Does "apostasy" mean "departure" which means "rapture"?

[CrowCross]

1Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, 2not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.

For that day will not come, unless the DEPARTURE comes first,

According to Paul, the day of the Lord will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the lawless man is revealed. If there is no apostasy, then there will be no day of the Lord. That is the literal reading of the text. Any and all attempts to change what is literally states into some other meaning is an example of hypocrisy,

So, apostasy...just what does the word mean?

The meaning of the word refers to ... "to stand away" or "to depart." I copied that directly from Strongs 646. apostasia

The question is....does depart mean a spiritual departure or a physical spatial departure? Or can it refer to BOTH?

Concerning a physical departure the word apostasia is derived from the word aphistémi. Acts 12:10 uses this word as follows
"and they went out, and passed on through one street; and forthwith the angel departed from him." This departure wasn't a spiritual departure but rather a physical departure.

Considering the make up of the word can refer to both a spiritual or physical departure we need to look at the subject or text of 2 Thes 2.

But first, will you agree the word can refer to a spiritual departure or a physical spatial departure.

 

[Josheb]

So, apostasy...just what does the word mean?

The word "apostasy" means "an abandonment or renunciation of religious or political belief," "an act of refusing to continue to follow, obey, or recognize a religious faith," or "an abandonment of previous loyalty."

The meaning of the word refers to ... "to stand away" or "to depart." I copied that directly from Strongs 646. apostasia

This is an example of the hypocrisy, dissociative living, lack of integrity, and lack of accountability I've described in my ops. Strong's G646 does NOT state "apostasia" means depart. What is states is the word's....

• Definition: Apostasy, rebellion, defection, falling away
• Meaning: defection, apostasy, revolt.

AND THEN it states the word "aphistēmi" means depart. The word apostasia is not the word aphistemi. In English the words "skirt" and "shirt" have the same root etymology. The same is true of the words "canon," and "cannon." The same is true for the words degenerate, genitalia, gentleman, and genuine, but a person would have to be fool to say genitalia is synonymous with degenerate or gender is synonymous with generic.

The question is....does depart mean a spiritual departure or a physical spatial departure? Or can it refer to BOTH?

As I told you in the other thread, the word "apostasia" is used five times in the New Testament and NONE of them mean depart. What Dispensationalism has done is to say all the precedents of other scriptures are meaningless and it is perfectly reasonable and sound to invent a new and completely different meaning for this one use of apostasia.

It is delusional.

It's not just delusional to ignore the facts of other scripture and Strong's to invent a meaning that fits one's doctrine, it's completely disingenuous to pretend this information wasn't already provided specifically to you for your edification and ask the question as if you don't already know the answer.

But first, will you agree the word can refer to a spiritual departure or a physical spatial departure.

Already answered this request, too. No, I will not agree. That interpretation does NOT fit the literal meaning of the word, text, the context, or the uniform use of the term elsewhere in scripture. All of those conditions overtly prohibit the Dispensationalism interpretation. I hope that is plain enough for you.


Now, without beating around the bush.....

1. Why have you posted an op asking about matters when you've already been provided the answers?
2. Why is it you're ignoring the facts in evidence?
3. Will you acknowledge that ONLY Dispensational Premillennialism has this problem of making the 2 Thes. 2:3's apostasia mean a separated rapture?

That last one ought to be easy because it's a simple yes or no inquiry. Just post a plain, simply, direct, unequivocal "Yes," or "No." I'll even post a chart proving the uniqueness of DPism written by a DPist (see the next post)..

 

[Josheb]

Here's the chart. It's taken from The Rose Guide to End-Times Prophecy. It's written by Dispensational Premillennialist Timothy Paul Jones and fellow Dispies David Gunderson and Benjamin Galen. This the chart's source is easily verified with a simple Google search.
.

The is a fairly well-done comparative work. It's clearly biased toward DPism, but they've done a reasonably fair job correctly presenting alternative views. You will note that the third row asks, "Do the rapture and the second coming of Christ occur at the same time?" and only Dispensational Premillennialism answers in the affirmative. DPism reaches this position by twisting verses like 2 Thes. 2:3 to fit its doctrine.

Doctrine is supposed to bend to fit scripture, not the other way around.


I answered your question. Please now answer mine: Will you acknowledge the facts in evidence?
.

 

[CrowCross]

The word "apostasy" means "an abandonment or renunciation of religious or political belief," "an act of refusing to continue to follow, obey, or recognize a religious faith," or "an abandonment of previous loyalty."

