The Falling Away - pre-trib rapture or ???
- Thread starter DavidTree
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Because I was highlighting the fact that you BOLDED the word "REVOLT" in your L&S's lexicon quote and EQUATED IT with an entirely DISTINCT usage of it elsewhere, leaving the impression to the readers that they were ONE AND THE SAME USAGE AND DEFINITION.
They aren't... but by your ignoring the SOURCE MATERIAL SUPPLIED in the L&S's listing you quoted and bolded different entries to, this was the SOLE POINT I was ADDRESSING in that post.
I placed a "[...]" which is an HONEST WAY of CONDENSING the material that is not COVERING THE POINT I'M ZEROING IN on in that particular post!
But your bolding of two distinct entries in their listing (and having the readers believe they are EQUATED)... my endeavoring to POINT THIS OUT (that particular thing specifically) to the readers, is considered "deceptive" according to you. Believe as you wish, ewq.
I believe you are missing the point of what I was zeroing in on, in order to clarify to the readers about how lexicons work, and their purpose (contrary to the way in which you were presenting it, in more than one post of yours).
They aren't... but by your ignoring the SOURCE MATERIAL SUPPLIED in the L&S's listing you quoted and bolded different entries to, this was the SOLE POINT I was ADDRESSING in that post.
I placed a "[...]" which is an HONEST WAY of CONDENSING the material that is not COVERING THE POINT I'M ZEROING IN on in that particular post!
But your bolding of two distinct entries in their listing (and having the readers believe they are EQUATED)... my endeavoring to POINT THIS OUT (that particular thing specifically) to the readers, is considered "deceptive" according to you. Believe as you wish, ewq.
I believe you are missing the point of what I was zeroing in on, in order to clarify to the readers about how lexicons work, and their purpose (contrary to the way in which you were presenting it, in more than one post of yours).
You are deflecting. This is not about what I did or bolded. It's about your posts that are INCOMPLETE references of definitions to hide issues with what you claim to be true about the references you post. YOU misrepresent the Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon and Abbott-Smith's lexicon about the meaning of the word apostasia.
-
1
- Show all
I've not been the one stating time and time again that there is only ONE usage and definition of the word... that's been you insisting such a thing...
...and my post was an attempt to point out why the very source you were quoting disproves your own theory, on that point, if only you (and those reading those posts... and where I point this out--zeroing in on that particular issue in that post) would know where to look in that lexicon you yourself provided and quoted from.
That was my sole point and purpose in my responding, back in that post. It wasn't to cover every other possible point that could have been covered, but to zero in on ONE POINT (that your repeatedly stating the word ONLY MEANS "departure FROM THE FAITH" [i.e. "religious apostasy"] is disproved by the very source you quoted from, but which source you did not explain accurately to the readers of this thread, consequently coming away with the wrong ideas about it. I find that important enough to try to address, which was my purpose in pointing that out--sorry you feel that is wicked. But, whatever...)
...and my post was an attempt to point out why the very source you were quoting disproves your own theory, on that point, if only you (and those reading those posts... and where I point this out--zeroing in on that particular issue in that post) would know where to look in that lexicon you yourself provided and quoted from.
That was my sole point and purpose in my responding, back in that post. It wasn't to cover every other possible point that could have been covered, but to zero in on ONE POINT (that your repeatedly stating the word ONLY MEANS "departure FROM THE FAITH" [i.e. "religious apostasy"] is disproved by the very source you quoted from, but which source you did not explain accurately to the readers of this thread, consequently coming away with the wrong ideas about it. I find that important enough to try to address, which was my purpose in pointing that out--sorry you feel that is wicked. But, whatever...)
Dear friend,
Scripture cannot lie - His Word is the straight path of the Lord that we are to walk with Him on all the way Home.
Lead me, O LORD, in thy righteousness because of mine enemies; make thy way straight before my face.
The path of pre-trib is wide with many twists and turns in it that Scripture does not agree with.
You say i promote lies? - Can you prove and bring forth these lies you accuse me of? It would be helpful for all.
Scripture cannot lie - His Word is the straight path of the Lord that we are to walk with Him on all the way Home.
Lead me, O LORD, in thy righteousness because of mine enemies; make thy way straight before my face.
The path of pre-trib is wide with many twists and turns in it that Scripture does not agree with.
You say i promote lies? - Can you prove and bring forth these lies you accuse me of? It would be helpful for all.
-
1
- Show all
Noted here in bold is a your example of "adding to and taking away" from God's words.
"NOTES: 1. There can be no doubt that “the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering unto Him” speaks of the Rapture (see John 14:1-3). So now we need to see the connection of the Rapture to the other events mentioned below.
John 14: 1-3 “Do not let your hearts be troubled. You believe in God; believe in Me as well. In My Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and welcome you into My presence, so that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going.”
There is no pre-trib rapture in John 14:1-3 Our Lord does not lie to us brother Nehemiah6.
