{"id":22369,"date":"2023-12-28T10:41:32","date_gmt":"2023-12-28T16:41:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/intelligent-torvalds.74-208-171-134.plesk.page\/?p=22369"},"modified":"2024-04-22T09:59:34","modified_gmt":"2024-04-22T14:59:34","slug":"the-day-of-the-lord-part-7","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/religiousmind.net\/?p=22369","title":{"rendered":"The Day of the Lord, Part 7"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is a continuation<\/a> of my consideration whether my assumption that Jesus called Judas Iscariot \u1f41<\/a> \u03c5\u1f31\u1f78\u03c2<\/a> \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2<\/a> \u1f00\u03c0\u03c9\u03bb\u03b5\u1f77\u03b1\u03c2<\/a> (NET: the one destined for destruction<\/i><\/a>) is like Jesus’ disciples’ discussion about having no bread<\/i>1<\/sup><\/a> <\/i>after He said: \u201cWatch out! Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and the yeast of Herod!\u201d<\/i>2<\/sup><\/a> <\/span>In another essay<\/a> I began to look at John’s description of antichrist <\/i>and many antichrists <\/i>because Meyer’s NT Commentary<\/a> stated that many of the Church Fathers <\/i>had understood Paul’s description of the man of lawlessness<\/i>, the son of destruction<\/i>, as the Antichrist. <\/span><\/p>\n

I highlighted<\/a> two things he wrote about their insights:3<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

They correctly agree in considering that by the advent (2 Thessalonians 2:1<\/a>; 2 Thessalonians 2:8<\/a>), or the day of the Lord (2 Thessalonians 2:2<\/a>), is to be understood the <\/span><\/span><\/em>personal <\/span><\/span>advent of Christ <\/span><\/span><\/em>for the last judgment and for the completion of the Messianic kingdom<\/span><\/span>. Also it is correctly regarded as proved, that the Antichrist here described is to be considered as an <\/span><\/span><\/em>individual person<\/span><\/span>, in whom sin will embody itself.<\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Meyer’s NT Commentary<\/a> continued to elaborate on the \u201cview of the Fathers\u201d regarding \u201cthe Antichrist…considered as an individual person\u201d with the following caveat: <\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Meyer’s NT Commentary<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Google Translate<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

Yet Augustin<\/a> already remarks, that \u201cnonnulli non ipsum principem, sed universum quodam modo corpus ejus i. e. ad eum pertinentem hominum multitudinem simul cum ipso suo principe hoc loco intelligi Antichristum volunt.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/td>\nYet Augustin<\/a> already remarks, that \u201csome, not the prince himself, but the whole world, in a certain way, his body i. e. The multitude of men belonging to him, together with their own leader, want to be understood in this place as Antichrist.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Mr. Meyer cataloged many evolving views: \u201c[T]he view, first in the eleventh century, that the establishment and growing power of the Papacy is to be considered as the Antichrist predicted by Paul,\u201d4<\/sup><\/a> is a familiar one. \u201cYet even before the reference of Antichrist to Popery was maintained, Mohammed<\/em>[55] was already regarded by the divines of the Greek church…as the Antichrist predicted by Paul.\u201d5<\/sup><\/a> <\/span><\/p>\n

The power which restrained Antichrist evolved as well.<\/span><\/p>\n

The restraining power by which the appearance of Antichrist is delayed, is usually considered [by the Church Fathers] to be the continuance of the Roman Empire (\u03c4\u1f78<\/a> \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd<\/a>) and its representative the Roman emperor (\u1f41<\/a> \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd<\/a>). Some, however, as Theodorus Mopsuestius<\/a> and Theodoret<\/a>, understand by it \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6<\/a> \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6<\/a> \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd<\/a> \u1f45\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd<\/a>, i.e. more exactly, the counsel of God to keep back the appearance of Antichrist until the gospel is proclaimed throughout the earth…Chrysostom<\/a> chooses a third interpretation, that by the restraining power is meant the continuance of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit…<\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

