A Prophetic Warning

Although it is taken out of its context, I would like to take a look at the verses:

2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (KJV)

In particular verse 10.

It is not enough to know the truth of the gospel, but one must love that truth (and trust one's soul to it). With the unveiling of the "son of perdition" or the "image system" present within the churches themselves (with which the Revelation is concerned (Rev 22:6)), the Lord sends strong delusion to those that practise the deceit of the dialectic (that unrighteousness of verses 10 and 12).

Instead, that would surely assert that they (the churches) have dialogued away the prophetic warnings of the Revelation because it concerns them themselves! They, instead, have dismissed it as yet a truth, but not the truth they want or would accept. Instead, they believe the lie of that product of the dialogue to consensus; the image system ties the knot of Satan over its constituent churches, and they become desolate (damned) because they rejected the truth of the warning, and instead found only pleasure in the dialogue itself.

The "truth", is not enough to justify a man - that is mere intellectual assent. Instead the love of the truth requires hard choices to be made. That "truth" however, is a strengthening of the doctrine to which God, seems somewhat opposed. He does not desire people to come up to Him "some other way" (as without a wedding garment). Instead, God offsets the strengthening of, and the opening of His scriptures (with which He blesses His elect) with a "strong delusion" to ensnare the tares and ungodly amongst His own people (those merely "called christian"). They are those that would "believe a lie" and are the "unrighteous" that practise the dialectic and take pleasure in the dialogue to consensus.

So, the truth now strengthened is to be dialogued away by the Nicolaitanes and the synagogue of Satan within the churches themselves. I give you this one warning of many - be separate.

Be ready to see this kind of "foolishness" in your church. The truth is not deprecated, it is not dialogued away by consensus, and will never change the person and reequirements of Jesus Christ. If the dialogue upon the truth occurs in your church, and it is ignored or dismissed - you have to witness that error somehow to those that remain.

If the truth is dismissed on the grounds that it is just and only found "intellectual assent" to merely accept that truth: then what is it that you love in the gospel? Is it Christ? If the truth is that the octal is the reality of the statement "faith without works is dead", in that God perfects every work whether performed or not - then also merely accepting the truth of the ultrafilter of the octal is itself to reject mere intellectual assent. One must also have and show good works as well because that "intellectual truth" is to be loved and trusted in. Now, is that more intellectual assent? Why, yes, it is!

So the octal is the image of a God of good works, and strengthens the faith of one whom loves the truth that God will perfect them, becoming the very image of Christ.

If that person (Christ) and works of God are rejected on grounds of intellectual assent, then instead, do you believe the words of Christ, or believe upon His works, or do you merely believe all He did and said because quite simply, you love Him - and His person? Do you know Him?

All three possibilties are positive, not to be separated - but are they found stronger with the octal? The devil does not attack the truth directly, instead he began by manipulating not the truth, but one's fellowship (in the love of Jesus' person). By intermixing those with error (the doctrine of Balaam) with those without on the grounds that "everyone loves Jesus", we see the leavening process at work. If every spirit were tested on their love of the one true gospel (Christ is come in the flesh) then there would have never developed such a state of affairs!

If the octal is found a key of the truth of God and of His Revelation, and the grounds of rejecting it as truth is that "all faith" requires only trust, not only knowledge, then that lonely faith without that key of truth is blind! Especially when to accept the truth of that octal is to accept that "faith without works is dead". Who then does one trust but one's teacher (and blindly)? That becomes Nicolaitanism, which thing Jesus hates.

Can one be required to do good works in Christ's name by mere "intellectual assent"? If one understands the gospel and acts on it, does Jesus' statement of building a spiritual house on the rock have any other requirements? I only recall believing and putting those words into action qualifying that rock. I see the octal and find Christ, I also hear Christ and acknowledge mercies rather than sacrifice. (I find the octal.)

Yet more realistic is the statement of those that have intellectual assent but no works of obedience to "Love God with all thy heart... and thy neighbour as thyself."

Luk 6:46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say? (KJV)

So, understanding Christ with "mere intellectual assent" is not to call Christ "Lord" in truth. The octal itself as truth would intellectually preclude this possibility of every inaction, and thus a lack of trust in the one true God.

Yet that is strictly a sophism. Is it sophist to strengthen one's faith with an argument along the ontological lines? If no faith is coherent thereby, all is become sophism, surely? Fallacies of equivocation aside - one may yet have "perfect faith". If an intellectual argument dismisses that faith as invalid, then is it all the more faith, or is it all the more false?

If on the other hand that argument agrees in faith and strengthens it - then is faith certainly all the more faith? It certainly cannot thereby become falsehood. If further things are found purged from faith and/or re-examined and altogether truth is "REVEALED" then that argument has done its job.

Yet dialogued to consensus, the truth divides the light (virtues) from the darkness (the dialectic). How can one intellectually accept the virtue of Christ and yet not do the things that He states? Such a one is a hypocrite, not one with faith, for we "surely know them by their works."

Continue To Next Page

Return To Section Start

Return To Previous Page