John 16:33 I have told you these things so that in Me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take courage; I have overcome the world!”
"NOTES: 1. There can be no doubt that “the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering unto Him” speaks of the Rapture (see John 14:1-3). So now we need to see the connection of the Rapture to the other events mentioned below.
John 14: 1-3 “Do not let your hearts be troubled. You believe in God; believe in Me as well. In My Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and welcome you into My presence, so that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going.”
There is no pre-trib rapture in John 14:1-3 Our Lord does not lie to us brother Nehemiah6.
John 16:33 I have told you these things so that in Me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take courage; I have overcome the world!”
Right. = ) 
One thing to bear in mind when considering this passage is, just what v.3a's "because [it is] [conjunction] IF NOT/UNLESS" connects BACK TO (per the "conjunction" and the "particle of qualified negation")...
... and that is, Paul is saying (v.3a) the "BECAUSE [it will not be present; CONJUNCTION] UNLESS / IF NOT [particle of qualified NEGATION]" ABOUT what the FALSE CLAIM (v.2) was "purporting" "IS" (i.e. "that the DAY OF THE LORD [a TIME PERIOD of JUDGMENTS unfolding] IS ALREADY HERE / IS PRESENT [perfect indicative; G1764 - https://biblehub.com/greek/1764.htm ; 2Th2:2 - https://biblehub.com/text/2_thessalonians/2-2.htm ]";
(Paul's TWO CHPTS are both addressing this issue, and his response covering the true "SEQUENCE" between the one thing ["our episynagoges unto Him"] and the other thing [the PRESENCE and EXISTENCE of the (earthly-located) day of the Lord and its JUDGMENTs unfolding on the earth OVER SOME TIME]--ONE THING is said to be "FIRST" [sequentially FIRST] before the other thing ["the DOTL" earthly time-period] can ACCURATELY BE SAID to exist [be "PRESENT"] and unfold upon the earth as it is slated to do)
The wording in v.2 [the content of the FALSE CLAIM] is not, "[purporting] that the day of Christ IS AT HAND [near-approaching]," but rather [the content of the FALSE CLAIM] is "[purporting] that the day of the Lord IS ALREADY HERE / IS PRESENT" [presently existing...in their present circumstances and experiences... i.e. in their present day]...
This is the issue [i.e. the FALSE CLAIM] that Paul is addressing in these 2 chpts of this 2nd epistle to the Thessalonians (a very "troubling"-to-their-minds matter)... and he is setting the record straight as to the CORRECT FACTS of the matter (in contrast to, and with regard to, the FALSE CLAIM he refers to in v.2)... He supplies the SEQUENCE... that settles the matter, once and for all, to their distraught minds (caused by the FALSE CLAIM "that the day of the Lord IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE" v.2).
The very thing that the FALSE CLAIM (v.2) was saying "IS PRESENT," Paul is addressing specifically (v.3a), by saying "it will NOT BE [present] UNLESS shall have come THE DEPARTURE FIRST and [distinctly]..." (we see that one thing as stated as being "FIRST," but two things are stated as being evidences that a statement such as "the day of the Lord IS PRESENT" would indeed be actually true--It wasn't, and Paul is telling WHY it is NOT SO.)
[quoting from Wm Kelly's commentary on 2Thess2, where he explains the difference between how some teach this passage and what the passage actually speaks to instead...]
"The "long and complicated series of events" to be developed, the very commencement of which was retarded by an obstacle then in being while the apostle wrote, was to crush, not the waiting for Christ's coming as a proximate hope, but the false statement that the day of the Lord [i.e. a TIME PERIOD] was there already. The designing men in question [v.2] did not set themselves systematically to urge the nearness of His coming, which all the New Testament does; their pretension to spiritual inspiration, their solemn utterance, their forgery of a letter under Paul's name, were all to give colour and currency to the wholly distinct and false insinuation that the day of the Lord was [already] come then and there [in their PRESENT experience / their CURRENT-day time-frame].
"Hence it was not enthusiastic and feverish excitement associated with the expectation of Christ's coming and the fruition of the Christian's joy with Him in glory. It was the operation of dismay and terror, as if that day [i.e. A TIME PERIOD] of unsparing judgment and of inevitable horror had set in on them. To be "shaken" from their [or, in] mind or "agitated" (σαλευθῆםבι) is descriptive of the disquiet and perturbation caused by fear; still more plainly does it flow from the same source to be "frightened" or "troubled" (θροεῖףטבι), which (less, if possible, than s.) suits the impatient and impetuous enthusiasm of a wrongly excited hope. [Kelly is saying, it wasn't THAT that agitated them.] It is in a quite different connection that we read in the last chapter of disorderly brethren who did not work as became them: spurious hope might produce this result; but nothing of the kind is implied here in 2 Thess. 2.
