If the Rapture is true, just who are the saints beheaded by the Antichrist?

[TheDivineWatermark]

If you won't accept what Apostasy means then I cannot help you. You should also look up what "root fallacy" is because that's what you are doing when you chop up the Greek word so you can avoid it's true meaning.

Apparently you overlooked what I said about that ^ specifically:

[quoting from BibleHub... the NOUN G646]

"646 apostasía (from 868 /aphístēmi, "leave, depart," which is derived from 575 /apó, "away from" and 2476 /histémi, "stand") – properly, departure [...] – literally, "a leaving, from a previous standing.""

[end quoting from BibleHub; bold and underline mine (and don't forget, THIS CONTEXT has the DEFINITE ARTICLE with the word!)]

Note ^ : everything outside of the parenthesis ^ is DIRECTLY ABOUT the NOUN G646 - apostasía

Link: Strong's Greek: 646. ἀποστασία (apostasia)

... and so that would look like this:

""646 apostasía –[...] properly, departure [...] – literally, "a leaving, from a previous standing.""


[now be certain to acknowledge "the definite article ['THE']" that is used along with this word, in 2Th2:3... because that is IMPORTANT ALSO, in determining the meaning being conveyed, here]


____________


. But, believe as you wish, ewq.

 

[ewq1938]

"a leaving, from a previous standing."
. But, believe as you wish, ewq.

And you don't understand that leaving a previous standing means to abandon something you believed in? It doesn't mean to go from physically standing to flying in the air. Again, Apostasy is the meaning of this word and that cannot be changed.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

"apostasis" is pretty much [one could say] the opposite of "stasis/stasin" ... A STANDING...

in that, it (apostasis/apostasia) literally means, "a standing away-from ['a standing away-from' a previous standing]" (aka "DEPARTURE," whether from some FAITH ISSUE, or some governance-type issue, or some SPATIAL/GEOGRAPHICAL situation...

...the CONTEXT [surrounding words and indicators] inform us of JUST "WHAT KIND" of "departure" is meant, in any given text/context).

In v.3, the word is accompanied by "the definite article ['THE']," and the Greek scholar I quoted from in past posts explains a couple of REASONS for that being in this text (when this word doesn't ordinarily require such), ... so [see that other article I posted, on that].



...which (word at top, "stasis/stasin") can either be "a standing" such as a belief (pertaining to one's "mind/heart"/inward things, even faith issues), or like "a position" (including, a physical[/tangible] locality/place/placement [quoting from BibleHub on that word: "originally: standing, position, place."])... like in Hebrews 9:8-9a:

"[while]... the first tabernacle [the one in the wilderness, per v.4] yet having A STANDING [stasis/stasin], which is A PARABLE for the PRESENT TIME..." ... (<---This is a major point of "study" to grasp what Heb9:8-9a is conveying... esp. because Scripture informs us, when it is directing our attention to such things in such a pointed way, ... "whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning,"... that we can certainly "learn" MUCH about THIS POINT [being made in Heb9:8-9a], since it is telling us [what this verse is telling us] are things directly applicable "for the PRESENT TIME" [one should ask, "HOW SO?" and "IN WHAT OTHER TEXT," in the NT epistles written esp. to/for/about (the doctrine pertaining to) "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY," is there Subjects "RELATING" to this? etc etc])




"By this the Holy Spirit was signifying that the way into the holy places has not yet been made manifest, the first tabernacle [the one in the wilderness, per v.4!] still having a standing, which is a parable for the present time, ..."

 

[Jackson123]

2 tes 2
1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

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;

4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

To my knowledge brother the divinewater mark believe the word falling away in verse 3 mean rapture.

I am not agree with this interpretation because

A. Read the sentence 2 or 3 time.

.... except come the falling away first, and that man of sin be reveal.

Let us chang the word falling away into rapture.

> except come rapture first.

In verse one Paul use:"our gathering together unto Him refer to rapture.

B. After read carefully in my analysis, The topic is when the rapture taking place.

C. If falling away in verse 3 mean rapture so the summary Will be:

1.Now about the rapture
2. Don't be confuse
3. There Will be (falling away)rapture first before rapture


Rapture first before rapture

It not look apropriate and odd.