This is an example of the hypocrisy, dissociative living, lack of integrity, and lack of accountability I've described in my ops. Strong's G646 does NOT state "apostasia" means depart. What is states is the word's....

• Definition: Apostasy, rebellion, defection, falling away
• Meaning: defection, apostasy, revolt.

AND THEN it states the word "aphistēmi" means depart. The word apostasia is not the word aphistemi. In English the words "skirt" and "shirt" have the same root etymology. The same is true of the words "canon," and "cannon." The same is true for the words degenerate, genitalia, gentleman, and genuine, but a person would have to be fool to say genitalia is synonymous with degenerate or gender is synonymous with generic.

As I told you in the other thread, the word "apostasia" is used five times in the New Testament and NONE of them mean depart. What Dispensationalism has done is to say all the precedents of other scriptures are meaningless and it is perfectly reasonable and sound to invent a new and completely different meaning for this one use of apostasia.

It is delusional.

It's not just delusional to ignore the facts of other scripture and Strong's to invent a meaning that fits one's doctrine, it's completely disingenuous to pretend this information wasn't already provided specifically to you for your edification and ask the question as if you don't already know the answer.

Already answered this request, too. No, I will not agree. That interpretation does NOT fit the literal meaning of the word, text, the context, or the uniform use of the term elsewhere in scripture. All of those conditions overtly prohibit the Dispensationalism interpretation. I hope that is plain enough for you.


Now, without beating around the bush.....

1. Why have you posted an op asking about matters when you've already been provided the answers?
2. Why is it you're ignoring the facts in evidence?
3. Will you acknowledge that ONLY Dispensational Premillennialism has this problem of making the 2 Thes. 2:3's apostasia mean a separated rapture?

That last one ought to be easy because it's a simple yes or no inquiry. Just post a plain, simply, direct, unequivocal "Yes," or "No." I'll even post a chart proving the uniqueness of DPism written by a DPist (see the next post)..

Yikes, a lot of nothing as I read it.

I have shown where the word means "stand away" or to "depart".
Word Origin: Derived from ἀφίστημι (aphistēmi), meaning "to stand away" or "to depart."
When you go back to the root word you can't simply disregard the meaning I have shown you. Especially when the subject of the text is used to interpret the word.

What you haven't done is explain just what THE apostasy is. According to your description there has been apostasy going on for thousands of years...thousands!...yet you claim it hasn't happen yet? So, just what is THE apostasy that causes just about all to loose faith then the anti-christ is revealed?

The apostasy is an EVENT. Just like the revealing of the Anti-Christ is an event.

The people gathered in 2 Thes 2:1 ....depart. Just as the word was translated in the early bibles.

 

[CrowCross]

DPism reaches this position by twisting verses like 2 Thes. 2:3 to fit its doctrine.

Just how do they twist those verses???

My post has shown the word apostasy has been and can be translated as depart.

Now, you may say the departure is a spiritual departure.....but, as I have shown in previous post the same root of the word shows a physical departure. Just as in Acts 12:10... "the angel departed from him". The angel didn't disagree theologically...the angel went home.

 

[CrowCross]

Literal Standard Version
do not let anyone deceive you in any way, because if the departure may not come first, the man of lawlessness may [not] be revealed—the son of destruction,

Geneva Bible of 1587
Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition,

Coverdale Bible of 1535
Let noman disceaue you by eny meanes. For the LORDE commeth not, excepte the departynge come first, and that that Man of synne be opened, euen the sonne of perdicion,

Tyndale Bible of 1526
Let no ma deceave you by eny meanes for the lorde commeth not excepte ther come a departynge fyrst and that that synfnll man be opened ye sonne of perdicion

World English Bible
Let no one deceive you in any way. For it will not be, unless the departure comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of destruction,

 

[Arial]

For that day will not come, unless the DEPARTURE comes first,

We'll make up your mind. Are you using the word "departure" to be apostasy or the rapture?

So, apostasy...just what does the word mean?

The meaning of the word refers to ... "to stand away" or "to depart." I copied that directly from Strongs 646. apostasia

Well, before you were using the antiquated translation to support a pre-trib rapture. Now you are using it to define apostasy? Make up your mind.

The question is....does depart mean a spiritual departure or a physical spatial departure? Or can it refer to BOTH?

It can't be both as a believer cannot lose his salvation. And whether or not it is a spiritual departure is nothing less than trying to support your beliefs by bringing something into the Bible that is not there. That passage in no way indicates that what you first term "departure" as meaning the rapture, and now are equating with the apostasy, is anything but a physical visible event.