"It will be seen that all this warping of details, as well as misinterpretation as a whole, by men otherwise to be respected, turns on the erroneous assumption that the express subject of discourse is the second personal coming of our Lord; and that it is to guard against the notion that His personal coming was "at hand" or imminent. Not so: this is divine truth everywhere taught in the New Testament, and nowhere so constantly, clearly, and urgently as in these Epistles. The apostle is really exposing and uprooting the delusion that the day of the Lord was now present. Do those confusing expositors aver that the Thessalonian dealers in false alarm as to that day thought or pretended that the Lord Himself was come or present in power and glory? The fact is, that on the contrary the apostle begs the saints, by His coming which would gather them together to Him in perfect peace and endless joy, not to be troubled with the deceptive cry that the day so awe-inspiring had begun [by this, Kelly means the same as what he said previously by the words, "as if that day [i.e. A TIME PERIOD] of unsparing judgment and of inevitable horror had set in on them"]. This cry is nowhere imputed to a misconstruction of the apostle's words in the first epistle. Even if we punctuate with Lachmann, and Theile, etc., or with Webster and Wilkinson, the only real meaning is the claim of a spirit of communication, oral ministry, and a letter, falsely attributed to the apostle. Of course it in no way emanated from really earnest Christians, but from fraudulent men who misled them. Tertullian and Chrysostom are right; Whitby, etc., quite wrong."
--William Kelly, commentary on 2 Thessalonians 2 (from BibleHub)
[end quoting; bold and underline mine; a few bracketed inserts mine for clarification purposes (italicized and underlined); parentheses original]
-- https://biblehub.com/commentaries/kelly/2_thessalonians/2.htm
One thing to bear in mind when considering this passage is, just what v.3a's "because [it is] [conjunction] IF NOT/UNLESS" connects BACK TO (per the "conjunction" and the "particle of qualified negation")...
... and that is, Paul is saying (v.3a) the "BECAUSE [it will not be present; CONJUNCTION] UNLESS / IF NOT [particle of qualified NEGATION]" ABOUT what the FALSE CLAIM (v.2) was "purporting" "IS" (i.e. "that the DAY OF THE LORD [a TIME PERIOD of JUDGMENTS unfolding] IS ALREADY HERE / IS PRESENT [perfect indicative; G1764 - https://biblehub.com/greek/1764.htm ; 2Th2:2 - https://biblehub.com/text/2_thessalonians/2-2.htm ]";
(Paul's TWO CHPTS are both addressing this issue, and his response covering the true "SEQUENCE" between the one thing ["our episynagoges unto Him"] and the other thing [the PRESENCE and EXISTENCE of the (earthly-located) day of the Lord and its JUDGMENTs unfolding on the earth OVER SOME TIME]--ONE THING is said to be "FIRST" [sequentially FIRST] before the other thing ["the DOTL" earthly time-period] can ACCURATELY BE SAID to exist [be "PRESENT"] and unfold upon the earth as it is slated to do)
The wording in v.2 [the content of the FALSE CLAIM] is not, "[purporting] that the day of Christ IS AT HAND [near-approaching]," but rather [the content of the FALSE CLAIM] is "[purporting] that the day of the Lord IS ALREADY HERE / IS PRESENT" [presently existing...in their present circumstances and experiences... i.e. in their present day]...
This is the issue [i.e. the FALSE CLAIM] that Paul is addressing in these 2 chpts of this 2nd epistle to the Thessalonians (a very "troubling"-to-their-minds matter)... and he is setting the record straight as to the CORRECT FACTS of the matter (in contrast to, and with regard to, the FALSE CLAIM he refers to in v.2)... He supplies the SEQUENCE... that settles the matter, once and for all, to their distraught minds (caused by the FALSE CLAIM "that the day of the Lord IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE" v.2).
The very thing that the FALSE CLAIM (v.2) was saying "IS PRESENT," Paul is addressing specifically (v.3a), by saying "it will NOT BE [present] UNLESS shall have come THE DEPARTURE FIRST and [distinctly]..." (we see that one thing as stated as being "FIRST," but two things are stated as being evidences that a statement such as "the day of the Lord IS PRESENT" would indeed be actually true--It wasn't, and Paul is telling WHY it is NOT SO.)
[quoting from Wm Kelly's commentary on 2Thess2, where he explains the difference between how some teach this passage and what the passage actually speaks to instead...]
"The "long and complicated series of events" to be developed, the very commencement of which was retarded by an obstacle then in being while the apostle wrote, was to crush, not the waiting for Christ's coming as a proximate hope, but the false statement that the day of the Lord [i.e. a TIME PERIOD] was there already. The designing men in question [v.2] did not set themselves systematically to urge the nearness of His coming, which all the New Testament does; their pretension to spiritual inspiration, their solemn utterance, their forgery of a letter under Paul's name, were all to give colour and currency to the wholly distinct and false insinuation that the day of the Lord was [already] come then and there [in their PRESENT experience / their CURRENT-day time-frame].
