New Jerusalem?

[Quasar92]

We should all find it strange that Dr. Ice's interpretation is not found in any of the older commentaries.
Go back to the time of the American Revolutionary War and find just one commentator who agrees with Dr. Ice.



Pretribulationist Revisionism
(Grant Jeffrey’s revision of early Church Posttrib viewpoints)
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/Jeffrey.pdf

.


.

Show me in any Scripturally supported way, the teachings of Paul, in 1 Thess.4:14-17 and in 2 Thess.2:1-8 contains a single particle inferring those teachings pertain to an apostasy.falling away, instead of what it is about, a rapture of the Church!

Dr.Ice is far from the only esteemed theologian who interpret the Greek term, "apostasia,"as "departure." Below is a list of others who do, as well:

1. Frank L. Gaebelein, A.M., Litt.D., Headmaster Emiritus, The Stoney Brook School; 2. William Culbertson, D.D., L.L.D., President, Moody Bible Institute; 3. Charles L. Feinberg, ThD., PhD., Dean, Talbot Theological Seminary; 4. Allan A. Mac Rae, A.M., PhD., President, Biblical School of Theology; 5. Clarence E. Mason, Jr., Th.M., D.D., Dean, Philadelphia College of Bible; 6. Alva J. Mc Clain, Th.M., D.D., President Emeritus, Grace Theological Seminary; 7. Wilbur M. Smith, D.D., Editor, Peloubet's Select Notes; 8. John F. Walvoord, A.M., Th.D., President, Dallas Theological Seminary; 9. C.I. Scofield, D.D., Editor, Scofield Bible; 10. Editorial Committee Chairman, J. E. Schuyler English, Litt.D.

Chuck Missler, Koinonia House, Charles Stanley, Baptist minister, Zola Levitt, Levitt's Ministries, Miles Weiss, Zola Levitt's Ministries, Moishe Rosen, Jew's For Jesus Org., David Bickner, Jew's For Jesus Org., Mitch Glaser, His Chosen People Minisries Dwight Pentecost, Dean at Dallas Theological Seminary, Harold Wilmington, Dean at Liberty Seminary, Arno Froese, Editor and CEO of Midnight Call Ministries, Thomas Ice, PhD., Author, Jack Van Impe, TV Ministry, Tim Le Haye, Author, Jerry Fallwell, Baptist minister, Billie Graham, TV ministry, Franklin Graham, TV ministry, Dr. Ron Carlson, Dr. Wilfred Hahn, Dave Hunt, Ed Decker and Dr. Norbert Lieth.

Tell me how your 1499 Geneva Bible translated 2 Thess.2:3!

FROM ANOTHER SOURCE:

2 Thes. 2:3, Falling Away Or Departure? – Grace thru faith


Quasar92

 

[jgr]

Show me in any Scripturally supported way, the teachings of Paul, in 1 Thess.4:12-16 and in 2 Thess.2:1-9 contains a single particle inferring those teachings pertain to an apostasy.falling away, instead of what it is about, a rapture of the Church!

Dr.Ice is far from the only esteemed theologian who interpret the Greek term, "apostasia,"as "departure." Below is a list of others who do, as well:

1. Frank L. Gaebelein, A.M., Litt.D., Headmaster Emiritus, The Stoney Brook School; 2. William Culbertson, D.D., L.L.D., President, Moody Bible Institute; 3. Charles L. Feinberg, ThD., PhD., Dean, Talbot Theological Seminary; 4. Allan A. Mac Rae, A.M., PhD., President, Biblical School of Theology; 5. Clarence E. Mason, Jr., Th.M., D.D., Dean, Philadelphia College of Bible; 6. Alva J. Mc Clain, Th.M., D.D., President Emeritus, Grace Theological Seminary; 7. Wilbur M. Smith, D.D., Editor, Peloubet's Select Notes; 8. John F. Walvoord, A.M., Th.D., President, Dallas Theological Seminary; 9. C.I. Scofield, D.D., Editor, Scofield Bible; 10. Editorial Committee Chairman, J. E. Schuyler English, Litt.D.

Chuck Missler, Koinonia House, Charles Stanley, Baptist minister, Zola Levitt, Levitt's Ministries, Miles Weiss, Zola Levitt's Ministries, Moishe Rosen, Jew's For Jesus Org., David Bickner, Jew's For Jesus Org., Mitch Glaser, His Chosen People Minisries Dwight Pentecost, Dean at Dallas Theological Seminary, Harold Wilmington, Dean at Liberty Seminary, Arno Froese, Editor and CEO of Midnight Call Ministries, Thomas Ice, PhD., Author, Jack Van Impe, TV Ministry, Tim Le Haye, Author, Jerry Fallwell, Baptist minister, Billie Graham, TV ministry, Franklin Graham, TV ministry, Dr. Ron Carlson, Dr. Wilfred Hahn, Dave Hunt, Ed Decker and Dr. Norbert Lieth.

Tell me how your 1499 Geneva Bible translated 2 Thess.2:3!

FROM ANOTHER SOURCE:

2 Thes. 2:3, Falling Away Or Departure? – Grace thru faith


Quasar92

Your list is fraudulent.

Darby and Scofield both translate 2 Thess. 2:3 as apostasy or falling away in their Bible versions.

Chuck Missler declares that 2 Thess. 2:3 teaches apostasy.

Charles Stanley declares that 2 Thess. 2:3 teaches apostasy.

Alva McClain declares that 2 Thess. 2:3 teaches apostasy:

“The Apostasy of the Church

Without designating a specific time table, the Apostle Paul warns of a “falling away” from the faith (2 Tim 4:1) that will lead to a heeding of deceitful spirits and the teachings of demons (I Tim 4:2) Paul simply says it will occur in the “later times” and produce hypocrisy and a searing of the conscience. This apostasy will be religious and moral in nature (II Tim 3:1-7) and will happen prior to the rapture of the Church and before the revelation of the son of destruction, the Antichrist (II Thess. 2:1-5). Paul further teaches that the seeds of apostasy are present in the Church but they will also completely mature in the last days, which he describes as “difficult times” (II Tim. 3:1).”

Alva J McClain School of Theology Doctrinal Statement

There are undoubtedly others.

To borrow some of your rhetoric (bad move I know), yourself, Thomas Ice, et al are accusing every contemporary English Bible translator, of whom there are dozens, and every one of whom translates the word as "apostasy" or "falling away" or equivalent; of being a liar.

You still haven't told us what you see when you plug "apostasia" into the Greek side of a Greek-English online translator.

Here's a clue: You won't see "departure". You will see "apostasy".

Here's more: Into an English-Greek translator, plug "departure", "rapture" , and "apostasy" into the English side, and tell us what you see.

Yeah.

 

[BABerean2]

Tell me how your 1499 Geneva Bible translated 2 Thess.2:3!

From the 1599 Geneva Bible, which is the Bible the Pilgrims brought to America, long before John Nelson Darby showed up on our shores with his modern Two Peoples of God doctrine.


2Th 2:3 Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition,

2 Thessalonians 2:3
Let no man deceive you by any means,.... By any of the above means; by pretending to a revelation from the Spirit; or to have had it from the mouth of anyone of the apostles; or to have a letter as from them, declaring the day of Christ to be instant; or by any other means whatever; do not be imposed upon by them for the following reasons, for there were things to be done before the coming of Christ, which were not then done, and which required time: for that day shall not come,

except there come a falling away first; either in a political sense, of the nations from the Roman empire, which was divided into the eastern and western empire; for which, way was made by translating the seat of empire from Rome to Byzantium, or Constantinople; the former of these empires was seized by Mahomet, and still possessed by the Turks; and the latter was overrun by the Goths, Huns, and Vandals, and torn to pieces; Italy particularly was ravaged by them, and Rome itself was sacked and taken: or rather in a religious sense, of the falling of men from the faith of the Gospel, from the purity of Gospel doctrines, discipline, worship, and ordinances; and this not of some Jews who professed faith in Christ, and departed from it, or of some Christians who went off to the Gnostics; but is to be understood of a more general defection in the times of the Papacy; when not only the eastern churches were perverted and corrupted by Mahomet, and drawn off to his religion, but the western churches were most sadly depraved by the man of sin, by bringing in errors of all sorts in doctrine, making innovations in every ordinance, and appointing new ones, and introducing both Judaism and Paganism into the churches; which general defection continued until the times of the reformation, and is what the apostle has respect to in 1Ti_4:1 where he manifestly points out some of the Popish tenets, as forbidding marriage to priests, and ordering abstinence from meats on certain days, and at certain times of the year: this was one thing that was to precede the coming of Christ, another follows, which should take place at the same time;

and that man of sin be revealed; who was now hid, though secretly working; by whom is meant not only any particular person or individual; not the devil, for though he is the wicked one, a damned spirit, an opposer, an adversary of God and Christ, and his people, and who has affected deity, and sought to be worshipped, and even by Christ himself; yet the man of sin is here distinguished from Satan, 2Ti_2:9 nor is any particular emperor of Rome intended, as Caius Caligula, or Nero, for though these were monsters of iniquity, and set up themselves as gods, yet they sat not in the temple of God; nor is Simon Magus designed, who was a very wicked man, a sorcerer, and who gave out himself to be some great one, and was called the great power of God, before big profession of faith in Christ; and afterwards affirmed that he was God, the Father in Samaria, the Son in Judea, and the Spirit in the rest of the nations of the world; and, because of his signs and lying wonders, had a statue erected by the Roman emperor with this inscription, "to Simon the holy god"; but then this wicked man was now already revealed: nor is this to be understood of a certain Jew, that is to be begotten by the devil on a virgin of the tribe of Dan, and who is to reign three years and a half, and then to be destroyed by Christ, which is a fable of the Papists; but a succession of men is here meant, as a king is used sometimes for an order and succession of kings, Deu_17:18 and an high priest for that whole order, from Aaron's time to the dissolution of it, Heb_9:7 so here it intends the whole hierarchy of Rome, monks, friars, priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and especially popes, who may well be called "the man of sin", because notoriously sinful; not only sinners, but sin itself, a sink of sin, monsters of iniquity, spiritual wickednesses in high places: it is not easy to reckon up their impieties, their adulteries, incest, sodomy, rapine, murder, avarice, simony, perjury, lying, necromancy, familiarity with the devil, idolatry, witchcraft, and what not? and not only have they been guilty of the most notorious crimes themselves, but have been the patrons and encouragers of others in sin; by dispensing with the laws of God and man, by making sins to be venial, by granting indulgences and pardon for the worst of crimes, by licensing brothel houses, and countenancing all manner of wickedness; and therefore it is no wonder to hear of the following epithet,

the son of perdition; since these are not only the Apollyon, the king of the bottomless pit, the destroyer, the cause of the perdition of thousands of souls, for the souls of men are their wares; but because they are by the righteous judgment of God appointed and consigned to everlasting destruction; the devil, the beast, and the false prophet, will have their portion together in the lake that burns with fire, Rev_20:10 the same character as here is given of Judas, the betrayer of Christ, Joh_17:12.

.

 

[Quasar92]

Your list is fraudulent.

Darby and Scofield both translate 2 Thess. 2:3 as apostasy or falling away in their Bible versions.

Chuck Missler declares that 2 Thess. 2:3 teaches apostasy.

Charles Stanley declares that 2 Thess. 2:3 teaches apostasy.

Alva McClain declares that 2 Thess. 2:3 teaches apostasy:

“The Apostasy of the Church

Without designating a specific time table, the Apostle Paul warns of a “falling away” from the faith (2 Tim 4:1) that will lead to a heeding of deceitful spirits and the teachings of demons (I Tim 4:2) Paul simply says it will occur in the “later times” and produce hypocrisy and a searing of the conscience. This apostasy will be religious and moral in nature (II Tim 3:1-7) and will happen prior to the rapture of the Church and before the revelation of the son of destruction, the Antichrist (II Thess. 2:1-5). Paul further teaches that the seeds of apostasy are present in the Church but they will also completely mature in the last days, which he describes as “difficult times” (II Tim. 3:1).”

Alva J McClain School of Theology Doctrinal Statement

There are undoubtedly others.

To borrow some of your rhetoric (bad move I know), yourself, Thomas Ice, et al are accusing every contemporary English Bible translator, of whom there are dozens, and every one of whom translates the word as "apostasy" or "falling away" or equivalent; of being a liar.

You still haven't told us what you see when you plug "apostasia" into the Greek side of a Greek-English online translator.

Here's a clue: You won't see "departure". You will see "apostasy".

Here's more: Into an English-Greek translator, plug "departure", "rapture" , and "apostasy" into the English side, and tell us what you see.

Yeah.

Every person you have laid claim to referring to 2 Thess.2:3 as apostasy or falling away, are all quoting what the Bible reveals today. What else could they say. FYI, each and every one of them are solid pre-trib rapture of the Church advocates, including myself, whom you're calling a liar!

I'm still waiting for you to prove by the Scriptures where any part of 1 Thess.4:13-18 and 2 Thess.2;1-8 teach anything other than a rapture of the Church. Except for the alteration of the Greek and Latin words of, "aostasia" and "discessio," from 15 centuries of meaning :departure," to the mistranslation of "falling away," or "apostasy,: in the 17th century!

The use of the word "departure" in 2 Thess.2:3 is reinforced in verse 7 with reference to the restrainer being "taken out of the way." Both verses, 3 and 7 refer to the departure of the Church, before the man of lawlessness/Antichrist, is revealed, in verses 3,4 and 8. Proving the pre-trib rapture of the Church.

Every person on the list I posted fully endorse the above facts. Your above post is deceitfully fraudulent from the Scriptural facts posted here.


Quasar92

 

[Quasar92]

From the 1599 Geneva Bible, which is the Bible the Pilgrims brought to America, long before John Nelson Darby showed up on our shores with his modern Two Peoples of God doctrine.


