The False Teaching (& Truth) of what happens at the Rapture.

[Omegatime]

I have been watching your discussion and I have been wondering if Paul was covering the departure and the falling away with one word. ( apostasia ) I sent this question to a skilled language professor at a university and waiting to hear back. Just wondering if it is possible?

 

[Marilyn]

Could you please quote verses that prove a pretrib rapture/resurrecton? I still haven't seen any.
.

Since I`ve been away this thread has developed many pages. Glad people are having a good discussion.

Now I would like to answer that question for You FG, but not on this thread as it will take it off into another direction. Thus I will go and prepare another thread on `The Purpose of the Rapture.` It seems people talk about when and where it happens but not really understand God`s purpose. Thus it would be a good discussion I believe.

 

[ewq1938]

Sorry buddy but you are dead wrong. The Departure means exactly what it says. Nothing more nothing less. And don't forget it's a noun not a verb....

I'm not wrong and the rapture is a verb so the departure from the Christian religion would be a noun because it's not about physical movement. You just proved apostasia cannot be the rapture but who cares about facts? Pretrib will fall upon it's own sword in the face of truth.

 

[ewq1938]

@ewq1938 , according to your way of reasoning, consider that your "signature" says:

This is just noise. I googled Apostasian and there is nothing related to apostasia. The only thing I found was related to music called, "Apostasian Tabs". Blueletterbible has ἀποστασία and so does biblehub. Paul never wrote apostasis in any of his letters and certainly not regarding the falling away that pretrib wants to take part in. Such foolishness in that doctrine and no scholarship at all. Your fellow pretribber even thinks all the expert Greek sources are corrupted. What utter foolishness.

 

[ewq1938]

[quoting Greek Scholar... from ewq's quotings]

"The earlier Greeks say Apostasis; see Lob. ad Phryn., p. 528; (Winer's Grammar, 24)."


Why would they SAY such a word...;

FOR WHAT?!?









["apostasian" (Acts 21:21, written after 2Th2:3, I believe)... "apostasia" (2Th2:3)... "apostasis" (older Greeks' spelling of this word)... ALL THE SAME WORD (differing SPELLINGS, same MEANING)]

Almost everything in this post is wrong. Apostasis is NOT the same word or same meaning as the newer word apostasia. TDW does not like that apostasia means apostasy so she is trying everything she can think of to erase what the word means and try to give it a new meaning it does not and can not mean.

 

[Runningman]

I have been watching your discussion and I have been wondering if Paul was covering the departure and the falling away with one word. ( apostasia ) I sent this question to a skilled language professor at a university and waiting to hear back. Just wondering if it is possible?

We can test it without being Greek experts (I don’t think anyone here is) by plugging it into the context. The gathering to Christ occurs when Christ returns. When Christ returns He destroys the “Wicked” one with the brightness of His coming.

It’s believed that “Wicked” one, given the context that he’s in the temple of God claiming to be God, is the anti-Christ.

That means Christ returns to gather His people and end the great tribulation. That’s how most people understand 2 Thessalonians 2 because it’s plain in the text.

So even if we allow apostasia to mean a departure of the church in a rapture, it introduces a contradiction in the chapter by allowing the church to be gathered to Christ before He returns to destroy the Wicked one. We can rule out departure being a pre-trib rapture this way. The rapture is post-trib.

 

[ewq1938]

I have been watching your discussion and I have been wondering if Paul was covering the departure and the falling away with one word. ( apostasia ) I sent this question to a skilled language professor at a university and waiting to hear back. Just wondering if it is possible?

The departure is the falling away which is the Apostasy. It's one event where Christians will fall away from Christ to the antichrist.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

I'm not wrong and the rapture is a verb so the departure from the Christian religion would be a noun because it's not about physical movement. You just proved apostasia cannot be the rapture but who cares about facts? Pretrib will fall upon it's own sword in the face of truth.

How was such a thing (supposedly) "proved"??

"he apostasia" is a NOUN (as was just mentioned).

So is "[OUR] episynagoges [NOUN] [UNTO HIM]" v.1 (the very thing / NOUN v.3b "THE Departure [NOUN] ['FIRST']" [not v.3a!] POINTS BACK TO).



Your thing about insisting the word would have to be a VERB (like "SNATCH / CAUGHT UP / RAPTURE / harpazo" is a VERB) just shows you (incorrectly) think Paul only referenced this whole "idea" ONLY ONCE in these two epistles, in 1Th4:17 ALONE (which is FAR from accurate, as I mentioned in a recent previous post).






[ewq doesn't like the fact that "apostasian" (Acts 21:21) and "apostasia" (2Th2:3) are spelled differently, thus obliterating her "totally made up rule" (unless she breaks her own rule, for her own ends [to support HER point], that is )]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

[...] the Apostasy. It's one event where Christians will fall away from Christ to the antichrist.

How are you defining the term "Christians"?

 

[ewq1938]

How was such a thing (supposedly) "proved"??

"he apostasia" is a NOUN (as was just mentioned).

I already explained. Rapture is a verb so this falling away from the faith is not a verb meaning no one is going up into the clouds because it's a noun not a verb.

[ewq doesn't like the fact that "apostasian" (Acts 21:21) and "apostasia" (2Th2:3) are spelled differently, thus obliterating her "totally made up rule" ]

I'm a male, not female. What are you if "she" is not the correct pronoun?