"Hence it was not enthusiastic and feverish excitement associated with the expectation of Christ's coming and the fruition of the Christian's joy with Him in glory. It was the operation of dismay and terror, as if that day [i.e. A TIME PERIOD] of unsparing judgment and of inevitable horror had set in on them. To be "shaken" from their [or, in] mind or "agitated" (σαλευθῆםבι) is descriptive of the disquiet and perturbation caused by fear; still more plainly does it flow from the same source to be "frightened" or "troubled" (θροεῖףטבι), which (less, if possible, than s.) suits the impatient and impetuous enthusiasm of a wrongly excited hope. [Kelly is saying, it wasn't THAT that agitated them.] It is in a quite different connection that we read in the last chapter of disorderly brethren who did not work as became them: spurious hope might produce this result; but nothing of the kind is implied here in 2 Thess. 2.
"It will be seen that all this warping of details, as well as misinterpretation as a whole, by men otherwise to be respected, turns on the erroneous assumption that the express subject of discourse is the second personal coming of our Lord; and that it is to guard against the notion that His personal coming was "at hand" or imminent. Not so: this is divine truth everywhere taught in the New Testament, and nowhere so constantly, clearly, and urgently as in these Epistles. The apostle is really exposing and uprooting the delusion that the day of the Lord was now present. Do those confusing expositors aver that the Thessalonian dealers in false alarm as to that day thought or pretended that the Lord Himself was come or present in power and glory? The fact is, that on the contrary the apostle begs the saints, by His coming which would gather them together to Him in perfect peace and endless joy, not to be troubled with the deceptive cry that the day so awe-inspiring had begun [by this, Kelly means the same as what he said previously by the words, "as if that day [i.e. A TIME PERIOD] of unsparing judgment and of inevitable horror had set in on them"]. This cry is nowhere imputed to a misconstruction of the apostle's words in the first epistle. Even if we punctuate with Lachmann, and Theile, etc., or with Webster and Wilkinson, the only real meaning is the claim of a spirit of communication, oral ministry, and a letter, falsely attributed to the apostle. Of course it in no way emanated from really earnest Christians, but from fraudulent men who misled them. Tertullian and Chrysostom are right; Whitby, etc., quite wrong."
--William Kelly, commentary on 2 Thessalonians 2 (from BibleHub)
[end quoting; bold and underline mine; a few bracketed inserts mine for clarification purposes (italicized and underlined); parentheses original]
-- https://biblehub.com/commentaries/kelly/2_thessalonians/2.htm
Right. = )
One thing to bear in mind when considering this passage is, just what v.3a's "because [it is] [conjunction] IF NOT/UNLESS" connects BACK TO (per the "conjunction" and the "particle of qualified negation")...
... and that is, Paul is saying (v.3a) the "BECAUSE [it will not be present; CONJUNCTION] UNLESS / IF NOT [particle of qualified NEGATION]" ABOUT what the FALSE CLAIM (v.2) was "purporting" "IS" (i.e. "that the DAY OF THE LORD [a TIME PERIOD of JUDGMENTS unfolding] IS ALREADY HERE / IS PRESENT [perfect indicative; G1764 - https://biblehub.com/greek/1764.htm ; 2Th2:2 - https://biblehub.com/text/2_thessalonians/2-2.htm ]";
(Paul's TWO CHPTS are both addressing this issue, and his response covering the true "SEQUENCE" between the one thing ["our episynagoges unto Him"] and the other thing [the PRESENCE and EXISTENCE of the (earthly-located) day of the Lord and its JUDGMENTs unfolding on the earth OVER SOME TIME]--ONE THING is said to be "FIRST" [sequentially FIRST] before the other thing ["the DOTL" earthly time-period] can ACCURATELY BE SAID to exist [be "PRESENT"] and unfold upon the earth as it is slated to do)
The wording in v.2 [the content of the FALSE CLAIM] is not, "[purporting] that the day of Christ IS AT HAND [near-approaching]," but rather [the content of the FALSE CLAIM] is "[purporting] that the day of the Lord IS ALREADY HERE / IS PRESENT" [presently existing...in their present circumstances and experiences... i.e. in their present day]...
This is the issue [i.e. the FALSE CLAIM] that Paul is addressing in these 2 chpts of this 2nd epistle to the Thessalonians (a very "troubling"-to-their-minds matter)... and he is setting the record straight as to the CORRECT FACTS of the matter (in contrast to, and with regard to, the FALSE CLAIM he refers to in v.2)... He supplies the SEQUENCE... that settles the matter, once and for all, to their distraught minds (caused by the FALSE CLAIM "that the day of the Lord IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE" v.2).
The very thing that the FALSE CLAIM (v.2) was saying "IS PRESENT," Paul is addressing specifically (v.3a), by saying "it will NOT BE [present] UNLESS shall have come THE DEPARTURE FIRST and [distinctly]..." (we see that one thing as stated as being "FIRST," but two things are stated as being evidences that a statement such as "the day of the Lord IS PRESENT" would indeed be actually true--It wasn't, and Paul is telling WHY it is NOT SO.)
