@selahsays , In your post #17, you say,
Well, selahsays that the Antichrist comes before the Second Coming of our Messiah. Here's why:
ALL of us here (representing the various rapture-timing viewpoints) believe that ^
(however, take into consideration that "Second Coming" is not actually a biblical term from scripture itself, but rather is a term that is supposed to aid in our discussions... to distinguish it from our references when speaking about when He had come to earth to be born, and His earthly ministry leading up to the Cross--which people often term His "First Coming / Advent" [also a phrase not used in scripture]--These CAN serve as helpful aids in discussing these things, but can also muddy some things as well ).
Also, the Thessalonians did not have trouble understanding that fact (AC before Christ's 2nd Coming to the earth), and would not have required Paul to have written them a letter to explain such a thing. In his first letter to them, Paul had acknowledged that the Thessalonians "KNOW PERFECTLY" that the ARRIVAL of "the day of the Lord" shall come "like a thief IN THE NIGHT," and which Paul explains will be "exactly like" the INITIAL "birth pang" that comes upon a woman with child (and that those are lead-ups to His "Second Coming" [to the earth], as we term it today, i.e. His "RETURN" to the earth--at Rev19).
But your "explanation" of what Paul is conveying in 2Th2, does not make sense of the text.
Here's some of why:
If that interpretation is accurate, why would Paul find it necessary to say the following:
"That ye be not soon [quickly]
SHAKEN IN MIND [agitated / disturbed in mind], or be
TROUBLED [disturbed / alarmed / thrown into a 'emotional uproar,' i.e. very upset (alarmed, startled); wanting to 'cry aloud, scream (passive) because terrified'],
neither by [by means of] spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as [purporting to be] from us
as that [purporting that / saying that] the
day of Christ / rapture
is at hand / is near / is soon to take place"
For one, ^ this makes no sense for Paul to be expressing such a thing...
for Paul to suggest that such a response on their part from hearing [thinking] such a claim, seems ill-fitting and extremely unlikely (esp. given what we've just read about the Thessalonians in 1:3-4);
Secondly, it neglects to take into consideration that the false claim is saying something "IS PRESENT" (
perfect indicative; "perfect tense" meaning, had started at some point IN PAST...; NOT that something was "at hand / near / soon to occur"
but hadn't yet);
Thirdly, there are something like 27 versions that have it (v.2) as
"the day of the Lord" [i.e. the earthly-located time-period of much duration,
including JUDGMENTS unfolding upon the earth, and including the period of "blessings" on the earth which follow the judgments],
rather than "the day of Christ" [when we/the Church which is His body will be UP THERE "WITH [G4862 - UNIONed-with] Him"--a thing for which we are "eagerly awaiting" in anticipation (
like the betrothed bride does), and which, for Paul to be saying anything about their supposedly being
"ALARMED" by such a claim or thought (
exhorting them not to be) seems to be thoroughly unfit with the rest of the context];
And lastly, recall, the claim (v.2) is that "[it] is ALREADY PRESENT [
perfect indicative;
transitive verb (in Grk)]," so for it to have been something that Paul understood would naturally be an
"ALARMING" idea for them (
read: believable and convincing rather than something far-fetched with absolutely ZERO evidence in their surroundings / experience / eyesight), the claim would better fit the context as saying:
--"purporting that [THE TRIBULATION PERIOD] is present" (given what we're told in 2Th1:4 about their present and VERY REAL [and very
negative] experiences: "the persections and tribulaTION
S ye endure")
--rather than as saying, "that [THE RAPTURE] is present / has taken place" (i.e. zero evidence... zero ppl in their sphere had disappeared... a far-fetched claim with absolutely zero evidence to have elicited such a reaction of being "ALARMED" and no reason for Paul to have thought to caution regarding such a thing).
Again, "IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE" (not "is at hand / soon to take place")... this is what the "perfect indicative" (and transitive verb) conveys.
The interpretation you are suggesting, does not adequately "explain" the wording in verse 2 (about the false claim), as I see it...
... nor to well explain the remainder of Paul's "why"--what follows on, in the text:
"[3] ... because
it/DOTL[/TRIB--v.2] will not be present, if not shall have come" ONE THING "
*FIRST*" ['
THE DEPARTURE *FIRST*'--the one Paul just spoke of
in v.1!]... and [
distinctly / consequently] the man of sin be revealed..."[and that's at Seal #1, the "kick-off" of the earthly-located
judgments in Tribulation Period, same point as the first of "the beginning of birth pangs" i.e. Matt24:4/Mk13:5 "G5100 -
tis - 'A CERTAIN ONE" (aka the "whose coming" of man of sin / AC / SEAL #1)];
Paul repeats THIS SEQUENCE [between these 2 distinct things] THREE TIMES in this text.
[The Departure / our Rapture
*FIRST* before the DOTL / TRIB can be "present" unfolding upon the earth with its JUDGMENTS (including "the man of sin" "IN HIS TIME," i.e. the "IN THE NIGHT" time-period)]