- Feb 25, 2008
- 9,692
- 5,020
- Country
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Every contemporary English Bible version translates it as apostasy, i.e. falling away, not flying away.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Every contemporary English Bible version translates it as apostasy, i.e. falling away, not flying away.Harpazo literally defined is a snatching away suddenly with a violent force ,,
apostasia means to "stand away" or "departure" in that context it may be either way , and it may mean departure of the church or departure of the Holy Spirit , but it could mean a departure of the " become born-again ' type teaching that Jesus taught , that churches seem to not be teaching this as they should
NOT every one 2 of the oldest referring to the 'departure' , not falling away -Every contemporary English Bible version translates it as apostasy, i
"Contemporary" refers to versions produced from the 20th century on, which is the vast majority.NOT every one 2 of the oldest referring to the 'departure' , not falling away -
You just confirmed my point - You focus on views that began in the 20th century - given more years to pass by and the bibles will be translating more scriptures in ways that are changing the view that the original writers presented - just like the companies that write and publish books for public school systems have rewritten history books to remove Christian faith of very important people of America and anything that shows that America was founded on the Holy Bible principles that has resulted in that majority of the younger generations being taught things that are not accurate"Contemporary" refers to versions produced from the 20th century on, which is the vast majority.
It is in fact demonstrable that no version ever produced at any time considered 2 Thessalonians 2:3 to refer to rapture. "Departure" appearing in any of them referred to departure from the faith, i.e. apostasy, i.e. falling away.You just confirmed my point - You focus on views that began in the 20th century - given more years to pass by and the bibles will be translating more scriptures in ways that are changing the view that the original writers presented - just like the companies that write and publish books for public school systems have rewritten history books to remove Christian faith of very important people of America and anything that shows that America was founded on the Holy Bible principles that has resulted in that majority of the younger generations being taught things that are not accurate
Debunked innumerable times.
If Paul meant "rapture" in 2 Thess. 2:3, why didn't he use the Greek "harpazo" rather than "apostasia"?
Simple. Because he meant "apostasy".
When you have qualification to teach eschatology, in contrast to your doing so by the seat of your pants now, I will discuss this issue with you further.
Which school did Pastor Reckart attend?
.
I don't recall addressing you on this issue you quote me from. Whatever Pastor Reckart's qualifications, they are more than yours.
Quasar92
His qualifications must be greater than yours as well, since he's consigned you to heretic hell along with us.I don't recall addressing you on this issue you quote me from. Whatever Pastor Reckart's qualifications, they are more than yours.
Quasar92
I'm learning, not teaching. As a learner, I'm asking a question which the teacher has not yet answered:The post you are quoting is proof positive of the false claims you keep making, in spite of the numerous times they have been posted, refuting you. When you have qualification to teach eschatology, in contrast to your doing so by the seat of your pants now, I will discuss this issue with you further.
Quasar92
I have never seen the forum rule that forbids a member from addressing you at any time.
Since you have used Pastor Reckart as one of your sources and he is opposed to Dispensational Theology, it might be interesting to know where he got his training.
If you do not know anything about his training or mine, how would you know who is more qualified?
.
I'm learning, not teaching. As a learner, I'm asking a question which the teacher has not yet answered:
Why didn't Paul use "harpazo" instead of "apostasia" in 2 Thessalonians 2:3?
His qualifications must be greater than yours as well, since he's consigned you to heretic hell along with us.
Welcome.
His qualifications must be greater than yours as well, since he's consigned you to heretic hell along with us.
Welcome.
"Harpazo" was used by Paul, long before the 3rd and 4th centuries, in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 for what is the dispensational claim of rapture. There is no reason for him not to have used the same word in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, if he meant rapture there.the word "harpazo," was not even thought of in the 3rd or 4th centuries.
When does the new or heavenly Jerusalem arrive?
"Harpazo" was used by Paul, long before the 3rd and 4th centuries, in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 for what is the dispensational claim of rapture. There is no reason for him not to have used the same word in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, if he meant rapture there.
The aberrant claim of "apostasia" as rapture did not appear until the late 19th century.
Paul unmistakably meant "apostasia" to be "apostasy" in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.
So did and does every English Bible version in existence.
Plug the Greek word "apostasia" into an online Greek-English translator and tell us what appears in English.
You should put Dr. Ice on ice.
Apostasia is the root word for the english Apostasy, that means to fall away from the faith once held.Your continual arguing that "apostasia" in 2 Thess.2:3 means anything other than "departure" is an unqualified contradiction of Paul's teachings of the pre-trib rapture of the Church. You are not able to provide a single example of his teachings in 1 Thess.4:13-18 and 2 Thess.2:1-8 he was referring to anything other that a rapture! Review the following from another source:
Greek term 'apostasia' in 2 Thes.2:3 means 'departure'
Here Mr. Wuest discusses 2Thes 2:3, specifically the meaning of "apostasia." He asserts that it should be translated as 'departure' with reference to the rapture of the church. I have never come across this in any translation and I wonder if it is a correct exegesis of this verse?