[quoting from Wm Kelly's commentary on 2Thess2, where he explains the difference between how some teach this passage and what the passage actually speaks to instead...]
"The "long and complicated series of events" to be developed, the very commencement of which was retarded by an obstacle then in being while the apostle wrote, was to crush, not the waiting for Christ's coming as a proximate hope, but the false statement that the day of the Lord [i.e. a TIME PERIOD] was there already. The designing men in question [v.2] did not set themselves systematically to urge the nearness of His coming, which all the New Testament does; their pretension to spiritual inspiration, their solemn utterance, their forgery of a letter under Paul's name, were all to give colour and currency to the wholly distinct and false insinuation that the day of the Lord was [already] come then and there [in their PRESENT experience / their CURRENT-day time-frame].
"Hence it was not enthusiastic and feverish excitement associated with the expectation of Christ's coming and the fruition of the Christian's joy with Him in glory. It was the operation of dismay and terror, as if that day [i.e. A TIME PERIOD] of unsparing judgment and of inevitable horror had set in on them. To be "shaken" from their [or, in] mind or "agitated" (σαλευθῆםבι) is descriptive of the disquiet and perturbation caused by fear; still more plainly does it flow from the same source to be "frightened" or "troubled" (θροεῖףטבι), which (less, if possible, than s.) suits the impatient and impetuous enthusiasm of a wrongly excited hope. [Kelly is saying, it wasn't THAT that agitated them.] It is in a quite different connection that we read in the last chapter of disorderly brethren who did not work as became them: spurious hope might produce this result; but nothing of the kind is implied here in 2 Thess. 2.
"It will be seen that all this warping of details, as well as misinterpretation as a whole, by men otherwise to be respected, turns on the erroneous assumption that the express subject of discourse is the second personal coming of our Lord; and that it is to guard against the notion that His personal coming was "at hand" or imminent. Not so: this is divine truth everywhere taught in the New Testament, and nowhere so constantly, clearly, and urgently as in these Epistles. The apostle is really exposing and uprooting the delusion that the day of the Lord was now present. Do those confusing expositors aver that the Thessalonian dealers in false alarm as to that day thought or pretended that the Lord Himself was come or present in power and glory? The fact is, that on the contrary the apostle begs the saints, by His coming which would gather them together to Him in perfect peace and endless joy, not to be troubled with the deceptive cry that the day so awe-inspiring had begun [by this, Kelly means the same as what he said previously by the words, "as if that day [i.e. A TIME PERIOD] of unsparing judgment and of inevitable horror had set in on them"]. This cry is nowhere imputed to a misconstruction of the apostle's words in the first epistle. Even if we punctuate with Lachmann, and Theile, etc., or with Webster and Wilkinson, the only real meaning is the claim of a spirit of communication, oral ministry, and a letter, falsely attributed to the apostle. Of course it in no way emanated from really earnest Christians, but from fraudulent men who misled them. Tertullian and Chrysostom are right; Whitby, etc., quite wrong."
--William Kelly, commentary on 2 Thessalonians 2 (from BibleHub)
[end quoting; bold and underline mine; a few bracketed inserts mine for clarification purposes (italicized and underlined); parentheses original]
-- https://biblehub.com/commentaries/kelly/2_thessalonians/2.htm
One thing to bear in mind when considering this passage is, just what v.3a's "because [it is] [conjunction] IF NOT/UNLESS" connects BACK TO (per the "conjunction" and the "particle of qualified negation")...
... and that is, Paul is saying (v.3a) the "BECAUSE [it will not be present; CONJUNCTION] UNLESS / IF NOT [particle of qualified NEGATION]" ABOUT what the FALSE CLAIM (v.2) was "purporting" "IS" (i.e. "that the DAY OF THE LORD [a TIME PERIOD of JUDGMENTS unfolding] IS ALREADY HERE / IS PRESENT [perfect indicative; G1764 - https://biblehub.com/greek/1764.htm ; 2Th2:2 - https://biblehub.com/text/2_thessalonians/2-2.htm ]";
(Paul's TWO CHPTS are both addressing this issue, and his response covering the true "SEQUENCE" between the one thing ["our episynagoges unto Him"] and the other thing [the PRESENCE and EXISTENCE of the (earthly-located) day of the Lord and its JUDGMENTs unfolding on the earth OVER SOME TIME]--ONE THING is said to be "FIRST" [sequentially FIRST] before the other thing ["the DOTL" earthly time-period] can ACCURATELY BE SAID to exist [be "PRESENT"] and unfold upon the earth as it is slated to do)
The wording in v.2 [the content of the FALSE CLAIM] is not, "[purporting] that the day of Christ IS AT HAND [near-approaching]," but rather [the content of the FALSE CLAIM] is "[purporting] that the day of the Lord IS ALREADY HERE / IS PRESENT" [presently existing...in their present circumstances and experiences... i.e. in their present day]...