D. Why Paul change the language from verse 1 to 3.

In verse 1 Paul say:" our gathering together unto Him" refer to rapture

And you say in verse 3 Paul use :"falling away" refer to rapture, again look odd.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

2 tes 2
1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
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;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

To my knowledge brother the divinewater mark believe the word falling away in verse 3 mean rapture.

"a falling away" (to fall = pipto... nowhere in this text)


"THE DEPARTURE"

I am not agree with this interpretation because
A. Read the sentence 2 or 3 time.

You do the same.

.... except come the falling away first, and that man of sin be reveal.
Let us chang the word falling away into rapture.

Yes, let's.

Now, what is the "except" in reference to, in v.3b??

The first part of v.3 (v.3a), right?? (which is in reference to the Subject of "that day"... the one mentioned in VERSE 2, the *earthly* TIME-PERIOD Paul was cautioning them NOT to be persuaded by those saying "that the DOTL *IS PRESENT [PERFECT indicative]*"... not "the Rapture [IN THE AIR; split-second noun-event from v.1]"


[Note: V.2 should read "[purporting] that THE DAY OF THE LORD *IS PRESENT*" referring to the EARTHLY-located "DOTL" (distinct from "DoCHR" used elsewhere)]

> except come rapture first.

[yes!] but... in RELATION TO "what OTHER thing"??

In verse one Paul use:"our gathering together unto Him refer to rapture.

Yes.

And in these two epistles, Paul talks about "our Rapture" using A VARIETY OF TERMS to speak of it, NOT JUST "harpazo / caught UP/-AWAY" (just one of the references to it)

B. After read carefully in my analysis, The topic is when the rapture taking place.
C. If falling away in verse 3 [3B not 3A! ] mean rapture so the summary Will be:

... yes, but don't forget that verse 2 is ALSO a part of this factor ("don't let anyone convince you Thess "that THE DOTL [earthly TIME-PERIOD] *IS PRESENT*"

1.Now about the rapture
2. Don't be confuse

V.2... don't be confused by those saying that "THE DOTL [EARTHLY TIME-PERIOD] *IS PRESENT*"

... you are brushing past v.2's Subject, as though it has NO IMPACT on WHAT PAUL is CONVEYING in that verse

3. There Will be (falling away)rapture first before rapture

Where in the world did you [totally] "throw out" the part about "that day [3a, about the Subject from v.2]" ??

It is COMPLETELY MISSING from your "analysis," here

Rapture first before rapture

NO.

That is NOT what the sentence would say, NOT what is SAYS, and NOT what I am pointing out that it SAYS.

Try again.

It seems you are not paying careful attention.

It not look apropriate and odd.

Of course it does [meaning, how you just tried to put it, which isn't AT ALL what I am pointing out that it actually says ]

D. Why Paul change the language from verse 1 to 3.

Same reason I just said (above).

Paul spoke of the event we call "Rapture," something like 8-10 TIMES in these two epistles (NOT JUST "harpazo" 1Th4:17), and he uses A VARIETY of terms to do so. Why not HERE??

In verse 1 Paul say:" our gathering together unto Him" refer to rapture

Yes (I said that).

And you say in verse 3 Paul use :"falling away" refer to rapture, again look odd.

V.3B yes! ["except RAPTURE [IN THE AIR] happen FIRST"]

NOT v.3A ("that day [THE DAY OF THE LORD EARTHLY TIME-PERIOD from v.2!!] WILL NOT BE PRESENT if not shall have come... ________ [<--noun-event from v.1!] *FIRST* and [distinctly]...)





Hope that helps. = )


[boiled down: "the trib won't be present till the RAPTURE happens FIRST..." ]

 

[Jackson123]

Note: V.2 should read "[purporting] that THE DAY OF THE LORD *IS PRESENT*" referring to the EARTHLY-located "DOTL" (distinct from "DoCHR" used elsewhere)]

If you agree verse 1 is the topic, that mean the topic is rapture.

Than verse 2 (the day of the Lord) refer to rapture.

Example:
1. John and peter went to the market
2. They Will be back this afternon

They refer to John and peter

1. Let's talk about when the second coming and rapture.
2. Don't think that day of Christ is in hand

That day of Christ refer to ; the second coming and rapture. Not something else.

1. Give that monky Eat
2. He Eat banana.

He refer to monkey, not refer to a cat, or something else

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

If you agree verse 1 is the topic, that mean the topic is rapture.