2Th 2:3 Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition,

2 Thessalonians 2:3
Let no man deceive you by any means,.... By any of the above means; by pretending to a revelation from the Spirit; or to have had it from the mouth of anyone of the apostles; or to have a letter as from them, declaring the day of Christ to be instant; or by any other means whatever; do not be imposed upon by them for the following reasons, for there were things to be done before the coming of Christ, which were not then done, and which required time: for that day shall not come,

except there come a falling away first; either in a political sense, of the nations from the Roman empire, which was divided into the eastern and western empire; for which, way was made by translating the seat of empire from Rome to Byzantium, or Constantinople; the former of these empires was seized by Mahomet, and still possessed by the Turks; and the latter was overrun by the Goths, Huns, and Vandals, and torn to pieces; Italy particularly was ravaged by them, and Rome itself was sacked and taken: or rather in a religious sense, of the falling of men from the faith of the Gospel, from the purity of Gospel doctrines, discipline, worship, and ordinances; and this not of some Jews who professed faith in Christ, and departed from it, or of some Christians who went off to the Gnostics; but is to be understood of a more general defection in the times of the Papacy; when not only the eastern churches were perverted and corrupted by Mahomet, and drawn off to his religion, but the western churches were most sadly depraved by the man of sin, by bringing in errors of all sorts in doctrine, making innovations in every ordinance, and appointing new ones, and introducing both Judaism and Paganism into the churches; which general defection continued until the times of the reformation, and is what the apostle has respect to in 1Ti_4:1 where he manifestly points out some of the Popish tenets, as forbidding marriage to priests, and ordering abstinence from meats on certain days, and at certain times of the year: this was one thing that was to precede the coming of Christ, another follows, which should take place at the same time;

and that man of sin be revealed; who was now hid, though secretly working; by whom is meant not only any particular person or individual; not the devil, for though he is the wicked one, a damned spirit, an opposer, an adversary of God and Christ, and his people, and who has affected deity, and sought to be worshipped, and even by Christ himself; yet the man of sin is here distinguished from Satan, 2Ti_2:9 nor is any particular emperor of Rome intended, as Caius Caligula, or Nero, for though these were monsters of iniquity, and set up themselves as gods, yet they sat not in the temple of God; nor is Simon Magus designed, who was a very wicked man, a sorcerer, and who gave out himself to be some great one, and was called the great power of God, before big profession of faith in Christ; and afterwards affirmed that he was God, the Father in Samaria, the Son in Judea, and the Spirit in the rest of the nations of the world; and, because of his signs and lying wonders, had a statue erected by the Roman emperor with this inscription, "to Simon the holy god"; but then this wicked man was now already revealed: nor is this to be understood of a certain Jew, that is to be begotten by the devil on a virgin of the tribe of Dan, and who is to reign three years and a half, and then to be destroyed by Christ, which is a fable of the Papists; but a succession of men is here meant, as a king is used sometimes for an order and succession of kings, Deu_17:18 and an high priest for that whole order, from Aaron's time to the dissolution of it, Heb_9:7 so here it intends the whole hierarchy of Rome, monks, friars, priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and especially popes, who may well be called "the man of sin", because notoriously sinful; not only sinners, but sin itself, a sink of sin, monsters of iniquity, spiritual wickednesses in high places: it is not easy to reckon up their impieties, their adulteries, incest, sodomy, rapine, murder, avarice, simony, perjury, lying, necromancy, familiarity with the devil, idolatry, witchcraft, and what not? and not only have they been guilty of the most notorious crimes themselves, but have been the patrons and encouragers of others in sin; by dispensing with the laws of God and man, by making sins to be venial, by granting indulgences and pardon for the worst of crimes, by licensing brothel houses, and countenancing all manner of wickedness; and therefore it is no wonder to hear of the following epithet,

the son of perdition; since these are not only the Apollyon, the king of the bottomless pit, the destroyer, the cause of the perdition of thousands of souls, for the souls of men are their wares; but because they are by the righteous judgment of God appointed and consigned to everlasting destruction; the devil, the beast, and the false prophet, will have their portion together in the lake that burns with fire, Rev_20:10 the same character as here is given of Judas, the betrayer of Christ, Joh_17:12.

.

BABerean2 wrote the following from his Geneva Bible:

"2Th 2:3 Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition,"

[Emphasis nine]

As I have repeatedly stated, the Greek word "apostasia" was translated as "to depart," or "departure," with the first seven English translated Bibles, into the 17th century, before being altered to "falling away," or "apostasy."

Now explain to me why Israel has been decreed to go through the coming tribulation, while the Church of believers in Jesus Christ will not go through the tribulation.

Show me how you arrive at those two groups of people are only one!


Quasar92

 

[jgr]

Every person you have laid claim to referring to 2 Thess.2:3 as apostasy or falling away, are all quoting what the Bible reveals today.

Precisely. What they say today. And what they've always said, as the original Greek manuscripts which today's translators use have never been been compromised.

To claim that they have is an extremely serious accusation against the historic veracity and integrity of the written Word of our God and His Son, and thus invariably upon the entire Christian faith. Such an accusation must therefore be condemned and rejected unreservedly and unconditionally in the strongest of terms.

I challenge you to provide written testimony from at least three in your list other than Thomas Ice (who has sold his soul to this heterodoxy), stating that all of the translators of all of today's Bible versions are using flawed sources in their translations of 2 Thess. 2:3.

We await your response.

 

[BABerean2]

Now explain to me why Israel has been decreed to go through the coming tribulation, while the Church of believers in Jesus Christ will not go through the tribulation.

Show me how you arrive at those two groups of people are only one!

The New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and is specifically applied to the New Covenant Church in Hebrews 12:22-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8.

On the Day of Pentecost Peter addressed the crowd as "all the house of Israel" in Acts 2:36. On that day about 3,000 Israelites accepted the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31.

Paul still considered himself an Israelite after his conversion in Romans 11:1.

James addressed his letter to "the twelve tribes" in James 1:1-3.

We find those under the blood of the Lamb in Revelation 12:11.
A person cannot be under the blood of the Lamb and not be a part of the New Covenant Church.

The Capital "C" Church as we use the word today is not found in the Book of Revelation.
Individual church bodies in ancient Asia Minor are found.

All of the scripture above prove the error of your Two Peoples of God doctrine, which was brought to America by John Nelson Darby, about the time of the Civil War.
It was later incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible.
After that, the doctrine spread like a virus through the evangelical churches in America.

Based on 1 John 2:22-23, there is only one people of God.
To claim otherwise is to deny that Jesus Christ is the ultimate fulfillment of Israel, found in Matthew 1:1, and confirmed by the Apostle Paul in Galatians 3:16.


The New Covenant: Bob George

.

 

[Quasar92]

Precisely. What they say today. And what they've always said, as the original Greek manuscripts which today's translators use have never been been compromised.

To claim that they have is an extremely serious accusation against the historic veracity and integrity of the written Word of our God and His Son, and thus invariably upon the entire Christian faith. Such an accusation must therefore be condemned and rejected unreservedly and unconditionally in the strongest of terms.

I challenge you to provide written testimony from at least three in your list other than Thomas Ice (who has sold his soul to this heterodoxy), stating that all of the translators of all of today's Bible versions are using flawed sources in their translations of 2 Thess. 2:3.

We await your response.

When you have shown that the teachings of Jesus, Matthew, Luke, John and Paul about the coming pre-trib rapture of the Church, in 1 Thessd.4:13-18 and 2 Thess.2:1-8, whom you are calling liars, is an "apostasy," rather than the "departure," the following Scriptures teach, I have asked you for several times before, will I consider your demands, and not before!

The Biblical teaching of the pre-trib rapture of the Church

Mt.24:31:
And He will send His angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather His ELECT from the four winds [Israel - on earth], from one end of the heavens to the other [The Church Jesus will rapture before the seven year tribulation begins]. How did those ELECT get into heaven? Read on to find out.

Lk.21:36:
"Watch ye, therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man."

Jn.14:2-4 and 28:
"In my Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you [See Jn.20:17]. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going." [Jn.14:2-4]. [THIS IS A DEPARTURE - NOT AN APOSTASY!]

"You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I." [Jn.14:28].

The Scriptures tell us where we all go, who belong to Christ, after the death of our bodies: "We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord." As recorded in 2 Cor.5:8, confirming Ecc.12:7. Which is, in and of itself, conclusive to the fact that Jesus is not going to let the rest of His Church remain on earth to go through the seven year tribulation, when He returns for those of us who are still alive, waiting for His appearing, in 1 Thes.4:17. Since He raises all those who have died, to be with Him, immediately after their physical death, for more than 2,000 years.

1 Thes.4:13-18:
The Thessalonians were very concerned about those among them who had died, that they would not be gathered together with the rest of them when Jesus returned. Paul assures them in vs 13-14 that they will all be returning with Christ from heaven, where they have been since He raised them up to be with Him, the day they died physically, according to 2 Cor.5:6-8.

"We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in Him [Died physically]. Vs 14.

"According to the Lord's own word [Scriptural truth as to the fact that Jesus taught there was to be a pre-trib rapture of the Church, as recorded in Jn.14:2-4 and 28], we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left to the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep." Vs 15. An assurance by Paul to the Thessalonians that the dead in Christ had already been raised from the dead before, and were already with Christ when He returns for all those left on earth alive at His coming.

Because they have already been raised, each in his/her own turn, according to 1 Cor.15:23. That is the very reason it is not documented as a resurrection in the Scriptures.

"For the Lord Himself will come down from heaven [With all His saints [Church], according to vs 14], with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first" [Paul again assures them, as seen in verses 13-14, they were already previously raised once before, each in his/her own turn, as they died, for more than 2,000 years]. Vs 16.

"After that, we who are still alive and are left will be CAUGHT UP [raptured] together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the sky. And so we will be with the Lord forever." Vs 17. Where we proceed with Jesus to our Father in heaven as He promised us in Jn.14:2-4 and 28. [THIS IS A DEPARTURE - NOT AN APOSTASY!]

"Therefore encourage each other with these words." Vs 18.

2 Thess.2:1-8: The precise timing of the rapture of the Church:
"Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to Him, [THIS IS A DEPARTURE - NOT AN APOSTASY!] we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the Day of the Lord [The 70th and final Week/seven year tribulation of Dan.9:27] has already come." 2 Thes.2:1-2. Which is a direct reference to 1 Thes.4:17 and the theme of Paul's entire pre-trib rapture message in 2 Thes.2:1-8. When we will be CAUGHT UP TOGETHER WITH THEM IN THE CLOUDS TO MEET THE LORD IN THE AIR. [Parenthetics mine].

The "Day of the Lord" Paul refers to in vs 2, alludes to Dan.9:27, when God will intervene into the affairs of man for the last time, culminating in the second coming of Jesus to the earth. In that passage of Scripture, the Day of the Lord is triggered by the "he" who "confirms a covenant [An agreement] for one Week" [The Day of the Lord/ 70th and final Week/seven year tribulation], who is the antichrist. The second, and same "he," who stops Israel from the offerings and sacrificing in the temple of God, and the third, and same "he," who breaks his covenant in the middle of the Week [After 3.5 of the 7 year total], and sets up the abomination of desolation Jesus referred to in Mt.24:15, in His Olivet Discourse, about the sign of His second coming, and of the end of the age.

In verse 3: "Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that Day [The Day of the Lord, the 70th and final Week, the seven year tribulation] will not come, until the "apostasia" [Greek term in which the original translation was "to depart," or "departure," meaning, the rapture of the Church] occurs and the man of lawlessness [The antichrist, and all three of the "he's" in Dan.9:27] is revealed [Who triggers the Day of the Lord/ the 70th and final Week/ the seven year tribulation], the man doomed to destruction." Which reveals the "apostasia" [Departure] will take place before the antichrist is revealed, who triggers the 70th Week/seven year tribulation. Confirmed in verses 7 and 8 below.

Translation History of apostasia and discessio: By Thomas Ice, PhD.
The first seven English translations of apostasia all rendered the noun as either " departure" or " departing." They are as follows: Wycliffe Bible (1384); Tyndale Bible (1526); Coverdale Bible (1535); Cranmer Bible (1539); Breeches Bible (1576); Beza Bible (1583); Geneva Bible (1608) . This supports the notion that the word truly means " departure." In fact, Jerome' s Latin translation known as the Vulgate from around the time of 325 A.D. renders apostasia with the " word discessio, meaning ' departure.' Why was the King James Version the first to depart from the established translation of "departure" in 1611 A.D.? [It is more than likely due to overzealous RCC scribes who altered the original wording of vs 3. to accommodate their teachings of Amillenialism, which rejects both the pre-trib rapture of the Church as well as Jesus Millennial reign her on earth].

Theodore Beza, the Swiss reformer was the first to transliterate apostasia and create a new word, rather than translate it as others had done. The translators of the King James Version were the first to introduce the new rendering of apostasia as " falling away." Most English translators have followed the KJV and Beza in departing from translating apostasia as " departure." No reason was ever given.

"He [The antichrist] will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God." Vs 4. [The abomination of desolation, confirming Dan.9:27 and Mt.24:15]. See also 2 Thes.2:4.

The rapture of the Church and verse 3 confirmed:
In vs 7: "For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so until he [The saints - Church] is taken out of the way."

The "he" who will be taken out of the way, is the one body of Christ, who bear the Holy Spirit within each of us [Eph.1:13-14], the Church of Jesus Christ. The very same as those who will participate in the "apostasia," the "departure," [the rapture] of the Church, in vs 3. Immediately following that:

In verse 8: "And then the lawless one [The antichrist] will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of His mouth and destroy by the splendor of His coming." Vs 8. [See Rev.19:17-21].

The antichrist is found in all three of the "he's" in Dan. 9:27, confirmed by Jesus in Mt.24:15; Mk.13:14 and by Paul, in 2 Thes.2:3, 4 and 8.

From the above Scriptural facts, there can be only one proper interpretation for the timing of the rapture of the Church, which will be immediately preceding the 70th and final/7 year tribulation, triggered by the antichrist, all three of the "he's" in Dan.9:27. Seen also as the first of the four horsemen of the apocalypse, riding the white horse, in the first of the seven seals, in Rev.6:2. There is no "pre-wrath" or post-trib rapture taught in the Scriptures.


Other verses pertaining to the rapture of the Church: 1 Thes.1:10; 1 Thes.5:9; Rev.3:10 and Rev.4:1-2. Of the saints [Church] returning with Christ from their marriage in heaven, in Rev.19:7, 8 and 14; Jude 14 and Zech.14:4-5!


The difference between the Second Coming of Christ and the pre-trib rapture of the Church:

http://www.pre-trib.org/data/pdf/Ice...eenTheRapt.pdf

[Parenthetics mine]


Quasar92

 

[BABerean2]

The antichrist is found in all three of the "he's" in Dan. 9:27

There is no singular antecedent for an antichrist in Daniel chapter 9.

The New Covenant had already been promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and based on Hebrews 8:6-13 Christ is the New Covenant Messiah.

Are we supposed to believe the angel Gabriel came to reveal the timeline of the New Covenant Messiah and then he "forgot" to mention the New Covenant?

The following is from the 1599 Geneva Bible, which is the Bible the Pilgrims brought to America, before John Darby showed up on our shores.


Dan 9:27 And he shal confirme the couenant with many for one weeke: and in the middes of the weeke he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the ouerspreading of the abominations, he shall make it desolate, euen vntill the consummation determined shalbe powred vpon the desolate.

Daniel 9:27

And he (a) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to (b) cease, (c) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

(a) By the preaching of the Gospel he affirmed his promise, first to the Jews, and after to the Gentiles.

(b) Christ accomplished this by his death and resurrection.

(c) Meaning that Jerusalem and the sanctuary would be utterly destroyed because of their rebellion against God, and their idolatry: or as some read, that the plague will be so great, that they will all be astonished at them.

.

 

[Quasar92]

There is no singular antecedent for an antichrist in Daniel chapter 9.

The New Covenant had already been promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and based on Hebrews 8:6-13 Christ is the New Covenant Messiah.

Are we supposed to believe the angel Gabriel came to reveal the timeline of the New Covenant Messiah and then he "forgot" to mention the New Covenant?