This is the issue [i.e. the FALSE CLAIM] that Paul is addressing in these 2 chpts of this 2nd epistle to the Thessalonians (a very "troubling"-to-their-minds matter)... and he is setting the record straight as to the CORRECT FACTS of the matter (in contrast to, and with regard to, the FALSE CLAIM he refers to in v.2)... He supplies the SEQUENCE... that settles the matter, once and for all, to their distraught minds (caused by the FALSE CLAIM "that the day of the Lord IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE" v.2).
The very thing that the FALSE CLAIM (v.2) was saying "IS PRESENT," Paul is addressing specifically (v.3a), by saying "it will NOT BE [present] UNLESS shall have come THE DEPARTURE FIRST and [distinctly]..." (we see that one thing as stated as being "FIRST," but two things are stated as being evidences that a statement such as "the day of the Lord IS PRESENT" would indeed be actually true--It wasn't, and Paul is telling WHY it is NOT SO.)
[quoting from Wm Kelly's commentary on 2Thess2, where he explains the difference between how some teach this passage and what the passage actually speaks to instead...]
"The "long and complicated series of events" to be developed, the very commencement of which was retarded by an obstacle then in being while the apostle wrote, was to crush, not the waiting for Christ's coming as a proximate hope, but the false statement that the day of the Lord [i.e. a TIME PERIOD] was there already. The designing men in question [v.2] did not set themselves systematically to urge the nearness of His coming, which all the New Testament does; their pretension to spiritual inspiration, their solemn utterance, their forgery of a letter under Paul's name, were all to give colour and currency to the wholly distinct and false insinuation that the day of the Lord was [already] come then and there [in their PRESENT experience / their CURRENT-day time-frame].
"Hence it was not enthusiastic and feverish excitement associated with the expectation of Christ's coming and the fruition of the Christian's joy with Him in glory. It was the operation of dismay and terror, as if that day [i.e. A TIME PERIOD] of unsparing judgment and of inevitable horror had set in on them. To be "shaken" from their [or, in] mind or "agitated" (σαλευθῆםבι) is descriptive of the disquiet and perturbation caused by fear; still more plainly does it flow from the same source to be "frightened" or "troubled" (θροεῖףטבι), which (less, if possible, than s.) suits the impatient and impetuous enthusiasm of a wrongly excited hope. [Kelly is saying, it wasn't THAT that agitated them.] It is in a quite different connection that we read in the last chapter of disorderly brethren who did not work as became them: spurious hope might produce this result; but nothing of the kind is implied here in 2 Thess. 2.
"It will be seen that all this warping of details, as well as misinterpretation as a whole, by men otherwise to be respected, turns on the erroneous assumption that the express subject of discourse is the second personal coming of our Lord; and that it is to guard against the notion that His personal coming was "at hand" or imminent. Not so: this is divine truth everywhere taught in the New Testament, and nowhere so constantly, clearly, and urgently as in these Epistles. The apostle is really exposing and uprooting the delusion that the day of the Lord was now present. Do those confusing expositors aver that the Thessalonian dealers in false alarm as to that day thought or pretended that the Lord Himself was come or present in power and glory? The fact is, that on the contrary the apostle begs the saints, by His coming which would gather them together to Him in perfect peace and endless joy, not to be troubled with the deceptive cry that the day so awe-inspiring had begun [by this, Kelly means the same as what he said previously by the words, "as if that day [i.e. A TIME PERIOD] of unsparing judgment and of inevitable horror had set in on them"]. This cry is nowhere imputed to a misconstruction of the apostle's words in the first epistle. Even if we punctuate with Lachmann, and Theile, etc., or with Webster and Wilkinson, the only real meaning is the claim of a spirit of communication, oral ministry, and a letter, falsely attributed to the apostle. Of course it in no way emanated from really earnest Christians, but from fraudulent men who misled them. Tertullian and Chrysostom are right; Whitby, etc., quite wrong."
--William Kelly, commentary on 2 Thessalonians 2 (from BibleHub)
[end quoting; bold and underline mine; a few bracketed inserts mine for clarification purposes (italicized and underlined); parentheses original]
-- https://biblehub.com/commentaries/kelly/2_thessalonians/2.htm
Very Good - this what you said is TRUE
Now all you need to do is believe all that the APOSTLE Paul said and stop adding your own words and changing Scripture (BAD).
For that Day will not come until the "falling away" (departure does not change anything) comes first and the man of sin is revealed.
Our Lord said what the departure is from, as did the Apostles Paul and John = departure from truth.
No pre-trib rapture - it does not exist in Scripture - only in the carnal mind and words of men and the spirit of error.
No Rapture until, First, the Resurrection and no Resurrection until the allotted Saints are killed by the Antichrist - Revelation ch 6 and ch 20.