In recent times it has often been considered as objectionable to determine exactly the individual traits of the imagery used by Paul. Accordingly the representation of the apostle has been interpreted in a <\/span><\/span><\/em>general<\/span><\/span>, <\/span><\/span><\/em>ideal<\/span><\/span>, or <\/span><\/span><\/em>symbolical <\/span><\/span>sense. To this class of interpreters belongs Koppe<\/a>, according to whom Paul, founding on an old national Jewish oracle, supported especially by Daniel<\/a>, would describe the ungodliness preceding the last day, which already worked, but whose full outbreak was only to take place after the death of the apostle; so that Paul himself was the \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd<\/a>.[57]6<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Meyer’s NT Commentary<\/a> continued:<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Meyer’s NT Commentary<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Google Translate<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

Similarly Storr<\/a> (l.c.), who understands by the \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2<\/a> \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2<\/a> \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2<\/a> [man of sin] \u201cpotestas aliqua, deo omnique religioni adversaria, quae penitus incognita et futuro demum tempore se proditura sit,\u201d and by the preventing power the \u201ccopia hominum verissimo amore inflammatorum in christianam religionem.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/td>\nSimilarly Storr<\/a> (l.c.), who understands by the \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2<\/a> \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2<\/a> \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2<\/a> [man of sin] \u201csome power, hostile to God and to all religion, which is completely unknown and will betray itself in the future at the last time,” and by the preventing power the “a multitude of men inflamed with true love into the Christian religion.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Other opinions were cited: \u201cNitzsch<\/a> (l.c.) thinks on the power of atheism first come to have public authority, or the contempt of all religion generally.\u201d7<\/sup><\/a> \u201cPelt<\/a>…sums up his views in the following words\u201d:8<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Meyer’s NT Commentary<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Google Translate<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

Mihi \u2026 adversarius illi principium<\/em> esse videtur sive vis spiritualis evangelio contraria<\/em>, quae huc usque tamen in Pontificiorum Romanorum operibus ac serie luculentissime sese prodidit, ita tamen, ut omnia etiam mala, quae in ecclesia compareant, ad eandem Antichristi \u1f10\u03bd\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd<\/a> sint referenda.<\/span><\/span><\/td>\nTo me… it seems that the opposite principle<\/em> is a spiritual force contrary to the gospel<\/em>, which until now has revealed itself most clearly in the works and series of the Roman Pontiffs, so that even all the evils that appear in the church are to be referred to the same Antichrist \u1f10\u03bd\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd<\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Ejus vero \u03a0\u0391\u03a1\u039f\u03a5\u03a3\u038a\u0391<\/a> i. e. summum fastigium, quod Christi reditum qui nihil aliud est, nisi regni divini victoria<\/em>,[59] antecedet, futurum adhuc esse videtur, quum illud tempus procul etiamnum abesse putemus, ubi omnes terrae incolae in eo erunt, ut ad Christi sacra transeant. \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd<\/a> vero cum Theodoreto putarim esse dei voluntatem illud Satanae regnum cohibentem, ne erumpat, et, si mediae spectantur causae, apostolorum tempore maxime imperii Romani vis, et quovis aevo illa resistentia, quam malis artibus, quae religionem subvertere student, privati commodi et honoris augendorum cupiditas opponere solet.<\/span><\/span><\/td>\nBut his \u03a0\u0391\u03a1\u039f\u03a5\u03a3\u038a\u0391<\/a> i. e. the highest climax, which precedes the return of Christ, which is nothing else but the victory of the divine kingdom<\/em>, [59] seems to be yet to come, since we think that time is still far off, when all the inhabitants of the earth will be there, to pass to the sacraments of Christ. \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd<\/a>, with Theodoretus, I think that it is the will of God restraining that kingdom of Satan, lest it break out, and, if we look at the middle causes, in the time of the apostles the power of the Roman government was especially strong, and in every age that resistance, which is usually opposed to the evil arts which seek to subvert religion, the desire to increase private advantage and honor.<\/span><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