The following is from the 1599 Geneva Bible, which is the Bible the Pilgrims brought to America, before John Darby showed up on our shores.


Dan 9:27 And he shal confirme the couenant with many for one weeke: and in the middes of the weeke he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the ouerspreading of the abominations, he shall make it desolate, euen vntill the consummation determined shalbe powred vpon the desolate.

Daniel 9:27

And he (a) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to (b) cease, (c) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

(a) By the preaching of the Gospel he affirmed his promise, first to the Jews, and after to the Gentiles.

(b) Christ accomplished this by his death and resurrection.

(c) Meaning that Jerusalem and the sanctuary would be utterly destroyed because of their rebellion against God, and their idolatry: or as some read, that the plague will be so great, that they will all be astonished at them.

.

Who is the "He" in Dan.9:27?

(1) ANTICHRIST: Applying the accepted rule of interpretation and observing the text for the nearest antecedent of the pronoun he (without bias or influence by other "experts"), this he most closely parallels the prince who is to come in the previous passage (Daniel 9:26). This is the conclusion reached by most conservative evangelical commentaries, who go on to identify him as the Little Horn (Antichrist) who "came up among the (10) horns" of the fourth beast (fourth kingdom ~ "Revived Rome") chapter 7 of Daniel (Da 7:8,11-note Da 7:20, 21-note).

It is interesting that both Christ and Antichrist are referred to as "prince" (synonymous with "king"), for the prefix "anti-" means the regal imposter is not only opposed to or against Christ, but "instead of" or a substitute for the real Christ.

We know that the prince's people (Rome) destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D., and can deduce that this coming prince has his ancestral roots in the ancient Roman Empire and is thus part of what is often referred to as "the revived Roman Empire", the final Gentile world government described in Romans 7 (see Da 7:7-note, Da 7:19-note). In the Revelation of Jesus Christ, John records this vision...

And he stood on the sand of the seashore. And I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads, and on his horns were ten diadems ("ten king stage" of the beast in Da 7), and on his heads were blasphemous names. 2 And the beast which I saw was like a leopard, and his feet were like those of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion (Ed: Note how this is the reverse of the sequence of same beasts in Da7:1, 2,3, 4, 5, 6-note - John is looking back in time and sees the leopard first = Greece, bear = Medo-Persia, Lion = Babylon). And the dragon (Satan) gave him (Antichrist) his power and his throne and great authority. (Notice how the term "beast" merges subtlety from a beastly kingdom to the king of that kingdom in the latter part of the verse) (Re 13:1-note; Re 13:2-note; see also study of The Beast; and Beasts, Heads, and Horns)

(2) CHRIST: Some such as Edward Young and Phillip Mauro interpret the "He" as a reference to the Messiah primarily because the entire prophecy is about the Messiah and the premise that there is no (to use their words) "future 'prince' making a covenant with" Israel. This interpretation makes little sense because the new covenant in His blood is an everlasting covenant, not a seven year covenant and not a covenant which He will ever break. God is a covenant keeping God! How can the reference be to Christ when we have just been introduced to the prince who is to come which describes one out of the Roman empire? Christ did not come from the Roman Empire but from Israel. Furthermore, when did Christ make a firm covenant with many Jews for one week (seven year period)? And how can it be said of Christ that “in the midst of the week” He caused the sacrifices to cease? Sacrifices continued in the Temple some 40 years after Messiah was cut off, well past the 7 years of the 70th Week. Clearly, the "he" is not Christ.

Harry Ironside agrees that "He" is not the Messiah writing...

Ere closing I briefly notice a rather peculiar interpretation which is frequently given to the 27th verse. It is said that the Lord Jesus is Himself to be the prince that shall come who confirms the covenant for one week. His own crucifixion is supposed to be the event which caused the sacrifice and oblation to cease. But neither chronologically nor doctrinally will this stand for a moment, if examined in the light of other scriptures. With whom did the Lord Jesus ever confirm a covenant for seven years? His precious blood is called ”the blood of the everlasting covenant;” not a covenant for one week of years. We may rest assured it is not Messiah at all, but the blasphemous prince who is yet to come, who will fulfil what is predicted in this verse.

How near this world may be to the actual entering upon all these things no man can say, but it is the part of wisdom to learn from the prophetic Scriptures, and to turn now to Him who alone can save; to own Him as Redeemer and Lord, and thus be certain of being caught up to meet Him when He comes in the clouds, ere the time comes for His righteous judgment to be poured out upon this poor world. (Daniel - H A Ironside) (Logos) (Wordsearch)

Ray adds...

In deciding between the Messiah or the “prince to come” as the antecedent, Barnes contends “it is not reasonable to suppose that the latter is referred to, because it is said (Da 9:26) that the effect and the purpose of his coming would be to ‘destroy the city and the sanctuary.’ In other words Barnes is saying the prince is coming to make peace. He is wrong on two accounts. Da 9:26 says it is the people of the prince, not the prince himself, who execute the destruction. Too, he is implying it is reasonable to suppose the Messiah would bring about the devastation. To assume Da 9:27 deals with Christ is presumptuous, for that is the very question for which interpreters are seeking an answer. Lastly, it is not unthinkable a future leader would bring about such an agreement with Israel; people will do almost anything to have peace in the Middle East....Leupold and Keil are some of the few non-pre-millenarians who admit the “he” is the antichrist. (A Study of Daniel 9:24 - 27, Part III)

(3) ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES: (See related discussion on Antiochus Epiphanes - Da 8:9-note, Da 8:17-note, Da 8:19-note; see also Daniel notes and additional discussion) The liberal commentator Montgomery (who to my utter amazement does not even interpret Da 9:25, 26 as a prophecy of Christ's first coming - [font='TIMES NEW ROMAN', TIMES][URL='[URL="http://www.preceptaustin.org/daniel_924-27.htm#3']See"]Background on Daniel 9:24-27 | Precept Austin[/URL] list of other Non-Christological Interpreters[/URL][/font]) identifies the "He" as Antiochus Epiphanes. Montgomery feels that this prophecy was fulfilled in the second century before Christ noting how apostate Jews cooperated with Antiochus (see 1Mac 1:11, 12,13, 14, 15).

(4) A WEEK: The pronoun He has even been interpreted as a week by some who take he as neuter (not masculine), but such an interpretation of makes absolutely no sense in context. It does emphasize how far some commentators are willing to go in an attempt to "jettison" a literal, futuristic interpretation.

In summary, even applying the elementary grammatical rule of examination of the context for the nearest antecedent noun ("prince" in Da 9:26), there is little question that the pronoun He in Da 9:27 is the future Antichrist, the evil end times anti-Semitic leader who is known by many names in Scripture (see table). And as you review the list of the names of the Antichrist, remember that in Scripture one's name speaks of one's character.


For the complete article: Daniel 9:27 Commentary | Precept Austin


Quasar92

 

[BABerean2]

Who is the "He" in Dan.9:27?

(1) ANTICHRIST: Applying the accepted rule of interpretation and observing the text for the nearest antecedent of the pronoun he (without bias or influence by other "experts"), this he most closely parallels the prince who is to come in the previous passage (Daniel 9:26). This is the conclusion reached by most conservative evangelical commentaries, who go on to identify him as the Little Horn (Antichrist) who "came up among the (10) horns" of the fourth beast (fourth kingdom ~ "Revived Rome") chapter 7 of Daniel (Da 7:8,11-note Da 7:20, 21-note).

It is interesting that both Christ and Antichrist are referred to as "prince" (synonymous with "king"), for the prefix "anti-" means the regal imposter is not only opposed to or against Christ, but "instead of" or a substitute for the real Christ.

We know that the prince's people (Rome) destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D., and can deduce that this coming prince has his ancestral roots in the ancient Roman Empire and is thus part of what is often referred to as "the revived Roman Empire", the final Gentile world government described in Romans 7 (see Da 7:7-note, Da 7:19-note). In the Revelation of Jesus Christ, John records this vision...

And he stood on the sand of the seashore. And I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads, and on his horns were ten diadems ("ten king stage" of the beast in Da 7), and on his heads were blasphemous names. 2 And the beast which I saw was like a leopard, and his feet were like those of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion (Ed: Note how this is the reverse of the sequence of same beasts in Da7:1, 2,3, 4, 5, 6-note - John is looking back in time and sees the leopard first = Greece, bear = Medo-Persia, Lion = Babylon). And the dragon (Satan) gave him (Antichrist) his power and his throne and great authority. (Notice how the term "beast" merges subtlety from a beastly kingdom to the king of that kingdom in the latter part of the verse) (Re 13:1-note; Re 13:2-note; see also study of The Beast; and Beasts, Heads, and Horns)

(2) CHRIST: Some such as Edward Young and Phillip Mauro interpret the "He" as a reference to the Messiah primarily because the entire prophecy is about the Messiah and the premise that there is no (to use their words) "future 'prince' making a covenant with" Israel. This interpretation makes little sense because the new covenant in His blood is an everlasting covenant, not a seven year covenant and not a covenant which He will ever break. God is a covenant keeping God! How can the reference be to Christ when we have just been introduced to the prince who is to come which describes one out of the Roman empire? Christ did not come from the Roman Empire but from Israel. Furthermore, when did Christ make a firm covenant with many Jews for one week (seven year period)? And how can it be said of Christ that “in the midst of the week” He caused the sacrifices to cease? Sacrifices continued in the Temple some 40 years after Messiah was cut off, well past the 7 years of the 70th Week. Clearly, the "he" is not Christ.

Harry Ironside agrees that "He" is not the Messiah writing...

Ere closing I briefly notice a rather peculiar interpretation which is frequently given to the 27th verse. It is said that the Lord Jesus is Himself to be the prince that shall come who confirms the covenant for one week. His own crucifixion is supposed to be the event which caused the sacrifice and oblation to cease. But neither chronologically nor doctrinally will this stand for a moment, if examined in the light of other scriptures. With whom did the Lord Jesus ever confirm a covenant for seven years? His precious blood is called ”the blood of the everlasting covenant;” not a covenant for one week of years. We may rest assured it is not Messiah at all, but the blasphemous prince who is yet to come, who will fulfil what is predicted in this verse.

How near this world may be to the actual entering upon all these things no man can say, but it is the part of wisdom to learn from the prophetic Scriptures, and to turn now to Him who alone can save; to own Him as Redeemer and Lord, and thus be certain of being caught up to meet Him when He comes in the clouds, ere the time comes for His righteous judgment to be poured out upon this poor world. (Daniel - H A Ironside) (Logos) (Wordsearch)

Ray adds...

In deciding between the Messiah or the “prince to come” as the antecedent, Barnes contends “it is not reasonable to suppose that the latter is referred to, because it is said (Da 9:26) that the effect and the purpose of his coming would be to ‘destroy the city and the sanctuary.’ In other words Barnes is saying the prince is coming to make peace. He is wrong on two accounts. Da 9:26 says it is the people of the prince, not the prince himself, who execute the destruction. Too, he is implying it is reasonable to suppose the Messiah would bring about the devastation. To assume Da 9:27 deals with Christ is presumptuous, for that is the very question for which interpreters are seeking an answer. Lastly, it is not unthinkable a future leader would bring about such an agreement with Israel; people will do almost anything to have peace in the Middle East....Leupold and Keil are some of the few non-pre-millenarians who admit the “he” is the antichrist. (A Study of Daniel 9:24 - 27, Part III)

(3) ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES: (See related discussion on Antiochus Epiphanes - Da 8:9-note, Da 8:17-note, Da 8:19-note; see also Daniel notes and additional discussion) The liberal commentator Montgomery (who to my utter amazement does not even interpret Da 9:25, 26 as a prophecy of Christ's first coming - [font='TIMES NEW ROMAN', TIMES][URL='[URL="[URL="http://www.preceptaustin.org/daniel_924-27.htm#3']See"]Background on Daniel 9:24-27 | Precept Austin[/URL]"]Background on Daniel 9:24-27 | Precept Austin[/URL] list of other Non-Christological Interpreters[/URL][/font]) identifies the "He" as Antiochus Epiphanes. Montgomery feels that this prophecy was fulfilled in the second century before Christ noting how apostate Jews cooperated with Antiochus (see 1Mac 1:11, 12,13, 14, 15).

(4) A WEEK: The pronoun He has even been interpreted as a week by some who take he as neuter (not masculine), but such an interpretation of makes absolutely no sense in context. It does emphasize how far some commentators are willing to go in an attempt to "jettison" a literal, futuristic interpretation.

In summary, even applying the elementary grammatical rule of examination of the context for the nearest antecedent noun ("prince" in Da 9:26), there is little question that the pronoun He in Da 9:27 is the future Antichrist, the evil end times anti-Semitic leader who is known by many names in Scripture (see table). And as you review the list of the names of the Antichrist, remember that in Scripture one's name speaks of one's character.


For the complete article: Daniel 9:27 Commentary | Precept Austin


Quasar92

 

[Quasar92]

The Making of a Covenant in Dan.9:27:

What is it that "he" will do? The antichrist will "make a firm covenant with the many for one week," that is seven years. Non-literal interpreters of Daniel’s seventy-week prophecy usually attempt to make this covenant a reference to Christ’s covenant to save His people, usually known as the covenant of grace. "This, then, is a confirming of a covenant already extant, i.e., the covenant of God’s redemptive grace that Christ confirms (Rom. 15:8)," claims Dr. Gentry. Dr. Gentry and those advocating a similar view, must resort to a non-textual, theological interpretation at this point since there was no seven-year covenant made by Christ with the Jewish people at the time of His first coming. They must back off from the specifics of the text in verse 27 and import in a theological interpretation, thus providing us with a classic example of spiritualization or allegorical interpretation.[/font]

]If this is supposed to be a reference to the covenant of grace, then "it may be observed first that this would be a strange way to express such a thought," notes Dr. Wood. Christ’s salvation covenant is not limited to seven years rather it is an eternal covenant. Daniel 9:27 says the covenant is to be made with "the many." This term always refers in some way to Israel throughout the book of Daniel (Daniel 11:33, 39; 12:3). Thus it is a narrow term, used in a specific context. It is not a broad term, synonymous with the language of global salvation. Further, "it is evident that the covenant is subsequent to the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of the City and the Sanctuary, in the twenty-sixth verse; therefore, it could not have been confirmed at the First Advent," says G. H. Pember. Such an interpretation does not fit this text and it does not account for the seven years that Gabriel says this covenant will be in place. Dr. Wood further explains:

Since a covenant as described in verse 27 has not yet taken place in reference to the nation of Israel, it must therefore follow that this will be a yet to occur future event. This then, demands a postponement of the seventieth week with a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of years.

This passage clearly says that the confirming of the covenant that "he" will make will be for one week or seven years. I suppose that this could mean either that the covenant will be predetermined to last seven years or that it does not specify a length of time when made, but as it turns out, is only in existence for seven years. Many of those who believe that the entire prophecy of the seventy weeks has already been fulfilled around the time of Christ’s first coming teach that the first half of the seventieth week was fulfilled by Christ’s ministry. "We know Christ’s three-and-one-half-year ministry," says Dr. Gentry, "was decidedly focused on the Jews in the first half of the seventieth week (Matt. 10:5b; cf. Matt. 15:24)." G. H. Pember objects to such a view with the following:

Once again we have seen in this installment on the seventy weeks that the text of this passage supports a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the seventieth week is still future to the time in which we now live. "Israel has now been reestablished as a nation (1948), suggesting that the seventieth seven may soon begin." Maranatha!