Than verse 2 (the day of the Lord) refer to rapture.

The phrase "DOTL" (used everywhere in Scripture) NEVER refers to "Rapture [IN THE AIR]," but rather

"the EARTHLY TIME-PERIOD [not merely 24-hrs in duration] of JUDGMENTs unfolding upon the EARTH, followed by an EARTHLY TIME-PERIOD [also not merely 24-hrs in duration] of BLESSINGs unfolding upon the EARTH" (ALL *earthly-located*).

THIS ^ is what they were not to believe ANYONE SAYING that it "IS PRESENT [PERFECT indicative]" (not merely "at hand /near").

This would REASONABLY "freak them out" to believe it IS PRESENT (v.2, in view of their PRESENT and ONGOING, VERY NEGATIVE *experiences* which 2Th1:4 Paul is acknowledging they ENDURE [presently]).

No one was telling them "RAPTURE" *IS PRESENT [PERFECT INDICATIVE]* .... but INSTEAD that "the DOTL [earthly-located] time-period" is .

Example:
1. John and peter went to the market
2. They Will be back this afternon

They refer to John and peter

1. Let's talk about when the second coming and rapture.

V.1 - Paul BRINGING the Subject of "RAPTURE" to their minds (their distraught minds that were "thinking" something ELSE)

2. Don't think that day of Christ is in hand

"that the DOTL *IS PRESENT [PERFECT INDICATIVE]*" (not "the day of Christ" UP THERE)

That day of Christ refer to ; the second coming and rapture. Not something else.

No.

Even "the Day of Christ [UP THERE]" occurs simultaneously with/alongside "the DOTL [EARTHLY time-period with its JUDGMENTs unfolding upon the earth]"--These are NOT IDENTICAL (tho occurring at the same TIME-PERIOD... DISTINCT *locations* )

This text (v.2) reads: "the DOTL" not the other.

1. Give that monky Eat
2. He Eat banana.

He refer to monkey, not refer to a cat, or something else

No.

How (SEQUENCE-WISE) the one split-second noun-event fits in relation to the other item which is a TIME-PERIOD [unfolding upon the earth].

The "split-second noun-event" comes *FIRST* before the TIME-PERIOD can unfold upon the earth (with its "man of sin" and ALL he will DO over the course of THAT TIME-PERIOD)

THUS,

V.3 - "that day [the *earthly* TIME -PERIOD from VERSE 2] will NOT be present if not shall have come THE DEPARTURE/THE RAPTURE [IN THE AIR, from VERSE 1!] *FIRST*..." (ONE ITEM *FIRST*)




Once "the man of sin BE REVEALED," that TIME-PERIOD is ALSO in existence upon the earth (and this is at the START of the 7 yr trib [NOT its MIDDLE nor its END], BECAUSE 1Th5:2-3 ALREADY SAID that it *ARRIVES* like the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]" that JESUS TOLD ABOUT already [Paul was not ignorant of Jesus' teachings on that Subject], and AT THAT POINT, MUCH MORE must ALSO transpire upon the earth!! ["the BEGINNING of birth PANGS [PLURAL]" that Jesus spoke of, are NOT THE MIDDLE, *nor* are they the END of that time-period... they are the START of it... i.e. what kicks it off! MUCH MORE "follows" those!])

____________

Now, read the text like the following convo (instead of your "monkey" bit):

[you and I convo-ing in July] -
[I say] - "1 Now about that TURKEY DINNER at Aunt Martha's over in Timbuktu,

2 Don't be distressed by anyone telling you THE CHRISTMAS MONTH is inexistence (the TIME-PERIOD that Santa said he was going to let the GRINCH'S ANTICS [throughout that whole month] happen to all the those others in Whoville [who are NOT RELATED TO US, and consequently DID NOT POSSESS *THE TICKET* to Martha's HOUSE] EXPERIENCE... I know you are PRESENTLY experiencing "persecutions and tribulations," but that is NOT the "GRINCH" HIMSELF [his PRESENCE--IN HIS TIME])

3 THAT MONTH [the TIME-PERIOD from VERSE 2!] will NOT be in existence/be present if not shall have come THE BALL-DROP [event] *FIRST* [from verse 1!!] and [distinctly] 'the GRINCH' [be present to] start his antics!"