According to [Pelt], the chief stress lies on <\/span><\/span><\/em>\u03a4\u1ff8 <\/a><\/span><\/span>\u039c\u03a5\u03a3\u03a4\u0389\u03a1\u0399\u039f\u039d<\/a> \u1f2c\u0394\u0397 <\/a>\u1f18\u039d\u0395\u03a1\u0393\u0395\u1fd6\u03a4\u0391\u0399 <\/a>\u03a4\u1fc6\u03c2 <\/a><\/span><\/span>\u1f08\u039d\u039f\u039c\u038a\u0391\u03c2<\/a><\/span><\/span> [literally: the mystery already working of lawlessness]. Antichrist is a union of the individuality and spiritual tendency in masses of individuals. The revolt of the Jews from the Romans, and the fearful divine punishment in the destruction of Jerusalem, Nero, Mohammed and his spiritual devastating power, the development of the Papacy in the Middle Ages, the French Revolution of 1789, with the abrogation of Christianity, and the setting up of prostitutes on altars for worship, <\/span><\/span><\/em>in the external world<\/span><\/span>, as well as the constantly spreading denial of the fundamentals of all religious truth and morality, of the doctrines of God, freedom, and immortality, and likewise the self-deification of the ego <\/span><\/span><\/em>in the internal world<\/span><\/span>,\u2014all these phenomena are the real precursors of Antichrist; but they contain only some of his characteristics, not all; it is the union of all these characteristics which shall make the full Antichrist.9<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Ultimately, though I found some of them illuminating, Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer<\/a> rejected the views developed in recent times<\/i><\/a>: <\/span><\/p>\n

It is evident that all these explanations are arbitrary. The Pauline description is so definitely and sharply marked, and has for its whole compass so much the idea of <\/span><\/span><\/em>nearness <\/span><\/span>for its supposition, that it can by no means be taken generally, and in this manner explained away.<\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

While I’m grateful to Mr. Meyer for painstakingly collecting all of these opinions in one place, I don’t intend to play guess<\/a> the identity of Antichrist as an individual person. That game scatters<\/i><\/a> in my opinion, rather than gathering with the Lord Jesus: and whoever does not gather <\/i>(\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u1f71\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd<\/a>, a form of \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c7\u03c9<\/a>) with me scatters <\/i>(\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c1\u03c0\u1f77\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9<\/a>, a form of \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c1\u03c0\u03af\u03b6\u03c9<\/a>),10<\/sup><\/a> Jesus said. So, I want to approach it differently.<\/span><\/p>\n

Matthew Poole’s<\/a> summation from his Commentary<\/a> of the difficulty of knowing \u201cwhat whithholdeth\u201d the revelation of the man of lawlessness<\/i><\/a> was very accessible:<\/span><\/p>\n

And now ye know what withholdeth<\/strong>: the apostle it seems had told them, as of his coming, so of what at present withheld the revealing of him. And what this was is difficult to know now, though it seems these Thessalonians knew it: there are many conjectures about it. This I shall say in general:<\/span><\/span><\/em>
\n1. It was something that the apostle thought not safe openly to declare in writing; else he would not have written of it so obscurely.<\/span><\/span><\/em>
\n2. It was both a thing, and a person; a thing, to<\/a> katecon<\/a>, in this verse, <\/span><\/span><\/em>that which withholdeth<\/span><\/span>; and a person, as in the next verse, o<\/a> katecwn<\/a>, <\/span><\/span><\/em>he who letteth<\/span><\/span>.<\/span><\/span><\/em>
\n3. It was also such a thing and such a person as were to be removed out of the way, not totally, but as they were hinderances [sic] of this revelation.<\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/a> echoed Mr. Poole’s<\/a> first point:<\/span><\/p>\n