From: http://www.raptureme.com/featured/70-weeks-9.html [This site has been moved]



Quasar92

 

[jgr]

When you have shown that the teachings of Jesus, Matthew, Luke, John and Paul about the coming pre-trib rapture of the Church, in 1 Thessd.4:13-18 and 2 Thess.2:1-8, whom you are calling liars, is an "apostasy," rather than the "departure," the following Scriptures teach, I have asked you for several times before, will I consider your demands, and not before!

The Biblical teaching of the pre-trib rapture of the Church

Mt.24:31:
And He will send His angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather His ELECT from the four winds [Israel - on earth], from one end of the heavens to the other [The Church Jesus will rapture before the seven year tribulation begins]. How did those ELECT get into heaven? Read on to find out.

Lk.21:36:
"Watch ye, therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man."

Jn.14:2-4 and 28:
"In my Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you [See Jn.20:17]. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going." [Jn.14:2-4]. [THIS IS A DEPARTURE - NOT AN APOSTASY!]

"You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I." [Jn.14:28].

The Scriptures tell us where we all go, who belong to Christ, after the death of our bodies: "We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord." As recorded in 2 Cor.5:8, confirming Ecc.12:7. Which is, in and of itself, conclusive to the fact that Jesus is not going to let the rest of His Church remain on earth to go through the seven year tribulation, when He returns for those of us who are still alive, waiting for His appearing, in 1 Thes.4:17. Since He raises all those who have died, to be with Him, immediately after their physical death, for more than 2,000 years.

1 Thes.4:13-18:
The Thessalonians were very concerned about those among them who had died, that they would not be gathered together with the rest of them when Jesus returned. Paul assures them in vs 13-14 that they will all be returning with Christ from heaven, where they have been since He raised them up to be with Him, the day they died physically, according to 2 Cor.5:6-8.

"We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in Him [Died physically]. Vs 14.

"According to the Lord's own word [Scriptural truth as to the fact that Jesus taught there was to be a pre-trib rapture of the Church, as recorded in Jn.14:2-4 and 28], we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left to the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep." Vs 15. An assurance by Paul to the Thessalonians that the dead in Christ had already been raised from the dead before, and were already with Christ when He returns for all those left on earth alive at His coming.

Because they have already been raised, each in his/her own turn, according to 1 Cor.15:23. That is the very reason it is not documented as a resurrection in the Scriptures.

"For the Lord Himself will come down from heaven [With all His saints [Church], according to vs 14], with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first" [Paul again assures them, as seen in verses 13-14, they were already previously raised once before, each in his/her own turn, as they died, for more than 2,000 years]. Vs 16.

"After that, we who are still alive and are left will be CAUGHT UP [raptured] together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the sky. And so we will be with the Lord forever." Vs 17. Where we proceed with Jesus to our Father in heaven as He promised us in Jn.14:2-4 and 28. [THIS IS A DEPARTURE - NOT AN APOSTASY!]

"Therefore encourage each other with these words." Vs 18.

2 Thess.2:1-8: The precise timing of the rapture of the Church:
"Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to Him, [THIS IS A DEPARTURE - NOT AN APOSTASY!] we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the Day of the Lord [The 70th and final Week/seven year tribulation of Dan.9:27] has already come." 2 Thes.2:1-2. Which is a direct reference to 1 Thes.4:17 and the theme of Paul's entire pre-trib rapture message in 2 Thes.2:1-8. When we will be CAUGHT UP TOGETHER WITH THEM IN THE CLOUDS TO MEET THE LORD IN THE AIR. [Parenthetics mine].

The "Day of the Lord" Paul refers to in vs 2, alludes to Dan.9:27, when God will intervene into the affairs of man for the last time, culminating in the second coming of Jesus to the earth. In that passage of Scripture, the Day of the Lord is triggered by the "he" who "confirms a covenant [An agreement] for one Week" [The Day of the Lord/ 70th and final Week/seven year tribulation], who is the antichrist. The second, and same "he," who stops Israel from the offerings and sacrificing in the temple of God, and the third, and same "he," who breaks his covenant in the middle of the Week [After 3.5 of the 7 year total], and sets up the abomination of desolation Jesus referred to in Mt.24:15, in His Olivet Discourse, about the sign of His second coming, and of the end of the age.

In verse 3: "Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that Day [The Day of the Lord, the 70th and final Week, the seven year tribulation] will not come, until the "apostasia" [Greek term in which the original translation was "to depart," or "departure," meaning, the rapture of the Church] occurs and the man of lawlessness [The antichrist, and all three of the "he's" in Dan.9:27] is revealed [Who triggers the Day of the Lord/ the 70th and final Week/ the seven year tribulation], the man doomed to destruction." Which reveals the "apostasia" [Departure] will take place before the antichrist is revealed, who triggers the 70th Week/seven year tribulation. Confirmed in verses 7 and 8 below.

Translation History of apostasia and discessio: By Thomas Ice, PhD.
The first seven English translations of apostasia all rendered the noun as either " departure" or " departing." They are as follows: Wycliffe Bible (1384); Tyndale Bible (1526); Coverdale Bible (1535); Cranmer Bible (1539); Breeches Bible (1576); Beza Bible (1583); Geneva Bible (1608) . This supports the notion that the word truly means " departure." In fact, Jerome' s Latin translation known as the Vulgate from around the time of 325 A.D. renders apostasia with the " word discessio, meaning ' departure.' Why was the King James Version the first to depart from the established translation of "departure" in 1611 A.D.? [It is more than likely due to overzealous RCC scribes who altered the original wording of vs 3. to accommodate their teachings of Amillenialism, which rejects both the pre-trib rapture of the Church as well as Jesus Millennial reign her on earth].

Theodore Beza, the Swiss reformer was the first to transliterate apostasia and create a new word, rather than translate it as others had done. The translators of the King James Version were the first to introduce the new rendering of apostasia as " falling away." Most English translators have followed the KJV and Beza in departing from translating apostasia as " departure." No reason was ever given.

"He [The antichrist] will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God." Vs 4. [The abomination of desolation, confirming Dan.9:27 and Mt.24:15]. See also 2 Thes.2:4.

The rapture of the Church and verse 3 confirmed:
In vs 7: "For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so until he [The saints - Church] is taken out of the way."

The "he" who will be taken out of the way, is the one body of Christ, who bear the Holy Spirit within each of us [Eph.1:13-14], the Church of Jesus Christ. The very same as those who will participate in the "apostasia," the "departure," [the rapture] of the Church, in vs 3. Immediately following that:

In verse 8: "And then the lawless one [The antichrist] will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of His mouth and destroy by the splendor of His coming." Vs 8. [See Rev.19:17-21].

The antichrist is found in all three of the "he's" in Dan. 9:27, confirmed by Jesus in Mt.24:15; Mk.13:14 and by Paul, in 2 Thes.2:3, 4 and 8.

From the above Scriptural facts, there can be only one proper interpretation for the timing of the rapture of the Church, which will be immediately preceding the 70th and final/7 year tribulation, triggered by the antichrist, all three of the "he's" in Dan.9:27. Seen also as the first of the four horsemen of the apocalypse, riding the white horse, in the first of the seven seals, in Rev.6:2. There is no "pre-wrath" or post-trib rapture taught in the Scriptures.


Other verses pertaining to the rapture of the Church: 1 Thes.1:10; 1 Thes.5:9; Rev.3:10 and Rev.4:1-2. Of the saints [Church] returning with Christ from their marriage in heaven, in Rev.19:7, 8 and 14; Jude 14 and Zech.14:4-5!


The difference between the Second Coming of Christ and the pre-trib rapture of the Church:

http://www.pre-trib.org/data/pdf/Ice...eenTheRapt.pdf

[Parenthetics mine]


Quasar92

Entirely as expected.

There is not an "esteemed theologian" on earth who would believe that every English Bible translator since the 19th century has been mistranslating 2 Thess. 2:3, effectively labelling said translators as incompetent fools or abject liars for failing to discharge their professional and spiritual responsibilities.

Which leaves Dr. Ice and his ilk. But I'm certain that he would lack the spine to publicly make such a claim.

However, you could ask him if he would.


Meanwhile, here's more on 2 Thess. 2:3 from two Church Fathers, hundreds of years before your alleged falsification could have occurred:

Justin Martyr in Dialogue of Justin
O unreasoning men! understanding not what has been proved by all these passages, that two advents of Christ have been announced: the one, in which He is set forth as suffering, inglorious, dishonoured, and crucified; but the other, in which He shall come from heaven with glory, when the man of apostasy

Victorinus in Victorinus Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John
Paul the apostle says: "Except there come a falling away first, and the man of sin shall appear, the son of perdition; and the adversary who exalted himself above all which is called God, or which is worshipped."

The earliest scholars thus confirm Paul's word choice, and the intended meaning of that word.

Apostasy.

 

[Quasar92]

Entirely as expected.

There is not an "esteemed theologian" on earth who would believe that every English Bible translator since the 19th century has been mistranslating 2 Thess. 2:3, effectively labelling said translators as incompetent fools or abject liars for failing to discharge their professional and spiritual responsibilities.

Which leaves Dr. Ice and his ilk. But I'm certain that he would lack the spine to publicly make such a claim.

However, you could ask him if he would.


Meanwhile, here's more on 2 Thess. 2:3 from two Church Fathers, hundreds of years before your alleged falsification could have occurred:

Justin Martyr in Dialogue of Justin
O unreasoning men! understanding not what has been proved by all these passages, that two advents of Christ have been announced: the one, in which He is set forth as suffering, inglorious, dishonoured, and crucified; but the other, in which He shall come from heaven with glory, when the man of apostasy

Victorinus in Victorinus Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John
Paul the apostle says: "Except there come a falling away first, and the man of sin shall appear, the son of perdition; and the adversary who exalted himself above all which is called God, or which is worshipped."

The earliest scholars thus confirm Paul's word choice, and the intended meaning of that word.

Apostasy.

No matter how much and how long you compose ways to contradict the teachings of Paul, let alone, Jesus, Matthew, Luke and John, as posted above, the meaning he meant for it was anything other than DEPARTURE, in 2 Thess.2:3! Review the following, from another source:

Apostasia in 2 Thess.2:3 means departure:

The Word of God has come to us with interpretation and choices of certain words that are not always clear to our understanding, and sometimes not agreeing with the context as in II Thessalonians chapter two: But relative to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to meet Him, we beg you, brethren, not to allow our minds to be quickly unsettled or disturbed or kept excited or alarmed, whether it be by some revelation of Spirit or by word or by letter from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has arrived and is here. Let no one deceive or beguile you in any way, for that day will not come except the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed, who is the son of doom. . . Do you not recollect that when I was still with you, I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining him; it is so that he may be manifested in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work in the world,[but it is ] restrained only until he who restrains is taken out of the way, and then the lawless one will be revealed and the Lord Jesus will slay him with the breath of His mouth and bring him to an end by His appearing at His coming (vs. 1-3, 5- 8).

This chapter would be very assuring in the hope of our salvation from the tribulation if the word, apostasy was translated in agreement with the context of the chapter. The Greek word apostasy is a compound word, “apo” –from and “istemi”- stand. So we see here that the fundamental meaning is “away from or departure”. Let’s put these verses in perspective in the order of events which Paul mentioned using the word departure in verse three and we will see that the subsequent verses, 6-8 will agree, establishing the same order of events. “The departure Paul previously referred to was ‘our being gathered to Him’ (v.1) and our being ‘caught up’ with the Lord and the raptured dead in the clouds “( I Thessalonians 4:17) an insight from Scripture clearly opening our eyes of understanding by Dr. Gordon R. Lewis.

Allan MacRae, president of Faith Theological Seminary in a letter to Schuyler English has said the following concerning this matter: I wonder if you have noticed the striking parallel between this verse and verses 7-8, a little further down. According to your suggestion verse 3 mentions the departure of the church as coming first, and then tells of the revealing of the man of sin. In verses 7 and 8 we find the

identical sequence. Verse 7 tells of the removal of the Church; verse 8 says: "And then shall that Wicked be revealed." Thus close examination of the passage shows an inner unity and coherence, if we take the word apostasia in its general sense of "departure," while a superficial examination would easily lead to an erroneous interpretation as "falling away" because of the proximity of the mention of the man of sin.[11] Rapture in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. So we have here in verse three the departure of the church before the Lawlessness one is revealed; and in verses seven and eight Paul repeats the sequence, the removal of the church and the revealing of the wicked one. When the word apostasy is used in the meaning of “falling away” it breaks the connection in its meaning. In the History of the translation of the word apostasia we learn from Dr. Thomas Ice the following:

The first seven English translations of apostasia all rendered the noun as either "departure" or "departing." They are as follows: Wycliffe Bible (1384); Tyndale Bible (1526); Coverdale Bible (1535); Cranmer Bible (1539); Breeches Bible (1576); Beza Bible (1583); Geneva Bible (1608).[5] This supports the notion that the word truly means "departure." In fact, Jerome's Latin translation known as the Vulgate from around the time of a.d. 400 renders apostasia with the "word discessio, meaning 'departure.'"[6] Why was the King James Version the first to depart from the established translation of "departure"?

Here is the summary of the ways apostasia means rapture in II Thessalonians 2:3 from Online Bible Study: 1. The parallel between verse 3 and 7-8, showing the antichrist is revealed after the rapture. 2. Words With Similar Definitions: methormizô, remove from one anchorage to another 3. Words With Similar Definitions: metex-anistamai, Pass., move from one place to another 4. Apostasia is translated as "Dissecto" in Latin, which has a meaning of a "spacial departure". 5. Apostasia is translated as "departure" in many Bibles. 6. Liddell and Scott Dictionary authors note Apostasia is translated as "spacial departure" in one case in the 6th century. 7. metatithemi, used for Enoch's rapture, and apostasia both mean "to fall away" 8. metatithemi, used for Enoch's rapture, and apostasia both mean "to depart" 9. metatithemi, used for Enoch's rapture, and apostasia both signify "change" as the rapture is a change. 10. metathesis, used for Enoch's rapture, and apostasia both (in the word it's derrived from, aphistemi) can both mean "to remove". 11. laqach, used for Enoch's rapture, and harpazo (rapture in 1 Thess 4:17), can both mean "to take" 12. laqach, used for Enoch's rapture, and harpazo, can both mean "to seize" 13. laqach, used for Enoch's rapture, and harpazo, can both mean "to snatch away" 14. laqach, used for Enoch's rapture, also carries the meaning "to marry, take a wife" which is a strong rapture parallel.

