so offended that they quit the congregation.  So what does Eph 5:22 and Col 3:18 say that is so offensive?

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. -- Eph 5:22

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. -- Col 3:18

Some of the women congregants said they were "disgusted" by the sermon which was accompanied by leaflets. Further, a woman member asked,

Are all Bible translations created equal? More than just a discussion over dynamic or formal equivalence (see link), is the simple question of whether a translation can dramatically affect a person's doctrine.

For example, two translations are "The Message Bible" and the "NIV".

Let's start with an example from "The Message Bible", Mt 18:15-17 concerning how to deal with a Christian who has sinned against you. Most should know this passage; about going to the offender privately, then taking two witnesses, next take it before the church, then finally, a writing off of the person as a "heathen or tax-collector" if the person doesn't repent. Look how "The Message Bible" renders this passage:

The ongoing debate between "Calvinists and Arminians" seems like a hopeless, pitched battle where some people think we should just "agree to disagree" and move to our respective corners.  After all, we are all entitled to our "opinions" right?  Well dear reader, if our approach to truth is that it is all just a matter of personal or private interpretation, then why believe anything?  Why oppose any other belief no matter how shocking it may seem to us? If we make our faith out to be as if nothing, then the little faith we have will be taken from us and someday we would look back and wonder how we arrived at a point of almost disbelief -- compromising and trading our faith for peace.

Previously I mentioned my plans to do a commentary on the entire Bible.  There was a slight delay as I searched for the right structure.  I have now decided on the structure & have completed testing commentary on the first chapter of Genesis.  Take a look and tell me what you think so far.  I wanted the structure to be very simplistic & easy to reference.  Commentaries often consume more page space than the actual verses upon which they are commenting.  Keep in mind this is just a test at the moment but I plan to go full force by this winter.  Again, I am doing this project more for my benefit in that I will later compare it to other commentaries & see where I differ & agree.  My goal is to NOT apply some "new" interpretation to the text but rather to eventually capture the "historic Christian" interpretation of the entire Bible.

You can access the Genesis 1 Commentary by clicking THIS LINK.

FEATURES

• Hover mouse pointer over verse reference to see verse. (Example: Gen 1:1)
• Click Lexicon "?" to go to a lexicon of the verse, showing original language & Strong's concordance system (thanks to blueletterbible.com)
• Easy "printer-friendly" format
• Keyed to TKC Glossary (online verision will define words contained in TKC glossary), hover mouse pointer over superscript "i" whenever present.  (Example: Trinityⁱ)

Due to my time spent within the Hyperpreteristⁱ Movement (see link), I like other hyperpreterists used to quote Matt 16:27 as a key proof-text for hyperpreterism.  The contention is, that Jesus was coming soon/shortly/quickly/about to (see link) & when He did, Mt 16:27 would be fulfilled. And hyperpreterists claim that Mt 16:27 is THE judgment.  This is also the reason many hyperpreterists fall into universalismⁱ (all saved) because if THE judgment happened in the 1st-century, then who can still be judged?

I would like to take a very practical & direct approach with Mt 16:27.

#1. What does the text say?
#2. What is the context?
#3. How has historic Christianity as a whole interpreted it?
#4. What are the supporting/conflicting verses for it?