"The words =93a falling away=94 are the Authorized Version rendering of apostasia. The verbal form afistamai from which it comes is present middle of afisthmi, the root verb, which we will study. The simple verb Jisthmi inits intransitive sense means =93 to stand,=94 the prefixed preposition means=93 off, away from,=94 and the compound verb, =93 to stand off from.=94 The=word does not mean =93 to fall.=94 The Greeks had a word for that, piptw. Afisthmi, in=its various uses, is reported by Thayer as follows: =93 to make stand off, cause=to withdraw, to stand off, stand aloof, to desert, to withdraw from one=94; in contexts where a defection from the faith is in view, it means =93to fall away, become faithless.=94 The verb is rendered by the translators of the Authorized Version =93 to depart,=94 in Luke 2:32; Luke 4:13; Luke 13:27;=Acts 12:10; Acts 15:38; Acts 19:9; Acts 22:29; 2 Corinthians 12:8; 1 Timothy 4:1;2 Timothy 2:19; Hebrews 3:12. In Luke 8:13 it is translated =93 fall away,=94 in Acts 5:37, =93 drew away,=94 and in Acts 5:38, =93 refrain.=94 Had they translated the word here instead of interpreting it, they would have rendered it by the word =93 departure =94. The reader will observe that the predominant=translation of the verbal form is =93 to depart,=94 also, that where it is translated =93 fall away,=94 the context adds the idea of =93 falling away =94 to the verb, which =action is still a departure.
E. Schuyler English, to whom this present writer is deeply in debted for calling his attention to the word =93 departure=94 as the correct rendering=ofapostasia in this context, also informs us that the following translators understood the Greek word to mean =93a departure=94 in this context: Tyndale(1534), Coverdale (1535), the Geneva Bible (1537), Cranmer (1539), and Beza(1565), and so used it in their translations. Apostasia is used once more inthe New Testament and is translated =93 to forsake=94 (AV), signifying a departure. The neuter noun apostasion in Matthew 5:31; Matthew 19:7; and Mark 10:4 is rendered by the Authorized Version, =93 divorcement,=94 which=word also signifies a departure, here, from antecedent relations.
The writer is well aware of the fact that apostasia was used at times bothin classical and koine Greek in the sense of a defection, a revolt in a religious sense, a rebellion against God, and of the act of apostasy. Liddell and Scott in their classical lexicon give the above as the first definition of the word. Moulton and Milligan quote a papyrus fragment where the word means =93a rebel.=94. But these are acquired meanings of the word=gotten from the context in which it is used, not the original, basic, literal meaning, and should not be imposed upon the word when the context does not qualify the word by these meanings, as in the case of our Thessalonians passage, where the context in which apostasia is embedded does not refer to a defection from the truth but to the rapture of the church. The fact that our word =93 apostasy=94 means a defection from the truth is entirely beside=the point since we do not interpret Scripture upon the basis of a transliterated word to which a certain meaning has been given, but upon the basis of what the Greek word meant to the first century reader. The fact that Paul in 1Timothy 4:1 uses this verb in the words =93 some shall depart from the faith==94 and finds it necessary to qualify its meaning by the phrase =93 from the faith=94 indicates that the word itself has no such connotation. The translators of the Authorized Version did not translate the word, but offered their interpretation of it. They should have translated it and allowed the student to interpret it in its context.
With the translation of the word before us, the next step is to ascertain from the context that to which this departure refers. We note the presence of the Greek definite article before apostasia, of which the translation takes no notice. A Greek word is definite in itself, and when the article is used the exegete must pay particular attention to it. =93. The basal function=of the article is to point out individual identity. It does more than mark =91 the object as definitely conceived,=92 for a substantive in Greek is definite without the article.=94. This departure, whatever it is, is a particular one,one differentiated from all others. Another function of the article is =93 todenote previous reference.=94. Here the article points out an object the identity of which is defined by some previous reference made to it in the context.=94 Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:1 has just spoken of the coming of the Lord. This coming is defined by the words =93 our gathering together unto=him,=94 not as the second advent, but as the rapture. The Greek word rendered =93 and=94 can also be translated =93 even,=94 and the translation reads, =93 the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, even our gathering together unto him.=94.
The article before apostasia defines that word by pointing to =93 the gathering together unto him =94 as that departure. This article determines the context which defines apostasia. The translators took the context of 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 as deciding the significance of the word, but they went too far afield, not grasping the function of the definite article preceding apostasia which points back to the rapture of 2 Thessalonians 2:2, not ahead to the refusal to believe the truth of 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12. The article is all-important here, as in many instances of its use in the Greek New Testament. In 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, Paul had given these saints teaching on the rapture, and the Greek article here points to that which was well known to both the reader and the writer, which is another use of the Greek definite article. Thus, the departure of the church from earth to heaven must precede the great tribulation period. And we have answered our questions again. It might be added that the reason why Paul merely speaks of a pre-tribulation rapture rather than a pre-seventieth week rapture is that he is addressing himself to the needs of the Thessalonian saints and is not explaining the particular place of the rapture in the prophetic program of God."
By Kenneth S. Wuest
From: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/archives/96-12/0863.html
Quasar92
"Harpazo" was used by Paul, long before the 3rd and 4th centuries, in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 for what is the dispensational claim of rapture. There is no reason for him not to have used the same word in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, if he meant rapture there.
The aberrant claim of "apostasia" as rapture did not appear until the late 19th century.
Paul unmistakably meant "apostasia" to be "apostasy" in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.
So did and does every English Bible version in existence.
Plug the Greek word "apostasia" into an online Greek-English translator and tell us what appears in English.
You should put Dr. Ice on ice.
The Greek word, "apostasi,} is the foundational English word "apostasy." "Apotasia{ hs other meanings in Greek, including 'departure" or "to depart." Clearly delineated in any examination of the Greek language!
There are many others beside Dr. Ice who fully endorse his translation of 2 Thess.2:3. It is clear you are the one who needs to put your attempts to remake the Scriptures into saying something it clearly does not, on ice!
Quasar92
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?