iamlamad
Lamad
- Jun 8, 2013
- 9,620
- 744
- 78
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Word of Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
Did Paul really teach that? Again I disagree. I believe the departing (apostasia) is the rapture and it must come first, because it is the Holy Spirit working through the church that is the restraining force that must be taken out of the way before the man of sin can be revealed.And so, I don't believe it. In fact, Paul taught that Jesus can never be said to have come on any day unless Antichrist appears first. So we are told not so much to wait for Antichrist, but to expect that the world will be Antichristian in character until Christ returns from heaven. In that way we are to be looking for him, because keeping our eyes on the prize causes us to work to be found diligent and responsible, so that we will not fall under the judgment that is coming upon the world.
The first problem is that the KJV missed the tense of a Greek word in verse 2. Here is how it should read.
AMP
2 Thes. 2:2: not to be quickly unsettled or alarmed either by a [so-called prophetic revelation of a] spirit or a message or a letter [alleged to be] from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has [already] come. (AMP)
Then almost every English translation adds words using the false idea that the Day was only "at hand." ("That day shall not come...")
1535 Coverdale Bible (added words removed)
Let no man disceaue you by eny meanes. For, excepte the departynge come first, and that Man of Synne be opened, even the sonne of perdicion.
It goes without saying that Paul must have expected his readers to know what he meant by the significant departing. If we look in his first letter, the significant departing was the rapture. The rapture or gathering was the theme of this passage.
Did you notice that in verse 3b the man of sin IS revealed? (Not in reality but in his argument.) Yet, in verses 6-8 he told us that the man of sin could NOT be revealed until the power restraining that revealed was taken out of the way. Therefore, logic tells us that somewhere in verse 3a we MUST Find something being "taken out of the way."
The ONLY word I can find that makes any sense is "apostasia" as something taken out of the way.
Here is what Strong tells us about this compound word.
The question is, CAN this word mean something else? It is a compound word - "apo" and "stasia."
Here is what Strong says about "apo:"
1. of separation…
1A. of local separation,
1B. of separation of a part from the whole
1Bi. where of a whole some part is taken
1C. of any kind of separation of one thing from another…
1D. of a state of separation, that is of distance
1Di. physical, of distance of place
At the rapture, will some part of the entire population be taken? You know the answer is YES.
Will those taken be separated by DISTANCE? Again the answer is YES.
The other part of the compound word 'stasia" is where we get "stationary" or "not moving" from.
Putting these two words together then can certainly mean a part of a whole group suddenly moved from where they were to a new location, and it happen so fast, the rest of the whole group seems stationary - not moving.
I believe this passage is pre-trib.
Upvote
0