Now the problem enters when *YOU* (reading MY LETTER to you ^ ) inadvertently READ INTO my words in v.3b (in place of "THE BALL-DROP [event] *FIRST* [the SUBJECT from verse 1!] that I wrote) [you READ INTO it an entirely DIFFERENT *IDEA*] by your thinking it refers [NOT to the "TURKEY DINNER" at Aunt Martha's over in Timbuktu AT THANKSGIVING in NOVEMBER [where you'll be SPENDING more than just DINNER THERE that one day!!], BEFORE "the Christmas MONTH" TIME-PERIOD ARRIVES (with the "GRINCH" doing ALL he's slated to DO over the COURSE of "THAT [DECEMBER] MONTH TIME-PERIOD" (ALL of his ANTICS)]... when YOU *read INTO* my words "THE BALL-DROP [event] *FIRST* [meaning, the "BUTTERBALL TURKEY" on AUNT MARTHA's SERVING PLATE in Timbuktu!]" to INSTEAD be meaning (you mistakenly *think*) "THE NEW-YEARS-EVE/NEW-YEARS-DAY BALL DROP in NY CITY [when Jan 1 (an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT SUBJECT/EVENT/TIME-PERIOD) enters the picture]"...


But *I* wasn't talking about the moment that the "BALL DROP in NY CITY" occurs.

*I* was talking about the moment of the "BALL-DROP [BUTTERBALL TURKEY dropping ON THE PLATE event (over in TIMBUKTU! on THANKSGIVING/NOVEMBER!!)]" which must happen *FIRST* BEFORE "the CHRISTMAS MONTH [TIME PERIOD] that the GRINCH has been given permission to WREAK HAVOC THROUGHOUT, can take place.


Can you see the misunderstanding now?


[my *example* is NOT to say I believe "the wedding FEAST/SUPPER" is IN HEAVEN, it ISN'T... this is just EXAMPLE convo]


It is a matter of CHRONOLOGY and SEQUENCE [btwn TWO DISTINCT ITEMS} that Paul is addressing here.


But because you are EQUATING completely DISTINCT ITEMS, you fail to see the SEQUENCE/CHRONOLOGY. You are "jumping ahead" to NEW YEARS [/eve or day]!

 

[GaryA]

GT is not wrath of God.

This is correct.

Matt 24
29 (a)Immediately after the tribulation of those days (this part is wrath of the devil

(B)shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

(B) is wrath of God.

{ No, brother... }

This is not correct. The things listed in Matthew 24:29 that occur "immediately after the tribulation of those days" are all part of the Trumpet Events - [actually] brought about by the Two Witnesses. They are not part of the Wrath of God.

The Wrath of God is represented in the 'vials' - and, only the 'vials'.

The Trumpets are not included. The Seals are not included. The Great Tribulation is not included. Only the Vials.

And seven trumphet happen after gt (matt 24:29)

This is correct.

 

[Jackson123]

The phrase "DOTL" (used everywhere in Scripture) NEVER refers to "Rapture [IN THE AIR]," but rather

base oN the context dotl here refer to rapture.

In vers 1 Paul talking about second coming and rapture, why explain judgement day and not touching rapture?
That is odd.

The day of the Lord can be rapture, second coming, judgement day, depend oN the context

 

[GaryA]

Having not read past post #180 as-of-yet ---- @Jackson123 has the greater (more correct) understanding; @TheDivineWatermark, you are the one trying to insert something into verse 2 that is not there...

I understand what you are saying; however, your interpretation of this passage is wrong.

 

[GaryA]

Right. So please stop using the phrase "A FALLING AWAY" ...

Thessalonians 2:

1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 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; 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

He is using the phrase "a falling away" because it is in the bible text. The above is from the KJV. I am not sure what bible he is using.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

base oN the context dotl here refer to rapture.

Verse 1 = Rapture [IN THE AIR]... Jesus isn't coming TO THE EARTH, at that point, but to "the meeting of the Lord IN THE AIR" (wher WE will be "CAUGHT UP/-AWAY"... "UNTO HIM" *there* (no one else will be... other ppl will proceed to experience "the DOTL time-period" with its "man of sin" IN HIS TIME, in the "IN THE NIGHT" TIME-PERIOD/ASPECT)

In vers 1 Paul talking about second coming and rapture, why explain judgement day and not touching rapture?
That is odd.