For the complete article:

http://www.lightfromtheword.org/upload/Apostasia or Departure.pdf



Quasar92

 

[jgr]

No matter how much and how long you compose ways to contradict the teachings of Paul, let alone, Jesus, Matthew, Luke and John, as posted above, the meaning he meant for it was anything other than DEPARTURE, in 2 Thess.2:3! Review the following, from another source:

Apostasia in 2 Thess.2:3 means departure:

The Word of God has come to us with interpretation and choices of certain words that are not always clear to our understanding, and sometimes not agreeing with the context as in II Thessalonians chapter two: But relative to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to meet Him, we beg you, brethren, not to allow our minds to be quickly unsettled or disturbed or kept excited or alarmed, whether it be by some revelation of Spirit or by word or by letter from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has arrived and is here. Let no one deceive or beguile you in any way, for that day will not come except the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed, who is the son of doom. . . Do you not recollect that when I was still with you, I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining him; it is so that he may be manifested in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work in the world,[but it is ] restrained only until he who restrains is taken out of the way, and then the lawless one will be revealed and the Lord Jesus will slay him with the breath of His mouth and bring him to an end by His appearing at His coming (vs. 1-3, 5- 8).

This chapter would be very assuring in the hope of our salvation from the tribulation if the word, apostasy was translated in agreement with the context of the chapter. The Greek word apostasy is a compound word, “apo” –from and “istemi”- stand. So we see here that the fundamental meaning is “away from or departure”. Let’s put these verses in perspective in the order of events which Paul mentioned using the word departure in verse three and we will see that the subsequent verses, 6-8 will agree, establishing the same order of events. “The departure Paul previously referred to was ‘our being gathered to Him’ (v.1) and our being ‘caught up’ with the Lord and the raptured dead in the clouds “( I Thessalonians 4:17) an insight from Scripture clearly opening our eyes of understanding by Dr. Gordon R. Lewis.

Allan MacRae, president of Faith Theological Seminary in a letter to Schuyler English has said the following concerning this matter: I wonder if you have noticed the striking parallel between this verse and verses 7-8, a little further down. According to your suggestion verse 3 mentions the departure of the church as coming first, and then tells of the revealing of the man of sin. In verses 7 and 8 we find the

identical sequence. Verse 7 tells of the removal of the Church; verse 8 says: "And then shall that Wicked be revealed." Thus close examination of the passage shows an inner unity and coherence, if we take the word apostasia in its general sense of "departure," while a superficial examination would easily lead to an erroneous interpretation as "falling away" because of the proximity of the mention of the man of sin.[11] Rapture in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. So we have here in verse three the departure of the church before the Lawlessness one is revealed; and in verses seven and eight Paul repeats the sequence, the removal of the church and the revealing of the wicked one. When the word apostasy is used in the meaning of “falling away” it breaks the connection in its meaning. In the History of the translation of the word apostasia we learn from Dr. Thomas Ice the following:

The first seven English translations of apostasia all rendered the noun as either "departure" or "departing." They are as follows: Wycliffe Bible (1384); Tyndale Bible (1526); Coverdale Bible (1535); Cranmer Bible (1539); Breeches Bible (1576); Beza Bible (1583); Geneva Bible (1608).[5] This supports the notion that the word truly means "departure." In fact, Jerome's Latin translation known as the Vulgate from around the time of a.d. 400 renders apostasia with the "word discessio, meaning 'departure.'"[6] Why was the King James Version the first to depart from the established translation of "departure"?

Here is the summary of the ways apostasia means rapture in II Thessalonians 2:3 from Online Bible Study: 1. The parallel between verse 3 and 7-8, showing the antichrist is revealed after the rapture. 2. Words With Similar Definitions: methormizô, remove from one anchorage to another 3. Words With Similar Definitions: metex-anistamai, Pass., move from one place to another 4. Apostasia is translated as "Dissecto" in Latin, which has a meaning of a "spacial departure". 5. Apostasia is translated as "departure" in many Bibles. 6. Liddell and Scott Dictionary authors note Apostasia is translated as "spacial departure" in one case in the 6th century. 7. metatithemi, used for Enoch's rapture, and apostasia both mean "to fall away" 8. metatithemi, used for Enoch's rapture, and apostasia both mean "to depart" 9. metatithemi, used for Enoch's rapture, and apostasia both signify "change" as the rapture is a change. 10. metathesis, used for Enoch's rapture, and apostasia both (in the word it's derrived from, aphistemi) can both mean "to remove". 11. laqach, used for Enoch's rapture, and harpazo (rapture in 1 Thess 4:17), can both mean "to take" 12. laqach, used for Enoch's rapture, and harpazo, can both mean "to seize" 13. laqach, used for Enoch's rapture, and harpazo, can both mean "to snatch away" 14. laqach, used for Enoch's rapture, also carries the meaning "to marry, take a wife" which is a strong rapture parallel.

For the complete article:

http://www.lightfromtheword.org/upload/Apostasia or Departure.pdf



Quasar92

You've been inundated with an avalanche of a plethora of different evidence for the historic interpretation, so now your only remaining recourse is an endless repetition of the same bunkum.

You've effectively labeled the cited Church Fathers and Reformers, all contemporary English Bible translators, and all Christians whose native tongue is Greek; as fools or liars.

Our brother BABerean2 recently accurately described dispensationalism as a doctrine of ignorance.

That ignorance is once again on full display.

The content below has been updated with the following:
""Apostasia" as "rapture" was unknown in Christian orthodoxy until its sudden appearance in 1895, as nascent dispensationalism pursued scriptural mutilation and malformation in its zeal to recast historic orthodox prophecy in the dispensational futurized image."


Here is the elaboration on 2 Thes. 2:3 in the Wycliffe translation:

3 [That] No man deceive you in any manner. For but dissension come first [For no but departing away, or dissension, shall come first], and the man of sin be showed, the son of perdition

Note that dissension (consistent with apostasy, separation, schism) is the elaboration. Rapture is unseen.

Departing away as a synonym of dissension thus means departing away from the faith, i.e. apostasy, not rapture; falling away, not flying away.

Wycliffe identified the man of sin as the apostate papal antichrist, at whose hands the true church was suffering. He did not believe in a pretrib rapture of which he had never heard, and which had never occurred.

From Calvin's Geneva Study Bible:

Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Calvin also identified the man of sin as the papacy, and did not believe in a pretrib rapture of which he had never heard, and which had never occurred..
Same with Tyndale. He was martyred by the papacy.
Same with Cranmer. He too was martyred by the papacy.
Coverdale was an associate of Tyndale's, and of like persuasion.
Beza was also of like persuasion.

There is no Reformer who considered the word to mean anything other than departure from the faith.

A definition of "discessio," the word used in the Vulgate, is found at this site.

Included near the end is a specific ecclesiological subdefinition:
"In the church, a separation, schism (eccl. Lat.), Vulg. Act. 21, 21; id. 2 Thes. 2, 3."

Occurrences are cited as being Acts 21:21 and 2 Thes. 2:3.

Letting Scripture interpret Scripture, the use of the word in Acts 21:21 is translated "forsake," which is fully consistent with the subdefinition above, and has nothing to do with rapture.

Apostacia: What Modern Greeks say about "Apostacia" in 2 Thess 2:3.

Excerpt: "I could find no debate among Greek speaking Christians on how to interpret this verse. They all interpret "apostacia" in 2 Thess 2:3 to mean "apostacy"."

Does Apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 Refer to a ‘Physical Departure’ (i.e. the Rapture)?

2 Thess 2:3 in the Early Church Writings; How early Greek, Latin and Aramaic speaking Christians interpreted "Apostacia"/"Apostacy

The Latin Influence on 2 Thess 2:3

"Apostasia" as "rapture" was unknown in Christian orthodoxy until its sudden appearance in 1895, as nascent dispensationalism pursued scriptural mutilation and malformation in its zeal to recast historic orthodox prophecy in the dispensational futurized image.

Of the several dozen contemporary English Bible versions in existence, not a single version translates "apostasia" as "rapture", but rather as apostasy, falling away, or the equivalent.

The early church believed that the imperial Roman empire, under which the church was then living, was the restrainer which would eventually be "taken out of the way", but which was forestalling the emergence of the papal Roman empire, which Paul describes as the lawless one; and its ensuing apostasy. Notice in the related verses in 2 Thess. 2 that Paul does not reveal the identity of the restrainer. If Paul had believed that the Holy Spirit or the Church was the restrainer, there would have been no reason for him not to explicitly name either one. But Paul did have a reason. John Chrysostom, an apologist of the later early post-apostolic era, reveals it:

"Because if he meant to say the Spirit, he would not have spoken obscurely, but plainly, that even now the grace of the Spirit, that is the gifts, withhold him...But because he said this of the Roman empire, he naturally glanced at it, and speaks covertly and darkly. For he did not wish to bring upon himself superfluous enmities, and useless dangers. For if he had said that after a little while the Roman empire would be dissolved, they would immediately have even overwhelmed him, as a pestilent person, and all the faithful, as living and warring to this end."

Paul did not wish to jeopardize the Church by attracting the attention of the Roman authorities.

History subsequently confirmed the validity of Paul's inspired prescience.

 

[Quasar92]

You've been inundated with an avalanche of a plethora of different evidence for the historic interpretation, so now your only remaining recourse is an endless repetition of the same bunkum.

You've effectively labeled the cited Church Fathers and Reformers, all contemporary English Bible translators, and all Christians whose native tongue is Greek; as fools or liars.

Our brother BABerean2 recently accurately described dispensationalism as a doctrine of ignorance.

That ignorance is once again on full display.

The content below has been updated with the following:
""Apostasia" as "rapture" was unknown in Christian orthodoxy until its sudden appearance in 1895, as nascent dispensationalism pursued scriptural mutilation and malformation in its zeal to recast historic orthodox prophecy in the dispensational futurized image."


Here is the elaboration on 2 Thes. 2:3 in the Wycliffe translation:

3 [That] No man deceive you in any manner. For but dissension come first [For no but departing away, or dissension, shall come first], and the man of sin be showed, the son of perdition

Note that dissension (consistent with apostasy, separation, schism) is the elaboration. Rapture is unseen.

Departing away as a synonym of dissension thus means departing away from the faith, i.e. apostasy, not rapture; falling away, not flying away.

Wycliffe identified the man of sin as the apostate papal antichrist, at whose hands the true church was suffering. He did not believe in a pretrib rapture of which he had never heard, and which had never occurred.

From Calvin's Geneva Study Bible:

Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Calvin also identified the man of sin as the papacy, and did not believe in a pretrib rapture of which he had never heard, and which had never occurred..
Same with Tyndale. He was martyred by the papacy.
Same with Cranmer. He too was martyred by the papacy.
Coverdale was an associate of Tyndale's, and of like persuasion.
Beza was also of like persuasion.

There is no Reformer who considered the word to mean anything other than departure from the faith.

A definition of "discessio," the word used in the Vulgate, is found at this site.

Included near the end is a specific ecclesiological subdefinition:
"In the church, a separation, schism (eccl. Lat.), Vulg. Act. 21, 21; id. 2 Thes. 2, 3."

Occurrences are cited as being Acts 21:21 and 2 Thes. 2:3.

Letting Scripture interpret Scripture, the use of the word in Acts 21:21 is translated "forsake," which is fully consistent with the subdefinition above, and has nothing to do with rapture.

Apostacia: What Modern Greeks say about "Apostacia" in 2 Thess 2:3.

Excerpt: "I could find no debate among Greek speaking Christians on how to interpret this verse. They all interpret "apostacia" in 2 Thess 2:3 to mean "apostacy"."

Does Apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 Refer to a ‘Physical Departure’ (i.e. the Rapture)?

2 Thess 2:3 in the Early Church Writings; How early Greek, Latin and Aramaic speaking Christians interpreted "Apostacia"/"Apostacy

The Latin Influence on 2 Thess 2:3

"Apostasia" as "rapture" was unknown in Christian orthodoxy until its sudden appearance in 1895, as nascent dispensationalism pursued scriptural mutilation and malformation in its zeal to recast historic orthodox prophecy in the dispensational futurized image.

Of the several dozen contemporary English Bible versions in existence, not a single version translates "apostasia" as "rapture", but rather as apostasy, falling away, or the equivalent.

The early church believed that the imperial Roman empire, under which the church was then living, was the restrainer which would eventually be "taken out of the way", but which was forestalling the emergence of the papal Roman empire, which Paul describes as the lawless one; and its ensuing apostasy. Notice in the related verses in 2 Thess. 2 that Paul does not reveal the identity of the restrainer. If Paul had believed that the Holy Spirit or the Church was the restrainer, there would have been no reason for him not to explicitly name either one. But Paul did have a reason. John Chrysostom, an apologist of the later early post-apostolic era, reveals it:

"Because if he meant to say the Spirit, he would not have spoken obscurely, but plainly, that even now the grace of the Spirit, that is the gifts, withhold him...But because he said this of the Roman empire, he naturally glanced at it, and speaks covertly and darkly. For he did not wish to bring upon himself superfluous enmities, and useless dangers. For if he had said that after a little while the Roman empire would be dissolved, they would immediately have even overwhelmed him, as a pestilent person, and all the faithful, as living and warring to this end."

Paul did not wish to jeopardize the Church by attracting the attention of the Roman authorities.

History subsequently confirmed the validity of Paul's inspired prescience.

No! The sources I use to support the rapture of the Church in 2 Thess.2:1-8 DO NOT all come from the same source! But they ARE ALL OF A SINGLE MIND! APOSTASIA = DEPARTURE! From another source:

Is the Rapture Found in

2 Thessalonians 2:3?

H. Wayne House, M.A., Th.D., J.D.

Distinguished Research Professor of Theology, Law and Culture

Faith Evangelical Seminary

The letters of Paul to the Thessalonian church were written early in his ministry (ca A.D. 51-52) to the new believers of Macedonia. These Christians eagerly accepted the teaching that Paul gave to them in the short time he was with them, but no sooner had Paul left than persons came into their midst who perverted the apostle�s teaching. In regards to the coming of Christ for Christians, Paul apparently taught that they should be diligent in looking for Christ to come (1 Thess 4-5). Unfortunately, however, someone argued that Jesus had already returned. This puzzled the believers due to the fact that they had not been taken in the �rapture� (1 Thess 4:13). Now Paul wanted to provide additional evidence to assure them that Jesus had not returned and proof that this was so.

I. How Biblical Scholars Have Understood Apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2:3

Biblical scholars have understood the word Greek word apostasia (translated �falling away� in the KJV) in four different ways. How one understands this Greek word may impact how one sees the return of Jesus. Let us examine the different interpretations below.

Apostasia Refers to the Man of Sin

This interpretation says that the word apostasy refers to the �man of sin� in verse three (what scholars call apposition). This was a common understanding in the first few centuries of the church, but few hold it today. The church father Augustine said, �No one can doubt that he [Paul] wrote this of Antichrist and of the day of judgment, which he here calls the day of the Lord, nor that he declared that this day should not come unless he first came who is called the apostate —apostate, to wit, from the Lord God.�[1]

Apostasia Refers to �Falling Away� from the Faith

A second view is that adopted by the King James Version (Authorized Version) of the Bible, namely, �falling away.� Under this view, apostasy speaks of a falling away or defection from the faith. [2] When this occurs, the Antichrist (man of sin) will arise, showing signs and wonders. This view seems to originate with the translation of the King James Version in 1611, but it is popular today. However, there is not a consistency regarding who will actually fall away. Does it refer to the church, to Jews during the Tribulation, or to non-Christians? Let us look at examples of those who hold to each view.