It is so CLEAR that a child can understand - It is as simple as 1,2,3 please refer yourself to our Lord's words in Matt 18: 1,2,3
On a slightly different but related note ... it is my understanding that Josephus apparently used the word "apostasis" (the older form of the word) in his "Antiquities" Book 16...
"ις. Ἀπόστασις τῶν τὸν Τράχωνα οἰκούντων καὶ παράληψις διὰ τῶν στρατηγῶν τῆς χώρας."
-- http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/historiens/Flajose/juda16gr.htm [16th entry down, following (not counting) the words in bold]
I cannot say for certain what the sentence says (since I'm not fluent in Greek)...
...but it is my understanding (and I could be mistaken), that this is where some of the LISTED SOURCES (in some of L&S's older editions of their lexicon, or another) refer to the word [entry; usage] as "DISTANCE" (perhaps in another lexicon, if I recall correctly...).
... it is my understanding that Josephus apparently used the word "apostasis" (the older form of the word) in his "Antiquities" Book 16..."ις. Ἀπόστασις τῶν τὸν Τράχωνα οἰκούντων καὶ παράληψις διὰ τῶν στρατηγῶν τῆς χώρας."
-- http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/historiens/Flajose/juda16gr.htm [16th entry down, following (not counting) the words in bold]
I cannot say for certain what the sentence says (since I'm not fluent in Greek)...
...but it is my understanding (and I could be mistaken), that this is where some of the LISTED SOURCES (in some of L&S's older editions of their lexicon, or another) refer to the word [entry; usage] as "DISTANCE" (perhaps in another lexicon, if I recall correctly...).
WHAT "DAY"????
(the earthly-located TIME PERIOD of JUDGMENTs unfolding upon the earth OVER SOME TIME [that the FALSE CLAIMANTS were purporting "IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE!!!!" (PERFECT INDICATIVE--indicating, FOR SOME TIME already!!)]; i.e. the years leading UP TO Christ's RETURN! You know, when the SEALS/TRUMPETS/VIALS [as we now understand] will be unfolding upon the earth: "THE DAY OF THE LORD" aka JUDGMENTS! [v.2's Subject!])
At first you quote Kelly's words and say "Very Good" to them ("this what you said is TRUE"), as though YOU AGREED with what he said... but by your very next words, prove you've simply NOT UNDERSTOOD what he just said.
(the earthly-located TIME PERIOD of JUDGMENTs unfolding upon the earth OVER SOME TIME [that the FALSE CLAIMANTS were purporting "IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE!!!!" (PERFECT INDICATIVE--indicating, FOR SOME TIME already!!)]; i.e. the years leading UP TO Christ's RETURN! You know, when the SEALS/TRUMPETS/VIALS [as we now understand] will be unfolding upon the earth: "THE DAY OF THE LORD" aka JUDGMENTS! [v.2's Subject!])
At first you quote Kelly's words and say "Very Good" to them ("this what you said is TRUE"), as though YOU AGREED with what he said... but by your very next words, prove you've simply NOT UNDERSTOOD what he just said.
On a slightly different but related note ... it is my understanding that Josephus apparently used the word "apostasis" (the older form of the word) in his "Antiquities" Book 16...
"ις. Ἀπόστασις τῶν τὸν Τράχωνα οἰκούντων καὶ παράληψις διὰ τῶν στρατηγῶν τῆς χώρας."
-- http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/historiens/Flajose/juda16gr.htm [16th entry down, following (not counting) the words in bold]
I cannot say for certain what the sentence says (since I'm not fluent in Greek)...
...but it is my understanding (and I could be mistaken), that this is where some of the LISTED SOURCES (in some of L&S's older editions of their lexicon, or another) refer to the word [entry; usage] as "DISTANCE" (perhaps in another lexicon, if I recall correctly...).
... it is my understanding that Josephus apparently used the word "apostasis" (the older form of the word) in his "Antiquities" Book 16..."ις. Ἀπόστασις τῶν τὸν Τράχωνα οἰκούντων καὶ παράληψις διὰ τῶν στρατηγῶν τῆς χώρας."
-- http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/historiens/Flajose/juda16gr.htm [16th entry down, following (not counting) the words in bold]
I cannot say for certain what the sentence says (since I'm not fluent in Greek)...
...but it is my understanding (and I could be mistaken), that this is where some of the LISTED SOURCES (in some of L&S's older editions of their lexicon, or another) refer to the word [entry; usage] as "DISTANCE" (perhaps in another lexicon, if I recall correctly...).
You need to believe the Faithful Witnesses that Testify to the Truth - Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Apostle Paul and the Apostle John
Did the Apostle Paul say: "our falling away/departure" or did he say "the falling away/departure"
You like to quarrel over words for selfish gain to make an error come across as truth - very Bad.
What Paul did say is this - "Do you not remember when I was with you I told you these things?
What did Paul write prior to 2 Thessalonians = well he wrote 1 Thessalonians.
In 1 Thessalonians, Paul clearly states no pre-trib rapture. How do we know?