Verse 1 (both phrases/parts) speak ONLY of "our Rapture" (when WE GO to MEET HIM *there* IN THE AIR... not "on the earth")

The day of the Lord can be rapture, second coming, judgement day, depend oN the context

Yes (it certainly DOES involve ALL THREE SLOTS!!)

But its *ARRIVAL* is (just like Paul said the Thessalonians already "KNOW PERFECTLY" 1Th5:2-3) LIKE the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]" of a woman in labor... and Jesus had ALREADY SPOKEN ABOUT "the BEGINNING of birth PANGS [PLURAL]" (which are EQUIVALENT to the "SEALS Rev6" at the START of the Trib [7] yrs) in His Olivet Discourse,
so that Matt24:4-8/Mk13:5-8/Lk21:8-11 are the BEGINNING of that time period (the ARRIVAL of "the DOTL" earthly time-period), NOT its MIDDLE (Matt24:15), NOR its END (Matt24:36 / Matt24:29-31 When Christ "RETURNS" to the earth FOR the promised and prophesied EARTHLY MK age).


[NOTE: Matt24:36 is NOT a "RAPTURE" verse. EVERYTHING in Matt24 is FOLLOWING "our Rapture," ... The Subject of Jesus' Olivet Discourse is NOTHING about "our Rapture," per CONTEXT]



IOW, MANY MORE "birth PANGS [PLURAL]" *follow on* from the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; 1Th5:2-3 / Matt24:4/Mk13:5]" which IS the ARRIVAL of "the DOTL [TIME-PERIOD]" unfolding upon the earth (over the course of SOME TIME--the "IN THE NIGHT" aspect...
Two OTHER aspects OF IT come after THAT: His "RETURN" to the earth, AND the MK age on the earth--ALL of it EARTHLY-LOCATED).




The Thessalonians "KNOW PERFECTLY" *what* it is, and the manner of its *ARRIVAL* (LIKE the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]" upon a woman in labor [where MANY MORE "PANGS [PLURAL]" *FOLLOW* this one!! This is just the INITIAL ONE!! , at its ARRIVAL]), but today's Christians/believers HAVE IT ALL JUMBLED!

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Thessalonians 2:
a falling away first,

I addressed this earlier in the thread (several posts).

The Greeks had a word for "to fall" - "pipto"... and that is not the word we find here in v.3.

And the Greek text has the definite article ("the") which is absent here (in your quoting of it).

He is using the phrase "a falling away" because it is in the bible text. The above is from the KJV. I am not sure what bible he is using.

It is not present in the Greek text.

I addressed this earlier in the thread (in a number of posts, including the time surrounding when that phrase was initially introduced into the English texts).

Additionally, the first seven English translations [prior to the kjv's existence coming on the scene, even] translated it "the departing/the departure" [years prior to it, that is...]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

The day of the Lord can be rapture, second coming, judgement day, depend oN the context

Yes (it certainly DOES involve ALL THREE SLOTS!!)

All me to CLARIFY what I meant by the word "INVOLVE" (since I typed too hastily, and did not convey my intent CLEARLY).

What I MEAN to say is:

"the DOTL" is ENTIRELY an "EARTHLY-located TIME-PERIOD" involving ALL THREE of the FOLLOWING (and context will show any or all of these):

--the 7-yr Trib (IN THE NIGHT aspect [STARTS when Jesus will "STAND to JUDGE" by opening the FIRST SEAL (INITIAL "bP[ SINGULAR]"])

--His Second Coming to the earth (SUN of righteousness ARISE aspect)

--His 1000 yr reign on/over the earth (reign... GLORIOUSLY aspect [His "governance / judge the world in righteousness" 'DAY'--not 24-hrs merely!! ])

ALL THREE ASPECTS (ALL "EARTHLY-located"!! ^ ) = "the DOTL"


"Our Rapture [IN THE AIR]" is only "INVOLVED" [what I meant was] because "our Rapture" IMMEDIATELY PRECEDES the *ARRIVAL* of the DOTL time-period to play out on the earth (over TIME) with its "man of sin," and ALL he will DO (throughout the "IN THE NIGHT" ASPECT *of it* [i.e. the 7-yr TRIB aspect OF IT]--Dan7:7, Gen46:2, etc etc).

