John Nelson Darby was a villain, no doubt about it. He is the father of Pretribulation doctrine.
An Oxford educated theologian he knew very well that the word apostasies in 2.Thessalonians.2. meant falling away as in rebellion but he reinterpreted it to mean departure or removal as in from one place to another. He knew it was wrong therefore he deliberately set out to deceive in order to produce his pretribulation doctrine.
But it is awful grammar.
He says concerning the rapture [in essence] That day will not come unless there been a rapture.
The rapture doesn't come unless there has been a rapture
doesn't make one iota of sense.
Of course it does not make sense to those who wear very thick preconceived glasses - people who imagine that the rapture and The day of the Lord are synonyms.
Always remember, "THE DAY will start out as a dreadful day of destruction. Notice that at the 6th seal where it begins, there will be a worldwide earthquake to begin it.
Paul had already taught them in his first letter that the rapture would come BEFORE the day and as a trigger for the day.
Then they received a letter or perhaps a prophecy telling them they were already IN the day. And of course they were still on earth. OF COURSE they were upset. Was Paul mistaken? Were they now IN the Day of the Lord? (Remember, a day of destruction).
Paul's argument was only to show them once and for all they were NOT in the day. He told them, when you see the man of sin revelealed, by entering the temple and declaring he is the God of the Jews, THEN, you will know without any doubt, you are IN that day of the Lord.
(John proves this in Revelation by showing us the abomination happens in the middle of the week.)
Paul, however, left a caveat: before the man of sin can be revealed - something else must take place FIRST: the one restraining must be taken out of the way. And in case you missed it, in verse 3b the man of sin IS revealed, meaning, in verse 3a the one or thing restraining MUST HAVE BEEN "taken out of the way."
How anyone can equate a falling away (from what Paul did not specify) with something "taken out of the way" I cannot fathom. Neither can I understand how an evil than can restrain another evil thing: such as a falling away from truth be a restraining force that would prevent the man of sin from being revealed.
On the other hand, "apostasia" as a departing, and several of the first translators put it, makes far better sense: the departing of the church must come FIRST, just as Paul taught in his first letter.
You are certainly going to have to apologize to Mr. Darby.
By the way, did you know that Strong's tells us, for the Greek word "apo" (as in apo-stasia) means, a part of a group removed spatially from the rest of the group? Maybe you should look it up.