1 Thess 1:6 "And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost"
affliction: Strong's Greek 2347: Persecution, affliction, distress, tribulation.
1 Thess 2:15-16 For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us
1 Thess 3:4 For verily, when we were with you, we told you before that we should suffer tribulation;
Paul also wrote that the Lord brings the Saints (those in White Robes in Revelation) with Him at His Coming for the Main Event
= the Resurrection.
The Saints in Heaven who are worshipping before God are the collective Body of Christ/His Bride who have died in Him.
Revelation 6: 9-11 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.
Revelation 20: 4-6 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.
This is the first resurrection.
Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
By these words of the LORD, "The Resurrection occurs after the "falling away and the man of sin"
I believe you are misunderstanding the text, and the order / sequence regarding which these are being expressed:
The text actually states "those having fallen asleep through Jesus shall God bring WITH [G4862 -UNIONed-with] Him [/Jesus]" - 1Th4:14 https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_thessalonians/4-14.htm .
And the means by which this will be able to take place (as stated in v.14), is this: "[re: the "caught up [harpagēsometha - SNATCH-ACTION] TOGETHER [/at the same time] WITH" thing, aka "SNATCH / rapture" of the "ONE BODY"]<--"SO / THUS / IN THIS MANNER [G3779] shall WE ever be WITH [G4862 - UNIONed-with] the Lord" [not PRIOR to that point in time (the "SNATCH-ACTION / rapture"), see] v.17 https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_thessalonians/4-17.htm
This requires "the dead IN Christ's" resurrection and glorified bodies (not as they are NOW up in Heaven "present with the Lord" [but "ABSENT from the body"])--when thereafter we'll be "PRESENTED" together (AS "ONE") "TO CHRIST" (bodily / physically--in glorified bodies)
The text actually states "those having fallen asleep through Jesus shall God bring WITH [G4862 -UNIONed-with] Him [/Jesus]" - 1Th4:14 https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_thessalonians/4-14.htm .
And the means by which this will be able to take place (as stated in v.14), is this: "[re: the "caught up [harpagēsometha - SNATCH-ACTION] TOGETHER [/at the same time] WITH" thing, aka "SNATCH / rapture" of the "ONE BODY"]<--"SO / THUS / IN THIS MANNER [G3779] shall WE ever be WITH [G4862 - UNIONed-with] the Lord" [not PRIOR to that point in time (the "SNATCH-ACTION / rapture"), see] v.17 https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_thessalonians/4-17.htm
This requires "the dead IN Christ's" resurrection and glorified bodies (not as they are NOW up in Heaven "present with the Lord" [but "ABSENT from the body"])--when thereafter we'll be "PRESENTED" together (AS "ONE") "TO CHRIST" (bodily / physically--in glorified bodies)
-
1
- Show all
No, i clearly SEE and boy do i SEE even the more so after i read your stuff.
Better get some reading glasses from the Holy Spirit.
You can make your request known to the Father through the Precious Blood of Christ who is seated at the Right Hand of God.
Print this out and put it up on the wall in a spot where you can easily SEE it and Read it everyday.
Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. - Proverbs 30: 5-6
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Revelation 22: 18-19
-
1
- Show all
Which is true regarding the words use in the bible and that information comes from Greek scholars. I merely have passed that info on to counter the false info you have provided. Remember what these tools say:
Strong's definition G646
apostasia
ap-os-tas-ee'-ah
Feminine of the same as G647; defection from truth (properly the state), (“apostasy”) : - falling away, forsake.
Total KJV occurrences: 2
G646
apostasia
Thayer Definition:
1) a falling away, defection, apostasy
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: feminine of the same as G647
Citing in TDNT: 1:513, 88
Total KJV occurrences: 2
Abbott-Smith Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament
Apostasia
defection, apostasy, revolt; in late Gk. (MM, Exp., viii; Lft., Notes, 111; Cremer, 308) for cl. ?p?stas?? , freq. in sense of political revolt, in LXX (e.g. Joshua 22:22, 2 Chronicles 29:19, Jeremiah 2:19) and NT always of religious apostasy: Ac21:21, II Th 2:3.
Liddell and Scott:
A defection, revolt, v.l. in D.H.7.1, J.Vit.10, Plu.Galb.1; esp. in religious sense, rebellion against God , apostasy, LXX Jo.22.22, 2 Ep.Th.2.3.
Winer's Grammar:
Apostasia, a falling away, defection, apostasy; in the Bible namely, from the true religion: Acts 21:21; 2 Thessalonians 2:3 ; ((Joshua 22:22; 2 Chronicles 29:19; 2 Chronicles 33:19); Jeremiah 2:19; Jeremiah 36
29) 32 Complutensian; 1 Macc. 2:15). The earlier Greeks say Apostasis; see Lob. ad Phryn., p. 528; (Winer's Grammar, 24). This is obviously false. No source says Apostasia in NT bible has any other meaning than Apostasy in the religious sense. See above.