Professing Church

Theologian Charles Ryrie believes that the �apostasy� in 2 Thess 2:3 speaks of a future falling away of those within the professing church who never truly believed in Jesus, and believes that this view is found in Rev 17 and 2 Tim 3:1.[3]

Jews during the Tribulation

The second interpretation asserts that Jews who reject God during the tribulation are in view in the passage. Martin Rosenthal has argued that even as the word is used in the New Testament when Paul was opposed by Jews (e.g. Acts 21:21), so this will be how Jews will act during the tribulation. He says that they will �totally abandon the God of their fathers and their messianic hope in favor of a false religion (humanism) and a false messiah (the Antichrist, 2 Thess. 2:2-12).�[4]

Non-Christians

Some have also viewed the �falling away� as referring to non-Christians as a whole. Hogg and Vine, as well as Chafer, believed that the term referred to the way in which unsaved humanity failed to embrace the truth of God found in the Gospel after the Church has been removed from the earth.[5]

Apostasia Refers to a Revolt or Rebellion Against God

Understanding apostasia as revolt or rebellion stands in strong contrast to the former �falling away.� The latter implies a defection from the faith or from God, while the former speaks of a forceful or violent rejection of God.

A. L. Moore explains this view:

[T]he rebellion comes first: here Paul uses imagery drawn probably from Daniel 11:36 (and cf. Isa. 14:13ff; Ezek. 28:2). Rebellion, apostasia, could refer to political apostasy or military revolt in classical Greek, but in the LXX [Greek OT] it denotes religious rebellion against God (cf. Jos. 22:22; Jer. 2:19). . . . The thought is, we suggest, that when the moment comes for Christ to appear in glory and for all that rebels against God to be unmasked and cast out, the forces of evil will arise as never before in a last desperate effort against God.[6]

Rather than a defection from the faith, or failure to embrace the Gospel, the majority of scholars probably hold to this option, believing the word expresses deliberate opposition against God and/or His people,[7] and even may be a revolt against public order or government.[8] This disorder would set the stage for the rise of a person who would bring back order, known as the Antichrist.

Apostasia as the Rapture

The final view is certainly held by a minority today but that apostasy may refer to the departure of the church has been embraced by a number of scholars, including E. Schuyler English, Stanley Ellisen, Gordon Lewis, and Kenneth Wuest. Since the view is rarely considered an option by commentators, it becomes incumbent upon those who hold such a view to make a vigorous defense. Whether or not apostasia may mean rapture does not rely only upon the meaning of the term in Greek, but whether the idea of defection or revolt in the end times is found as an event in Paul�s teaching, as well as the likely meaning of the word in the immediate context of the letter to the Thessalonians.

Regarding this first consideration, the nature of the idea of defection or revolt in Paul�s teaching, Ellisen captures the likely scenario:

At the risk of being out of step with most commentaries on the subject, may we suggest the greater acceptability of an alternate view: the evidence for a great singular defection from the faith, occurring just prior to the rapture or to the day of the Lord, is really based on questionable ground. In the first reference generally appealed to (1 Tim. 4), Paul does speak of an apostasy from the faith, but not as a unique end-time event. Rather, he described it as a trend or movement that was already present. This he characterized as erroneous doctrine, hypocritical living, and improper legalism. In using the term here, he qualified it with the phrase �from the faith.� By itself it meant simply �departure.�

In the second reference to defection, 2 Timothy 3:1ff., Paul does not use the term apostasy, but merely speaks of evil men in general in the latter times. His point here is that evil men will become more and more depraved as the age wears on (2 Timothy 3:13). Thus this passage has no real relation to apostasy from the faith and certain does not warn of some specific final defection that will precede the rapture or introduce the day of the Lord.[9]

The remainder of the chapter will be given to the meaning of the technical term apostasy and what best meaning fits its usage in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

II. How Apostasia Has Been Translated

Jerome translated the Greek New Testament into Latin in the 4th century (the Vulgate). He used the Latin word discessio, meaning �departure,� for the Greek word apostasia. This meaning was continued in the earliest English translations such as the Wycliff Bible (1384), Tyndale Bible (1526), Coverdale Bible (1535), Cranmer Bible (1539), Breeches Bible (1576), Beza Bible (1583), and Geneva Bible (1608). The King James Version deviated from this translation, translating apostasia as �falling away.� No explanation was given for doing this. Moreover, Theodore Beza transliterated apostasia as apostasy, rather than translating it. Since the 17th century, the consistent understanding of apostasia in modern translations has been rebellion (NIV, NRSV, Goodspeed, RSV, Moffatt, Phillips, Jerusalem Bible, Williams), or falling away (Berkeley, ASV, NKJV).

III. Arguments that Favor Apostasia as the Rapture

The Sense of �Departure� in Classical and Biblical Sources

The word apostasia is regularly translated �rebellion� or �defection� in Greek literature before the time of the writing of the New Testament. In a few cases, however, it does have the sense of �departure.� The reason for this difference is the context of the passages. At times, the word does not occur in a context in which the matter of rebellion against authority, or defection from a person, ideology, or religious faith is in view. Rather the noun adheres more closely to the verbal meaning of �depart� or some other spatial sense.[10] The predominant meaning of rebellion and, at times, defection is also found in the Greek Old Testament. One must be careful when deviating from the established meanings in classical and biblical (LXX) writings, yet one must also not be afraid to take the minority meaning with spatial connotation when context warrants. Such may be the case in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

The Use of the Definite Article with apostasia

One finds the use of the Greek article with apostasia in 2 Thess 2:3. Another example of this in 1 Macc 2:15, where defection from the Old Testament faith is generally viewed to be the proper translation of he apostasia. "And those who came from the king were compelling the defection in the city of Modein, in order to sacrifice." (1 Macc 2:15). What is the significance of these two instances? Similar to this passage in 1 Maccabees, 2 Thess 2:3 has the article and no qualifiers, such as defection from God, so the context is determinative for the meaning of apostasia. In the first two chapters of 1 Maccabees there is a description of the Greek victory of Israel by Alexander the Greek until the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, with the latter king invading Judah and enforcing a desecration of the temple. When one studies the context of 2 Thess 2:13 in the same way, the context speaks of the coming of Christ for the church and the coming man of sin after the restrainer is removed.

Idea of Second Coming throughout 1 & 2 Thessalonians

Paul is deeply concerned with the coming of Christ for believers. This is clear in that in each chapter of 1 Thessalonians he speaks of Jesus� coming for His people. The apostle in 1 Thess 1:9-10a speaks of the rescue from the coming wrath that God�s Son would provide for believers. Paul says the Thessalonians give him hope and joy at the coming of Christ (2:19). The pivotal passage on the rapture is in 1 Thess 4:13-17, in which the apostle reveals that the dead would be caught up (from which we get the word �rapture�) together with living saints to be with Christ. Chapter 5:1-11 he continues his discussion found in chapter 4. He said that believers, unlike those in the world, would not be caught unready for Christ�s coming.

One also finds discussion of the coming of Jesus in 2 Thessalonians. In chapter 2, addressing the false teaching since he left Thessalonica that Christ had already come, he tells the Christians that they need have no anxiety over this teaching.

Contextual Reasons for apostasia to be the Rapture

What in the context of 2 Thessalonians 2 would lead one to accept that the rapture, rather than defection or rebellion is in view? Let us look at the immediately preceding verses to the reference of an apostasia. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2 reads,

1 Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, 2 that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.� (2 Th 2:1–2 NAS95)

The purpose of Paul�s teaching on the coming of Christ was to comfort the church. Each text in 1 and 2 Thessalonians emphasizes this truth. If apostasia carries the sense of �departure,� following his words in 2:1, this would add to the comfort and assurance. Moreover, he sought through verse 3 to assuage them of the false notion taught by those false teachers who came to them, that the Day of the Lord had already come. Contrary to this false teaching, the Day of the Lord (a time of judgment) would not come until two events occurred. One is the apostasia and the other the rise of the man of sin. Since neither of these two had taken place, they should not believe that the time for God�s judgment had arrived.

What makes the most sense in the context, that the Day of the Lord had not come because a rebellion against government or a defection from the faith had not occurred, or that the departure to be with Christ had not occurred? Remember, in 1 Thessalonians 1, the encouragement was that the coming of Christ would rescue believers from the coming wrath. In addition to this, there are at least three more arguments that favor a departure rather than a rebellion/defection in the passage.

First, in passages where a rebellion or defection is in view, the context speaks of the rebellion or defection, but such is not in few in preceding verses in 2 Thessalonians. Rather, as we have seen in a brief review of 1 and 2 Thessalonians, the coming of Christ is in view: �Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,� (2 Th 2:1 NAS95). Since the subject of the passage, then, is the coming of Christ, and nothing in this passage, or any other to my knowledge, has discussion of a rebellion against government or defection from Christianity as being a prerequisite for Christ�s coming, the most natural understanding of apostasia would be a spatial departure in concert with 1 Thess 4. Certainly Matthew 24 speaks of many being led to follow the Antichrist (Mt 24:5), but there is nothing about true believers following false Christs as an indication of Christ�s coming. Moreover, the events of Matthew 24 refer to the coming of Christ in judgment, not salvation, and relate to the time of the Tribulation and afterwards. A statement of false teachers in the church is given in Acts 20, but again, these to not concern the man of sin.

Second, the word apostasia has the unusual article occurring with it, signifying that a specific event is in view, and one that is known to the readers. The only event that fits with this special sense would seem to be in 2 Thess 2:1 and the former teaching of Paul in 1 Thessalonians, particular chaps 4-5. This would favor also a rapture perspective.

Last of all, is the use of "restrainer" in verses 6-7. What is Paul speaking of when he mentions a �restrainer� that keeps the man of sin from arising (note that the restrainer does not impact the apostasia)? The term apostasia and the rise of the man of sin are probably not the same event in verse 3, and the contrast of the restrainer and the man of sin lend support to apostasia being a departure. Verses 6 and 7 seem to be parallel of apostasia and man of sin. Generally the restrainer in verses 6 and 7 has been taken to be a reference to the Holy Spirit or to the church (though some have seen this a reference to government). What is interesting is that the idea of restrainer is expressed in both a personal and impersonal sense. The text reads, �6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.� (2 Th 2:6–7 NAS95). So there is a �what� that restrains and a �who� that restrains. What is it that keeps the man of sin from arising, and who keeps him from arising. I believe it is reasonable to conclude that the presence of the church restrains him and the presence of the work of the Holy Spirit in the church restrains him. When the antichrist comes to power, God�s redeemed will no longer be present, and as the Holy Spirit came upon the church in Acts 2, He leaves with the church in 2 Thessalonians 2.[11]

IV. Interaction With Those Who Reject the Rapture View

The claim is made that apostasia never speaks of a departure in Greek literature, specifically the New Testament. I have already dealt with this earlier in the chapter, and in much more depth elsewhere.[12] A person who has probably an important critque against apostasia being the rapture is Robert Gundry. His arguments have even convinced a stalwart pre-tribulationist such as John Walvoord.[13]

Gundry recognizes that Schuyler English, an early proponent of the rapture view, did discover apostasia as meaning �departure� in the classical period,[14] but considered this discovery to be unimportant for the word in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Gundry says that the four sources for determining the meaning are found in the New Testament, the Greek Old Testament (LXX), the koine (common Greek in time of NT), and classical Greek.⁠ He is unconvinced that the word apostasia carries this minority meaning in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Since the predominant meaning of apostasia is revolt and religious defection, he believes that this would govern its use in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

The only other instance of apostasia in the New Testament is Acts 21:21, when Paul is challenged as �teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses� (Acts 21:21 NAS95). The meaning is clear, religious defection. Gundry believes that the two instances in the New Testament (Acts 21:21 and 2 Thess 2:3) would convey the idea of defection from the faith, despite no such reference in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 because even without defection being in the context, the word apostasia had inherently come to mean defection. Such is not the case. Context must always be considered in deciding the meaning of words. Yet in the passages that apostasia is translated revolt or defection, the context naturally leads one to the translation. This is not true in 2 Thessalonians. The context does not address these negative ideas but the focus is the coming of Christ and what must precede the Day of the Lord (judgment). Consequently, the sense of spatial departure is not outside the possible meaning.

V. Conclusion

In this short presentation, I have attempted to present evidence that the departure of the church from the earth very well may discussed in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. This meaning agrees with examples in the Greek world, is consistent with the context of 2 Thessalonians 2, and the emphasis of the apostle Paul in the Thessalonian epistles to provide comfort to these early believers. This interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 may also provide hope for us today.

Source: http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/a-defense-of-the-rapture-in-2-thessalonians-23


Quasar92

 

[Truth7t7]

No! The sources I use to support the rapture of the Church in 2 Thess.2:1-8 DO NOT all come from the same source! But they ARE ALL OF A SINGLE MIND! APOSTASIA = DEPARTURE! From another source:

Is the Rapture Found in

2 Thessalonians 2:3?

H. Wayne House, M.A., Th.D., J.D.

Distinguished Research Professor of Theology, Law and Culture

Faith Evangelical Seminary

The letters of Paul to the Thessalonian church were written early in his ministry (ca A.D. 51-52) to the new believers of Macedonia. These Christians eagerly accepted the teaching that Paul gave to them in the short time he was with them, but no sooner had Paul left than persons came into their midst who perverted the apostle�s teaching. In regards to the coming of Christ for Christians, Paul apparently taught that they should be diligent in looking for Christ to come (1 Thess 4-5). Unfortunately, however, someone argued that Jesus had already returned. This puzzled the believers due to the fact that they had not been taken in the �rapture� (1 Thess 4:13). Now Paul wanted to provide additional evidence to assure them that Jesus had not returned and proof that this was so.

I. How Biblical Scholars Have Understood Apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2:3

Biblical scholars have understood the word Greek word apostasia (translated �falling away� in the KJV) in four different ways. How one understands this Greek word may impact how one sees the return of Jesus. Let us examine the different interpretations below.

Apostasia Refers to the Man of Sin

This interpretation says that the word apostasy refers to the �man of sin� in verse three (what scholars call apposition). This was a common understanding in the first few centuries of the church, but few hold it today. The church father Augustine said, �No one can doubt that he [Paul] wrote this of Antichrist and of the day of judgment, which he here calls the day of the Lord, nor that he declared that this day should not come unless he first came who is called the apostate —apostate, to wit, from the Lord God.�[1]

Apostasia Refers to �Falling Away� from the Faith

A second view is that adopted by the King James Version (Authorized Version) of the Bible, namely, �falling away.� Under this view, apostasy speaks of a falling away or defection from the faith. [2] When this occurs, the Antichrist (man of sin) will arise, showing signs and wonders. This view seems to originate with the translation of the King James Version in 1611, but it is popular today. However, there is not a consistency regarding who will actually fall away. Does it refer to the church, to Jews during the Tribulation, or to non-Christians? Let us look at examples of those who hold to each view.