It is not known precisely what is referred to by the phrase “what withholdeth,” \u03c4\u03bf\u0300<\/a> \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u0301\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd<\/a> to katechon. The phrase means properly, something that “holds back,” or “restrains”….Of this, the apostle says, they had had full information; but we can only conjecture what it was.<\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This seems to be a natural consequence of the assumption that Antichrist is an unknown individual from the future. Rather than assuming that Paul, the Holy Spirit and the New Testament are keeping something from us, I prefer to experiment with the idea that \u1f41<\/a> \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2<\/a> \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2<\/a> \u1f00\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u1f77\u03b1\u03c2<\/a> or \u03b1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2<\/a> (NET: the man of lawlessness<\/i>; KJV: that man of sin <\/i>[Table<\/a>])11<\/sup><\/a> and \u1f41<\/a> \u03c5\u1f31\u1f78\u03c2<\/a> \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2<\/a> \u1f00\u03c0\u03c9\u03bb\u03b5\u1f77\u03b1\u03c2<\/a> (NET: the son of destruction<\/i>; KJV: the son of perdition<\/i>)12<\/sup><\/a> are other words for \u1f21<\/a> \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1<\/a> \u1f10\u03bd<\/a> \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76<\/a> \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u1f77\u03b1<\/a> (NET: sin that lives in me<\/i>; KJV: sin that dwelleth in me<\/i>),13<\/sup><\/a> \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd<\/a> \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u1f78\u03bd<\/a> \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd<\/a> \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd<\/a> \u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u1f79\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd<\/a> \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70<\/a> \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2<\/a> \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u1f77\u03b1\u03c2<\/a> \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2<\/a> \u1f00\u03c0\u1f71\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2<\/a> (NET: the old man who is being corrupted in accordance with deceitful desires<\/i>; KJV: the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts<\/i>),14<\/sup><\/a> \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76<\/a> \u03c4\u1f78<\/a> \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd<\/a> \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f71\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9<\/a> (NET\/KJV: evil<\/i>…present with me<\/i>)15<\/sup><\/a> and \u1f21<\/a>…\u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be<\/a> (NET\/KJV: the flesh<\/i>).16<\/sup><\/a> I’ll work backwards through this.<\/span><\/p>\n

The spirit is willing, but the flesh <\/i>(\u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be<\/a>) is weak<\/i>,17<\/sup><\/a> Jesus said of disciples who both believed and followed Him. The Greek word translated willing <\/i>was \u03c0\u03c1\u1f79\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd<\/a> (a form of \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2<\/a>): \u201cready, willing, eager, predisposed.\u201d The Greek word translated weak <\/i>was \u1f00\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u1f75\u03c2<\/a>: \u201cweak, powerless; weak and easily defeated; sick, ill, unhealthy; disabled, physically weak, feeble, miserable; morally weak; weak in influence, without influence; structurally weak (e.g., weak stones unable to support).\u201d What is born of the flesh <\/i>(\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2<\/a>, a form of \u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be<\/a>) is flesh <\/i>(\u03c3\u1f71\u03c1\u03be<\/a>),18<\/sup><\/a> He told Nicodemus; in other words, it is weak<\/i> (\u1f00\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u1f75\u03c2<\/a>). And again, Jesus said to his disciples, The Spirit is the one who gives life; human nature <\/i>(\u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be<\/a>) is of no help!<\/i>19<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Flesh <\/i>(\u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be<\/a>) and blood cannot<\/a> inherit the kingdom of God<\/i>,20<\/sup><\/a> Paul wrote the Corinthians. He elaborated on this point in his letter to the Romans (Romans 8:1-8 NET):<\/span><\/p>\n

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus<\/a>. For the law of the life-giving Spirit in Christ Jesus has set you<\/a> free from the law of sin and death [Table<\/a>]. For God achieved what the law could not do because it was weakened (\u1f20\u03c3\u03b8\u1f73\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9<\/a>, a form of \u1f00\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c9<\/a>) through the flesh (\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f79\u03c2<\/a>, a form of \u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be<\/a>). By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh (\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2<\/a>, a form of \u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be) and concerning sin, he condemned sin in the flesh (\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f77<\/a>, another form of \u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be), so that the righteous requirement of the law may be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh (\u03c3\u1f71\u03c1\u03ba\u03b1<\/a>, another form of \u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be) but according to the Spirit.<\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