And you are wrong that I somehow don't like a spelling. "apostasia" is the spelling in 2Th2:3. Paul did not write "apostasian" and he certainly did not write apostasis.

In Acts 21, bible hub has apostasian, and blueletterbible has both spellings but it doesn't matter, it's still the same word and not apostasis.

 

[ewq1938]

How are you defining the term "Christians"?

It only has one definition. There will be a group who followed Christ but will fall away from him in the event known as the Apostasy. The passage makes it clear that they will fall away to the man of sin otherwise known as the antichrist.

 

[ewq1938]

Just as my signature says:

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

I already explained. Rapture is a verb so this falling away from the faith is not a verb meaning no one is going up into the clouds because it's a noun not a verb.

Your reasoning makes it sound like, since "[OUR] episynagoges [UNTO HIM]" is a NOUN (the word in BLUE), that it absolutely CANNOT involve a MOVEMENT / RELOCATION / EXIT from the earth (like "SNATCH / CAUGHT UP / RAPTURE / harpazo - VERB [TO the MEETING [NOUN] of the Lord IN THE AIR]" does) simply BECAUSE it is a NOUN.

How does this make reasonable sense? I'm not seeing it.

 

[ewq1938]

Your reasoning makes it sound like, since "[OUR] episynagoges [UNTO HIM]" is a NOUN (the word in BLUE), that it absolutely CANNOT involve a MOVEMENT / RELOCATION / EXIT from the earth (like "SNATCH / CAUGHT UP / RAPTURE / harpazo [TO the MEETING [NOUN] of the Lord I THE AIR]" does) simply BECAUSE it is a NOUN.

How does this make reasonable sense? I'm not seeing it.

The gathering together is meeting Christ after the verb of rapture has taken place. It's related to rapture but isn't rapture just like the change of bodies is related to rapture but isn't the rapture.

 

[cv5]

It only has one definition. There will be a group who followed Christ but will fall away from him in the event known as the Apostasy. The passage makes it clear that they will fall away to the man of sin otherwise known as the antichrist.

There is not the slightest hint nor nuance nor warning nor threat of Christians falling prey to "apostasy" ANYWHERE in first or second Thessalonians. Nothing zero zip nada.

Furthermore the ONLY threat (which was debunked) was that of Christians suffering the predicament to be still be lingering upon the earth AFTER the DOTL had ALREADY BEGUN.

You need to get a grip and understand that there is no "apostasy" or "falling away from the faith" in first and second Thessalonians. At all. It is neither a topic of discussion nor is it a threat. It simply isn't there......

 

[ewq1938]

There is not the slightest hint nor nuance nor warning nor threat of Christians falling prey to "apostasy" ANYWHERE in first or second Thessalonians. Nothing zero zip nada.

Yes, there is. It's the main one and the only one to use the Greek word for Apostasy. Thinking the way you do is dangerous, and it's just plain dumb to think all these Greek experts and Greek sources are corrupted and wrong. Go ahead and commit Apostasia if you want to. You will regret the decision.

 

[cv5]

It only has one definition. There will be a group who followed Christ but will fall away from him in the event known as the Apostasy. The passage makes it clear that they will fall away to the man of sin otherwise known as the antichrist.

Paul makes it exceedingly excessively clear in 1Thess 5 and 2Thes 2 that the "darkness", "sudden destruction", "unrighteous deception" falls ONLY upon those who "did not receive the love of the truth"......the same "THEY" "THEM" of 1Thes 5.

These are NOT Christians......they are the unsaved by very definition.

There are absolutely no Christians in first or second Thessalonians being deceived to perdition......Paul makes it perfectly clear that it is they who are NOT deceived.

Furthermore there are absolutely no Christians "falling away" or becoming "apostate" in first or second Thessalonians. That is a figment of your florid imagination.

 

[ewq1938]

Paul makes it exceedingly excessively clear in 1Thess 5 and 2Thes 2 that the "darkness", "sudden destruction", "unrighteous deception" falls ONLY upon those who "did not receive the love of the truth"......the same "THEY" "THEM" of 1Thes 5.

These are NOT Christians......they are the unsaved by very definition.

The unsaved cannot commit Apostasy. It is speaking of Christians who don't understand the antichrist will come first and deceive as many Christians as he can and it will be a large amount. This is why bad doctrines are so very dangerous. If "Jesus" comes and says he wants to rapture you, tell him no and walk away. The fake "Jesus" will come first, long before the real one does.

 

[Jackson123]

Your mistake is in thinking that the false claim (by false conveyors) IN VERSE 2 is identical to [i.e the SAME Subject as] what PAUL was referring to IN VERSE 1.



They are not the SAME THING.

Why? Explain

 

[Jackson123]

Try to keep up. In context "the departure" has nothing whatsoever to do with the rebellion. In fact the notion and concept of apostasy or rebellion doesn't belong anywhere in Thessalonians. It's completely out of place because of the very spirit and nature of these two books.

In both of these books it is consistently clear that we are to be taken out of and away from God's wrath, which happens before the DOTL ever begins.

There is no passage all of Scripture that indicates that the Church goes through Daniels 70th week wrath/the DOTL seven year judgment.

We have already been raptured and are no longer earth dwellers by Revelation 4. The 1Thes 5 birth pangs and darkness befall...."they" and "them". They do NOT befall "ye" and "we".

Rebellion than confirmed by Man of sin. man of sin is other word of rebelion