Professing Church

Theologian Charles Ryrie believes that the �apostasy� in 2 Thess 2:3 speaks of a future falling away of those within the professing church who never truly believed in Jesus, and believes that this view is found in Rev 17 and 2 Tim 3:1.[3]

Jews during the Tribulation

The second interpretation asserts that Jews who reject God during the tribulation are in view in the passage. Martin Rosenthal has argued that even as the word is used in the New Testament when Paul was opposed by Jews (e.g. Acts 21:21), so this will be how Jews will act during the tribulation. He says that they will �totally abandon the God of their fathers and their messianic hope in favor of a false religion (humanism) and a false messiah (the Antichrist, 2 Thess. 2:2-12).�[4]

Non-Christians

Some have also viewed the �falling away� as referring to non-Christians as a whole. Hogg and Vine, as well as Chafer, believed that the term referred to the way in which unsaved humanity failed to embrace the truth of God found in the Gospel after the Church has been removed from the earth.[5]

Apostasia Refers to a Revolt or Rebellion Against God

Understanding apostasia as revolt or rebellion stands in strong contrast to the former �falling away.� The latter implies a defection from the faith or from God, while the former speaks of a forceful or violent rejection of God.

A. L. Moore explains this view:

[T]he rebellion comes first: here Paul uses imagery drawn probably from Daniel 11:36 (and cf. Isa. 14:13ff; Ezek. 28:2). Rebellion, apostasia, could refer to political apostasy or military revolt in classical Greek, but in the LXX [Greek OT] it denotes religious rebellion against God (cf. Jos. 22:22; Jer. 2:19). . . . The thought is, we suggest, that when the moment comes for Christ to appear in glory and for all that rebels against God to be unmasked and cast out, the forces of evil will arise as never before in a last desperate effort against God.[6]

Rather than a defection from the faith, or failure to embrace the Gospel, the majority of scholars probably hold to this option, believing the word expresses deliberate opposition against God and/or His people,[7] and even may be a revolt against public order or government.[8] This disorder would set the stage for the rise of a person who would bring back order, known as the Antichrist.

Apostasia as the Rapture

The final view is certainly held by a minority today but that apostasy may refer to the departure of the church has been embraced by a number of scholars, including E. Schuyler English, Stanley Ellisen, Gordon Lewis, and Kenneth Wuest. Since the view is rarely considered an option by commentators, it becomes incumbent upon those who hold such a view to make a vigorous defense. Whether or not apostasia may mean rapture does not rely only upon the meaning of the term in Greek, but whether the idea of defection or revolt in the end times is found as an event in Paul�s teaching, as well as the likely meaning of the word in the immediate context of the letter to the Thessalonians.

Regarding this first consideration, the nature of the idea of defection or revolt in Paul�s teaching, Ellisen captures the likely scenario:

At the risk of being out of step with most commentaries on the subject, may we suggest the greater acceptability of an alternate view: the evidence for a great singular defection from the faith, occurring just prior to the rapture or to the day of the Lord, is really based on questionable ground. In the first reference generally appealed to (1 Tim. 4), Paul does speak of an apostasy from the faith, but not as a unique end-time event. Rather, he described it as a trend or movement that was already present. This he characterized as erroneous doctrine, hypocritical living, and improper legalism. In using the term here, he qualified it with the phrase �from the faith.� By itself it meant simply �departure.�

In the second reference to defection, 2 Timothy 3:1ff., Paul does not use the term apostasy, but merely speaks of evil men in general in the latter times. His point here is that evil men will become more and more depraved as the age wears on (2 Timothy 3:13). Thus this passage has no real relation to apostasy from the faith and certain does not warn of some specific final defection that will precede the rapture or introduce the day of the Lord.[9]

The remainder of the chapter will be given to the meaning of the technical term apostasy and what best meaning fits its usage in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

II. How Apostasia Has Been Translated

Jerome translated the Greek New Testament into Latin in the 4th century (the Vulgate). He used the Latin word discessio, meaning �departure,� for the Greek word apostasia. This meaning was continued in the earliest English translations such as the Wycliff Bible (1384), Tyndale Bible (1526), Coverdale Bible (1535), Cranmer Bible (1539), Breeches Bible (1576), Beza Bible (1583), and Geneva Bible (1608). The King James Version deviated from this translation, translating apostasia as �falling away.� No explanation was given for doing this. Moreover, Theodore Beza transliterated apostasia as apostasy, rather than translating it. Since the 17th century, the consistent understanding of apostasia in modern translations has been rebellion (NIV, NRSV, Goodspeed, RSV, Moffatt, Phillips, Jerusalem Bible, Williams), or falling away (Berkeley, ASV, NKJV).

III. Arguments that Favor Apostasia as the Rapture

The Sense of �Departure� in Classical and Biblical Sources

The word apostasia is regularly translated �rebellion� or �defection� in Greek literature before the time of the writing of the New Testament. In a few cases, however, it does have the sense of �departure.� The reason for this difference is the context of the passages. At times, the word does not occur in a context in which the matter of rebellion against authority, or defection from a person, ideology, or religious faith is in view. Rather the noun adheres more closely to the verbal meaning of �depart� or some other spatial sense.[10] The predominant meaning of rebellion and, at times, defection is also found in the Greek Old Testament. One must be careful when deviating from the established meanings in classical and biblical (LXX) writings, yet one must also not be afraid to take the minority meaning with spatial connotation when context warrants. Such may be the case in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

The Use of the Definite Article with apostasia

One finds the use of the Greek article with apostasia in 2 Thess 2:3. Another example of this in 1 Macc 2:15, where defection from the Old Testament faith is generally viewed to be the proper translation of he apostasia. "And those who came from the king were compelling the defection in the city of Modein, in order to sacrifice." (1 Macc 2:15). What is the significance of these two instances? Similar to this passage in 1 Maccabees, 2 Thess 2:3 has the article and no qualifiers, such as defection from God, so the context is determinative for the meaning of apostasia. In the first two chapters of 1 Maccabees there is a description of the Greek victory of Israel by Alexander the Greek until the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, with the latter king invading Judah and enforcing a desecration of the temple. When one studies the context of 2 Thess 2:13 in the same way, the context speaks of the coming of Christ for the church and the coming man of sin after the restrainer is removed.

Idea of Second Coming throughout 1 & 2 Thessalonians

Paul is deeply concerned with the coming of Christ for believers. This is clear in that in each chapter of 1 Thessalonians he speaks of Jesus� coming for His people. The apostle in 1 Thess 1:9-10a speaks of the rescue from the coming wrath that God�s Son would provide for believers. Paul says the Thessalonians give him hope and joy at the coming of Christ (2:19). The pivotal passage on the rapture is in 1 Thess 4:13-17, in which the apostle reveals that the dead would be caught up (from which we get the word �rapture�) together with living saints to be with Christ. Chapter 5:1-11 he continues his discussion found in chapter 4. He said that believers, unlike those in the world, would not be caught unready for Christ�s coming.

One also finds discussion of the coming of Jesus in 2 Thessalonians. In chapter 2, addressing the false teaching since he left Thessalonica that Christ had already come, he tells the Christians that they need have no anxiety over this teaching.

Contextual Reasons for apostasia to be the Rapture

What in the context of 2 Thessalonians 2 would lead one to accept that the rapture, rather than defection or rebellion is in view? Let us look at the immediately preceding verses to the reference of an apostasia. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2 reads,

1 Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, 2 that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.� (2 Th 2:1–2 NAS95)

The purpose of Paul�s teaching on the coming of Christ was to comfort the church. Each text in 1 and 2 Thessalonians emphasizes this truth. If apostasia carries the sense of �departure,� following his words in 2:1, this would add to the comfort and assurance. Moreover, he sought through verse 3 to assuage them of the false notion taught by those false teachers who came to them, that the Day of the Lord had already come. Contrary to this false teaching, the Day of the Lord (a time of judgment) would not come until two events occurred. One is the apostasia and the other the rise of the man of sin. Since neither of these two had taken place, they should not believe that the time for God�s judgment had arrived.

What makes the most sense in the context, that the Day of the Lord had not come because a rebellion against government or a defection from the faith had not occurred, or that the departure to be with Christ had not occurred? Remember, in 1 Thessalonians 1, the encouragement was that the coming of Christ would rescue believers from the coming wrath. In addition to this, there are at least three more arguments that favor a departure rather than a rebellion/defection in the passage.

First, in passages where a rebellion or defection is in view, the context speaks of the rebellion or defection, but such is not in few in preceding verses in 2 Thessalonians. Rather, as we have seen in a brief review of 1 and 2 Thessalonians, the coming of Christ is in view: �Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,� (2 Th 2:1 NAS95). Since the subject of the passage, then, is the coming of Christ, and nothing in this passage, or any other to my knowledge, has discussion of a rebellion against government or defection from Christianity as being a prerequisite for Christ�s coming, the most natural understanding of apostasia would be a spatial departure in concert with 1 Thess 4. Certainly Matthew 24 speaks of many being led to follow the Antichrist (Mt 24:5), but there is nothing about true believers following false Christs as an indication of Christ�s coming. Moreover, the events of Matthew 24 refer to the coming of Christ in judgment, not salvation, and relate to the time of the Tribulation and afterwards. A statement of false teachers in the church is given in Acts 20, but again, these to not concern the man of sin.

Second, the word apostasia has the unusual article occurring with it, signifying that a specific event is in view, and one that is known to the readers. The only event that fits with this special sense would seem to be in 2 Thess 2:1 and the former teaching of Paul in 1 Thessalonians, particular chaps 4-5. This would favor also a rapture perspective.

Last of all, is the use of "restrainer" in verses 6-7. What is Paul speaking of when he mentions a �restrainer� that keeps the man of sin from arising (note that the restrainer does not impact the apostasia)? The term apostasia and the rise of the man of sin are probably not the same event in verse 3, and the contrast of the restrainer and the man of sin lend support to apostasia being a departure. Verses 6 and 7 seem to be parallel of apostasia and man of sin. Generally the restrainer in verses 6 and 7 has been taken to be a reference to the Holy Spirit or to the church (though some have seen this a reference to government). What is interesting is that the idea of restrainer is expressed in both a personal and impersonal sense. The text reads, �6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.� (2 Th 2:6–7 NAS95). So there is a �what� that restrains and a �who� that restrains. What is it that keeps the man of sin from arising, and who keeps him from arising. I believe it is reasonable to conclude that the presence of the church restrains him and the presence of the work of the Holy Spirit in the church restrains him. When the antichrist comes to power, God�s redeemed will no longer be present, and as the Holy Spirit came upon the church in Acts 2, He leaves with the church in 2 Thessalonians 2.[11]

IV. Interaction With Those Who Reject the Rapture View

The claim is made that apostasia never speaks of a departure in Greek literature, specifically the New Testament. I have already dealt with this earlier in the chapter, and in much more depth elsewhere.[12] A person who has probably an important critque against apostasia being the rapture is Robert Gundry. His arguments have even convinced a stalwart pre-tribulationist such as John Walvoord.[13]

Gundry recognizes that Schuyler English, an early proponent of the rapture view, did discover apostasia as meaning �departure� in the classical period,[14] but considered this discovery to be unimportant for the word in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Gundry says that the four sources for determining the meaning are found in the New Testament, the Greek Old Testament (LXX), the koine (common Greek in time of NT), and classical Greek.⁠ He is unconvinced that the word apostasia carries this minority meaning in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Since the predominant meaning of apostasia is revolt and religious defection, he believes that this would govern its use in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

The only other instance of apostasia in the New Testament is Acts 21:21, when Paul is challenged as �teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses� (Acts 21:21 NAS95). The meaning is clear, religious defection. Gundry believes that the two instances in the New Testament (Acts 21:21 and 2 Thess 2:3) would convey the idea of defection from the faith, despite no such reference in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 because even without defection being in the context, the word apostasia had inherently come to mean defection. Such is not the case. Context must always be considered in deciding the meaning of words. Yet in the passages that apostasia is translated revolt or defection, the context naturally leads one to the translation. This is not true in 2 Thessalonians. The context does not address these negative ideas but the focus is the coming of Christ and what must precede the Day of the Lord (judgment). Consequently, the sense of spatial departure is not outside the possible meaning.

V. Conclusion

In this short presentation, I have attempted to present evidence that the departure of the church from the earth very well may discussed in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. This meaning agrees with examples in the Greek world, is consistent with the context of 2 Thessalonians 2, and the emphasis of the apostle Paul in the Thessalonian epistles to provide comfort to these early believers. This interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 may also provide hope for us today.

Source: http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/a-defense-of-the-rapture-in-2-thessalonians-23


Quasar92

Quasar, you think anyone is reading your continual "Massive" copy/paste?

No

 

[jgr]

No! The sources I use to support the rapture of the Church in 2 Thess.2:1-8 DO NOT all come from the same source! But they ARE ALL OF A SINGLE MIND! APOSTASIA = DEPARTURE! From another source:

Is the Rapture Found in

2 Thessalonians 2:3?

H. Wayne House, M.A., Th.D., J.D.

Distinguished Research Professor of Theology, Law and Culture

Faith Evangelical Seminary

The letters of Paul to the Thessalonian church were written early in his ministry (ca A.D. 51-52) to the new believers of Macedonia. These Christians eagerly accepted the teaching that Paul gave to them in the short time he was with them, but no sooner had Paul left than persons came into their midst who perverted the apostle�s teaching. In regards to the coming of Christ for Christians, Paul apparently taught that they should be diligent in looking for Christ to come (1 Thess 4-5). Unfortunately, however, someone argued that Jesus had already returned. This puzzled the believers due to the fact that they had not been taken in the �rapture� (1 Thess 4:13). Now Paul wanted to provide additional evidence to assure them that Jesus had not returned and proof that this was so.

I. How Biblical Scholars Have Understood Apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2:3

Biblical scholars have understood the word Greek word apostasia (translated �falling away� in the KJV) in four different ways. How one understands this Greek word may impact how one sees the return of Jesus. Let us examine the different interpretations below.

Apostasia Refers to the Man of Sin

This interpretation says that the word apostasy refers to the �man of sin� in verse three (what scholars call apposition). This was a common understanding in the first few centuries of the church, but few hold it today. The church father Augustine said, �No one can doubt that he [Paul] wrote this of Antichrist and of the day of judgment, which he here calls the day of the Lord, nor that he declared that this day should not come unless he first came who is called the apostate —apostate, to wit, from the Lord God.�[1]

Apostasia Refers to �Falling Away� from the Faith

A second view is that adopted by the King James Version (Authorized Version) of the Bible, namely, �falling away.� Under this view, apostasy speaks of a falling away or defection from the faith. [2] When this occurs, the Antichrist (man of sin) will arise, showing signs and wonders. This view seems to originate with the translation of the King James Version in 1611, but it is popular today. However, there is not a consistency regarding who will actually fall away. Does it refer to the church, to Jews during the Tribulation, or to non-Christians? Let us look at examples of those who hold to each view.