But its *ARRIVAL* is (just like Paul said the Thessalonians already "KNOW PERFECTLY" 1Th5:2-3) LIKE the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]" of a woman in labor... and Jesus had ALREADY SPOKEN ABOUT "the BEGINNING of birth PANGS [PLURAL]" (which are EQUIVALENT to the "SEALS Rev6" at the START of the Trib [7] yrs) in His Olivet Discourse,
so that Matt24:4-8/Mk13:5-8/Lk21:8-11 are the BEGINNING of that time period (the ARRIVAL of "the DOTL" earthly time-period), NOT its MIDDLE (Matt24:15), NOR its END (Matt24:36 / Matt24:29-31 When Christ "RETURNS" to the earth FOR the promised and prophesied EARTHLY MK age).


[NOTE: Matt24:36 is NOT a "RAPTURE" verse. EVERYTHING in Matt24 is FOLLOWING "our Rapture," ... The Subject of Jesus' Olivet Discourse is NOTHING about "our Rapture," per CONTEXT]



IOW, MANY MORE "birth PANGS [PLURAL]" *follow on* from the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; 1Th5:2-3 / Matt24:4/Mk13:5]" which IS the ARRIVAL of "the DOTL [TIME-PERIOD]" unfolding upon the earth (over the course of SOME TIME--the "IN THE NIGHT" aspect...
Two OTHER aspects OF IT come after THAT: His "RETURN" to the earth, AND the MK age on the earth--ALL of it EARTHLY-LOCATED).




The Thessalonians "KNOW PERFECTLY" *what* it is, and the manner of its *ARRIVAL* (LIKE the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR]" upon a woman in labor [where MANY MORE "PANGS [PLURAL]" *FOLLOW* this one!! This is just the INITIAL ONE!! , at its ARRIVAL]), but today's Christians/believers HAVE IT ALL JUMBLED!

 

[GaryA]

Link: Strong's Greek: 646. ἀποστασία (apostasia)

I find it to be a deplorable error for biblehub.com to "define" a Strong's Greek word without actually quoting it verbatim from Strong's Concordance.

I realize there may be a copyright issue involved - still - it is "just plain wrong"...

 

[KT88]

And unless you didn't know this - our government ordered a number of guillotines and so did Canada. In fact Canada is constructing concentration-style camps.

I suspect you are the victim of a conspiracy. Canada is not building anything but igloos. Read this:

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/covid-internment-camps-debunked_ca_5f909f23c5b695a32fb0023b

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

I find it to be a deplorable error for biblehub.com to "define" a Strong's Greek word without actually quoting it verbatim from Strong's Concordance.

I realize there may be a copyright issue involved - still - it is "just plain wrong"...

I dunno... I think you just have to actually LOOK at where that LINK takes you (and see what that entire PAGE is saying). JMHO.


LINK which had been PROVIDED IN MY POST (I think, right??): https://biblehub.com/greek/646.htm

[same LINK as-->] Strong's Greek: 646. ἀποστασία (apostasia)

[then you have to LOOK at WHAT's AT THE LINK...]

 

[GaryA]

It is eisegesis to INJECT "from the faith" into this word.

I do not believe I have ever seen anyone inject "from the faith" into the [actual] word [itself].

I have seen "from the faith" included in someone's interpretation of the verse/passage.

You, however, [consciously-or-not] are trying to change the meaning of the actual word - thereby changing the meaning of the verse/passage.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

I dunno... I think you just have to actually LOOK at where that LINK takes you (and see what that entire PAGE is saying). JMHO.
LINK which had been PROVIDED IN MY POST (I think, right??): https://biblehub.com/greek/646.htm
[same LINK as-->] Strong's Greek: 646. ἀποστασία (apostasia)
[then you have to LOOK at WHAT's AT THE LINK...]

And, btw, "Strong's" is not the "end all be all" of "definitions"... meaning, if one looks around at SEVERAL lexicons, you can gather more insight. "Strong's" alone is not equivalent to "the Bible," in other words... so why the fuss?

I know that wasn't YOUR point here @GaryA (which point I tried to answer to, in my previous post [quoted above]... I hope, sufficiently to your liking = ) )

 

[GaryA]

I dunno... I think you just have to actually LOOK at where that LINK takes you (and see what that entire PAGE is saying). JMHO.

I have an actual Strong's Exhaustive Concordance [physical] BOOK right here in front of me ---- and, what is written on that web page is not the same as what is written in my BOOK.

I trust the book more than the web page.