For those who live according to the flesh (\u03c3\u1f71\u03c1\u03ba\u03b1) have their outlook shaped by the things of the flesh (\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2), but those who live according to the Spirit have their outlook shaped by the things of the Spirit. For the outlook of the flesh (\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2) is death, but the outlook of the Spirit is life and peace, because the outlook of the flesh (\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2) is hostile to God, for it does not submit to the law of God, nor is it able to do so. Those who are in the flesh (\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f76) cannot please God.<\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Prior to this, Paul had written, with my flesh <\/i>(\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f76<\/a>, another form of \u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be) I serve the law of sin<\/i>.21<\/sup><\/a> [W]hen I want to do good, evil is present with me<\/i>,22<\/sup><\/a> he lamented as he characterized that evil <\/i>as a different law in my members waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to<\/a> the law of sin that is in my members<\/i>.23<\/sup><\/a> For the flesh <\/i>(\u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be) has desires that are opposed to the Spirit, and the Spirit has desires that are opposed to the flesh <\/i>(\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f79\u03c2<\/a>, another form of \u03c3\u1f70\u03c1\u03be),24<\/sup><\/a> he wrote to the Galatians. To the Ephesians he characterized this flesh <\/i>as the old man who is being corrupted in accordance with deceitful desires<\/i>.25<\/sup><\/a> He also called this old man <\/i>simply, sin that lives in me<\/i>.26<\/sup><\/a> And to the Thessalonians he described all of this as the man of lawlessness<\/em>…the son of destruction<\/em>.27<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

I’ll continue with this in another essay.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
The Day of the Lord, Part 8<\/em><\/a><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
\n

1<\/sup><\/a> Mark 8:16b (NET) Table<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

2<\/sup><\/a> Mark 8:15b (NET)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

3<\/sup><\/a> From Meyer’s NT Commentary 2 Thessalonians 2:12<\/a>, Bible Commentaries<\/a> on Bible Hub<\/a> online.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

4<\/sup><\/a> Ibid.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

5<\/sup><\/a> Ibid.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

6<\/sup><\/a> Ibid.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

7<\/sup><\/a> Ibid.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

8<\/sup><\/a> Ibid.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

9<\/sup><\/a> Ibid.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

10<\/sup><\/a> Matthew 12:30b (NET)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

11<\/sup><\/a> 2 Thessalonians 2:3 Table<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

12<\/sup><\/a> Ibid.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

13<\/sup><\/a> Romans 7:19 Table<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

14<\/sup><\/a> Ephesians 4:22<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

15<\/sup><\/a> Romans 7:21<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

16<\/sup><\/a> Galatians 5:17 Table<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

17<\/sup><\/a> Matthew 26:41b (NET)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

18<\/sup><\/a> John 3:6a (NET)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

19<\/sup><\/a> John 6:63a (NET) Table<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

20<\/sup><\/a> 1 Corinthians 15:50b (NET) Table<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

21<\/sup><\/a> Romans 7:25b (NET) Table<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

22<\/sup><\/a> Romans 7:21b (NET)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

23<\/sup><\/a> Romans 7:23b (NET) Table<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

24<\/sup><\/a> Galatians 5:17a (NET) Table<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

25<\/sup><\/a> Ephesians 4:22b (NET)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

26<\/sup><\/a> Romans 7:17b (NET) Table<\/a>, and 7:20b (NET) Table<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

27<\/sup><\/a> 2 Thessalonians 2:3b (NET) Table<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This is a continuation of my consideration whether my assumption that Jesus called Judas Iscariot \u1f41 \u03c5\u1f31\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03c9\u03bb\u03b5\u1f77\u03b1\u03c2 (NET: the one destined for destruction) is like Jesus’ disciples’ discussion about having no bread1 after He said: \u201cWatch out! Beware … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5355,5690,4892],"tags":[4550,5679,5920,774,293,847,5692,5691,5864,3844,840,883,884,4283,5926,775,5925],"class_list":["post-22369","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-section-six","category-the-day-of-the-lord","category-the-lost-son-of-perdition","tag-1-corinthians-1550","tag-2-thessalonians-23","tag-ephesians-422","tag-galatians-517","tag-john-36","tag-john-663","tag-mark-815","tag-mark-816","tag-matthew-1230","tag-matthew-2641","tag-romans-717","tag-romans-719","tag-romans-720","tag-romans-721","tag-romans-723","tag-romans-725","tag-romans-81-8"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/religiousmind.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22369","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/religiousmind.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/religiousmind.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/religiousmind.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/religiousmind.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=22369"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/religiousmind.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22369\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":23568,"href":"https:\/\/religiousmind.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22369\/revisions\/23568"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/religiousmind.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=22369"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/religiousmind.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=22369"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/religiousmind.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=22369"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}