Professing Church

Theologian Charles Ryrie believes that the �apostasy� in 2 Thess 2:3 speaks of a future falling away of those within the professing church who never truly believed in Jesus, and believes that this view is found in Rev 17 and 2 Tim 3:1.[3]

Jews during the Tribulation

The second interpretation asserts that Jews who reject God during the tribulation are in view in the passage. Martin Rosenthal has argued that even as the word is used in the New Testament when Paul was opposed by Jews (e.g. Acts 21:21), so this will be how Jews will act during the tribulation. He says that they will �totally abandon the God of their fathers and their messianic hope in favor of a false religion (humanism) and a false messiah (the Antichrist, 2 Thess. 2:2-12).�[4]

Non-Christians

Some have also viewed the �falling away� as referring to non-Christians as a whole. Hogg and Vine, as well as Chafer, believed that the term referred to the way in which unsaved humanity failed to embrace the truth of God found in the Gospel after the Church has been removed from the earth.[5]

Apostasia Refers to a Revolt or Rebellion Against God

Understanding apostasia as revolt or rebellion stands in strong contrast to the former �falling away.� The latter implies a defection from the faith or from God, while the former speaks of a forceful or violent rejection of God.

A. L. Moore explains this view:

[T]he rebellion comes first: here Paul uses imagery drawn probably from Daniel 11:36 (and cf. Isa. 14:13ff; Ezek. 28:2). Rebellion, apostasia, could refer to political apostasy or military revolt in classical Greek, but in the LXX [Greek OT] it denotes religious rebellion against God (cf. Jos. 22:22; Jer. 2:19). . . . The thought is, we suggest, that when the moment comes for Christ to appear in glory and for all that rebels against God to be unmasked and cast out, the forces of evil will arise as never before in a last desperate effort against God.[6]

Rather than a defection from the faith, or failure to embrace the Gospel, the majority of scholars probably hold to this option, believing the word expresses deliberate opposition against God and/or His people,[7] and even may be a revolt against public order or government.[8] This disorder would set the stage for the rise of a person who would bring back order, known as the Antichrist.

Apostasia as the Rapture

The final view is certainly held by a minority today but that apostasy may refer to the departure of the church has been embraced by a number of scholars, including E. Schuyler English, Stanley Ellisen, Gordon Lewis, and Kenneth Wuest. Since the view is rarely considered an option by commentators, it becomes incumbent upon those who hold such a view to make a vigorous defense. Whether or not apostasia may mean rapture does not rely only upon the meaning of the term in Greek, but whether the idea of defection or revolt in the end times is found as an event in Paul�s teaching, as well as the likely meaning of the word in the immediate context of the letter to the Thessalonians.

Regarding this first consideration, the nature of the idea of defection or revolt in Paul�s teaching, Ellisen captures the likely scenario:

At the risk of being out of step with most commentaries on the subject, may we suggest the greater acceptability of an alternate view: the evidence for a great singular defection from the faith, occurring just prior to the rapture or to the day of the Lord, is really based on questionable ground. In the first reference generally appealed to (1 Tim. 4), Paul does speak of an apostasy from the faith, but not as a unique end-time event. Rather, he described it as a trend or movement that was already present. This he characterized as erroneous doctrine, hypocritical living, and improper legalism. In using the term here, he qualified it with the phrase �from the faith.� By itself it meant simply �departure.�

In the second reference to defection, 2 Timothy 3:1ff., Paul does not use the term apostasy, but merely speaks of evil men in general in the latter times. His point here is that evil men will become more and more depraved as the age wears on (2 Timothy 3:13). Thus this passage has no real relation to apostasy from the faith and certain does not warn of some specific final defection that will precede the rapture or introduce the day of the Lord.[9]

The remainder of the chapter will be given to the meaning of the technical term apostasy and what best meaning fits its usage in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

II. How Apostasia Has Been Translated

Jerome translated the Greek New Testament into Latin in the 4th century (the Vulgate). He used the Latin word discessio, meaning �departure,� for the Greek word apostasia. This meaning was continued in the earliest English translations such as the Wycliff Bible (1384), Tyndale Bible (1526), Coverdale Bible (1535), Cranmer Bible (1539), Breeches Bible (1576), Beza Bible (1583), and Geneva Bible (1608). The King James Version deviated from this translation, translating apostasia as �falling away.� No explanation was given for doing this. Moreover, Theodore Beza transliterated apostasia as apostasy, rather than translating it. Since the 17th century, the consistent understanding of apostasia in modern translations has been rebellion (NIV, NRSV, Goodspeed, RSV, Moffatt, Phillips, Jerusalem Bible, Williams), or falling away (Berkeley, ASV, NKJV).

III. Arguments that Favor Apostasia as the Rapture

The Sense of �Departure� in Classical and Biblical Sources

The word apostasia is regularly translated �rebellion� or �defection� in Greek literature before the time of the writing of the New Testament. In a few cases, however, it does have the sense of �departure.� The reason for this difference is the context of the passages. At times, the word does not occur in a context in which the matter of rebellion against authority, or defection from a person, ideology, or religious faith is in view. Rather the noun adheres more closely to the verbal meaning of �depart� or some other spatial sense.[10] The predominant meaning of rebellion and, at times, defection is also found in the Greek Old Testament. One must be careful when deviating from the established meanings in classical and biblical (LXX) writings, yet one must also not be afraid to take the minority meaning with spatial connotation when context warrants. Such may be the case in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

The Use of the Definite Article with apostasia

One finds the use of the Greek article with apostasia in 2 Thess 2:3. Another example of this in 1 Macc 2:15, where defection from the Old Testament faith is generally viewed to be the proper translation of he apostasia. "And those who came from the king were compelling the defection in the city of Modein, in order to sacrifice." (1 Macc 2:15). What is the significance of these two instances? Similar to this passage in 1 Maccabees, 2 Thess 2:3 has the article and no qualifiers, such as defection from God, so the context is determinative for the meaning of apostasia. In the first two chapters of 1 Maccabees there is a description of the Greek victory of Israel by Alexander the Greek until the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, with the latter king invading Judah and enforcing a desecration of the temple. When one studies the context of 2 Thess 2:13 in the same way, the context speaks of the coming of Christ for the church and the coming man of sin after the restrainer is removed.

Idea of Second Coming throughout 1 & 2 Thessalonians

Paul is deeply concerned with the coming of Christ for believers. This is clear in that in each chapter of 1 Thessalonians he speaks of Jesus� coming for His people. The apostle in 1 Thess 1:9-10a speaks of the rescue from the coming wrath that God�s Son would provide for believers. Paul says the Thessalonians give him hope and joy at the coming of Christ (2:19). The pivotal passage on the rapture is in 1 Thess 4:13-17, in which the apostle reveals that the dead would be caught up (from which we get the word �rapture�) together with living saints to be with Christ. Chapter 5:1-11 he continues his discussion found in chapter 4. He said that believers, unlike those in the world, would not be caught unready for Christ�s coming.

One also finds discussion of the coming of Jesus in 2 Thessalonians. In chapter 2, addressing the false teaching since he left Thessalonica that Christ had already come, he tells the Christians that they need have no anxiety over this teaching.

Contextual Reasons for apostasia to be the Rapture

What in the context of 2 Thessalonians 2 would lead one to accept that the rapture, rather than defection or rebellion is in view? Let us look at the immediately preceding verses to the reference of an apostasia. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2 reads,

1 Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, 2 that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.� (2 Th 2:1–2 NAS95)

The purpose of Paul�s teaching on the coming of Christ was to comfort the church. Each text in 1 and 2 Thessalonians emphasizes this truth. If apostasia carries the sense of �departure,� following his words in 2:1, this would add to the comfort and assurance. Moreover, he sought through verse 3 to assuage them of the false notion taught by those false teachers who came to them, that the Day of the Lord had already come. Contrary to this false teaching, the Day of the Lord (a time of judgment) would not come until two events occurred. One is the apostasia and the other the rise of the man of sin. Since neither of these two had taken place, they should not believe that the time for God�s judgment had arrived.

What makes the most sense in the context, that the Day of the Lord had not come because a rebellion against government or a defection from the faith had not occurred, or that the departure to be with Christ had not occurred? Remember, in 1 Thessalonians 1, the encouragement was that the coming of Christ would rescue believers from the coming wrath. In addition to this, there are at least three more arguments that favor a departure rather than a rebellion/defection in the passage.

First, in passages where a rebellion or defection is in view, the context speaks of the rebellion or defection, but such is not in few in preceding verses in 2 Thessalonians. Rather, as we have seen in a brief review of 1 and 2 Thessalonians, the coming of Christ is in view: �Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,� (2 Th 2:1 NAS95). Since the subject of the passage, then, is the coming of Christ, and nothing in this passage, or any other to my knowledge, has discussion of a rebellion against government or defection from Christianity as being a prerequisite for Christ�s coming, the most natural understanding of apostasia would be a spatial departure in concert with 1 Thess 4. Certainly Matthew 24 speaks of many being led to follow the Antichrist (Mt 24:5), but there is nothing about true believers following false Christs as an indication of Christ�s coming. Moreover, the events of Matthew 24 refer to the coming of Christ in judgment, not salvation, and relate to the time of the Tribulation and afterwards. A statement of false teachers in the church is given in Acts 20, but again, these to not concern the man of sin.

Second, the word apostasia has the unusual article occurring with it, signifying that a specific event is in view, and one that is known to the readers. The only event that fits with this special sense would seem to be in 2 Thess 2:1 and the former teaching of Paul in 1 Thessalonians, particular chaps 4-5. This would favor also a rapture perspective.

Last of all, is the use of "restrainer" in verses 6-7. What is Paul speaking of when he mentions a �restrainer� that keeps the man of sin from arising (note that the restrainer does not impact the apostasia)? The term apostasia and the rise of the man of sin are probably not the same event in verse 3, and the contrast of the restrainer and the man of sin lend support to apostasia being a departure. Verses 6 and 7 seem to be parallel of apostasia and man of sin. Generally the restrainer in verses 6 and 7 has been taken to be a reference to the Holy Spirit or to the church (though some have seen this a reference to government). What is interesting is that the idea of restrainer is expressed in both a personal and impersonal sense. The text reads, �6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.� (2 Th 2:6–7 NAS95). So there is a �what� that restrains and a �who� that restrains. What is it that keeps the man of sin from arising, and who keeps him from arising. I believe it is reasonable to conclude that the presence of the church restrains him and the presence of the work of the Holy Spirit in the church restrains him. When the antichrist comes to power, God�s redeemed will no longer be present, and as the Holy Spirit came upon the church in Acts 2, He leaves with the church in 2 Thessalonians 2.[11]

IV. Interaction With Those Who Reject the Rapture View

The claim is made that apostasia never speaks of a departure in Greek literature, specifically the New Testament. I have already dealt with this earlier in the chapter, and in much more depth elsewhere.[12] A person who has probably an important critque against apostasia being the rapture is Robert Gundry. His arguments have even convinced a stalwart pre-tribulationist such as John Walvoord.[13]

Gundry recognizes that Schuyler English, an early proponent of the rapture view, did discover apostasia as meaning �departure� in the classical period,[14] but considered this discovery to be unimportant for the word in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Gundry says that the four sources for determining the meaning are found in the New Testament, the Greek Old Testament (LXX), the koine (common Greek in time of NT), and classical Greek.⁠ He is unconvinced that the word apostasia carries this minority meaning in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Since the predominant meaning of apostasia is revolt and religious defection, he believes that this would govern its use in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

The only other instance of apostasia in the New Testament is Acts 21:21, when Paul is challenged as �teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses� (Acts 21:21 NAS95). The meaning is clear, religious defection. Gundry believes that the two instances in the New Testament (Acts 21:21 and 2 Thess 2:3) would convey the idea of defection from the faith, despite no such reference in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 because even without defection being in the context, the word apostasia had inherently come to mean defection. Such is not the case. Context must always be considered in deciding the meaning of words. Yet in the passages that apostasia is translated revolt or defection, the context naturally leads one to the translation. This is not true in 2 Thessalonians. The context does not address these negative ideas but the focus is the coming of Christ and what must precede the Day of the Lord (judgment). Consequently, the sense of spatial departure is not outside the possible meaning.

V. Conclusion

In this short presentation, I have attempted to present evidence that the departure of the church from the earth very well may discussed in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. This meaning agrees with examples in the Greek world, is consistent with the context of 2 Thessalonians 2, and the emphasis of the apostle Paul in the Thessalonian epistles to provide comfort to these early believers. This interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 may also provide hope for us today.

Source: http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/a-defense-of-the-rapture-in-2-thessalonians-23


Quasar92

Same wearisome cultic modernist bilge and bunkum, originating in the "doctrine of ignorance".

In case you missed it, which you did, your own article acknowledges that John Walvoord, who appears in your "esteemed theologians" list, rejects apostasia as rapture.

Add him to the "esteemed theologians" I previously supplied from your list, who shouldn't be there.

 

[Truth7t7]

Same wearisome cultic modernist bilge and bunkum, originating in the "doctrine of ignorance".

In case you missed it, which you did, your own article acknowledges that John Walvoord, who appears in your "esteemed theologians" list, rejects apostasia as rapture.

Add him to the "esteemed theologians" I previously supplied from your list, who shouldn't be there.

Don't forget the 1917 C.I. Scofield Reference Notes.

Apostasia: Scofield taught was the apostasy of the professing church.

Thomas Ice, Dallas Theological Grad, trying to plug the sinking boat, with his new teaching in "Departure" Smiles.

Quasar knows well what the historical teaching of Scofield was, he's carried Scofield's bible for the last 70 years.

1917 Scofield Reference Notes

2 Thessalonians 2:3

2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

for that day

The order of events is:

(1) The working of the mystery of lawlessness under divine restraint which had already begun in the apostle's time 2 Thessalonians 2:7

(2) the apostasy of the professing church 2 Thessalonians 1:3 ; Luke 18:8 ; 2 Timothy 3:1-8 .

 

[jgr]

Don't forget the 1917 C.I. Scofield Reference Notes.

Apostasia: Scofield taught was the apostasy of the professing church.

Thomas Ice, Dallas Theological Grad, trying to plug the sinking boat, with his new teaching in "Departure" Smiles.

Quasar knows well what the historical teaching of Scofield was, he carried his bible for the last 70 years.

1917 Scofield Reference Notes

2 Thessalonians 2:3

2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

for that day

The order of events is:

(1) The working of the mystery of lawlessness under divine restraint which had already begun in the apostle's time 2 Thessalonians 2:7

(2) the apostasy of the professing church 2 Thessalonians 1:3 ; Luke 18:8 ; 2 Timothy 3:1-8 .

Yes, I've pointed out to him more than once that both the Darby and Scofield versions show apostasy, not departure.

But that's only a minor annoyance to someone who believes that every contemporary English Bible translator is either a fool or a liar.