The most common translation of what you term "departure" is rebellion. Departure when it was translated as that in the Geneva Bible may have had quite a different meaning then than it does now. (Just as when the KJV is translated rightly divide the word, which today means the opposite of what we are to do, just to give an example of what I mean.) With todays understanding of "departure" that word does not in anyway fit into what Paul is saying. But rebellion does.

Look at the passage. Who is rebelling? Those opposed to God. What are they rebelling against? God and the people of God. More than anything else, that suggests a massive attack on the church of Christ. In any case, Paul is dealing with false teachers who had come into the church. The false teaching at that particular time was that Christ had already returned. Some still teach that of course, but another false teaching has come into the church concerning his return, called dispensationalism.

Considering the make up of the word can refer to both a spiritual or physical departure we need to look at the subject or text of 2 Thes 2.

Well, the subject of the text is not about Christians departing or Christians at all. It is about those opposed to Christianity in verses 3-12. And that is presented as the reason why the false teaching that the Lord had already returned was false. Verses 1-2.

 

[CrowCross]

We'll make up your mind. Are you using the word "departure" to be apostasy or the rapture?

All 3 describe the same event.

Well, before you were using the antiquated translation to support a pre-trib rapture. Now you are using it to define apostasy? Make up your mind.

What is wrong with the older translations?

From what i understand the catholic church changed the meaning of apostasy to reflect a defection from the teaching of the catholic church. In doing so they labeled the protestants as rebellious.

It can't be both as a believer cannot lose his salvation. And whether or not it is a spiritual departure is nothing less than trying to support your beliefs by bringing something into the Bible that is not there. That passage in no way indicates that what you first term "departure" as meaning the rapture, and now are equating with the apostasy, is anything but a physical visible event.

The chapter is about the gathering, the rapture.
The Thessalonians received a fake letter saying they were in the tribulation...Paul told them you can't be in the tribulation as you are still here.

The most common translation of what you term "departure" is rebellion. Departure when it was translated as that in the Geneva Bible may have had quite a different meaning then than it does now. (Just as when the KJV is translated rightly divide the word, which today means the opposite of what we are to do, just to give an example of what I mean.) With todays understanding of "departure" that word does not in anyway fit into what Paul is saying. But rebellion does.

We know what the departure is...the rapture. Tell us just what THE rebellion is that will happen just prior to THE anti-christ being revealed?

Look at the passage. Who is rebelling? Those opposed to God. What are they rebelling against? God and the people of God. More than anything else, that suggests a massive attack on the church of Christ. In any case, Paul is dealing with false teachers who had come into the church. The false teaching at that particular time was that Christ had already returned. Some still teach that of course, but another false teaching has come into the church concerning his return, called dispensationalism.

As I have said in other post departure can be physical or spiritual. You choose spiritual for no reason other than you agree with the change in the context of the scripture being presented.

Well, the subject of the text is not about Christians departing or Christians at all. It is about those opposed to Christianity in verses 3-12. And that is presented as the reason why the false teaching that the Lord had already returned was false. Verses 1-2.

Paul was saying the Lord had not returned....or you would not still be here.

 

[Josheb]

Literal Standard Version
do not let anyone deceive you in any way, because if the departure may not come first, the man of lawlessness may [not] be revealed—the son of destruction,

Geneva Bible of 1587
Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition,

Coverdale Bible of 1535
Let noman disceaue you by eny meanes. For the LORDE commeth not, excepte the departynge come first, and that that Man of synne be opened, euen the sonne of perdicion,

Tyndale Bible of 1526
Let no ma deceave you by eny meanes for the lorde commeth not excepte ther come a departynge fyrst and that that synfnll man be opened ye sonne of perdicion

World English Bible
Let no one deceive you in any way. For it will not be, unless the departure comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of destruction,

Departure from faithfulness in Christ, not departure from the planet. For every translation you can provide using "departure," I can provide three or four that use "apostasy," "rebellion," or "falling away." Even if "departure" were viable, it would be a departure from the established context of the faith, not an extra-contextual physical departure from the planet. All those translation put together do not change the fact the word "apostasia" is never used to mean a departure from the planet but is, instead, uniformly used as a word meaning forsaking or abandoning one's religious belief or commitment, not the planet. This op's handling of the "departure" simply proves Dispensationalism eisegetically injects removal from the earth where none is stated or implied. Conjugations of apostasia are used to refer to divorce or forsaking the Law of Moses. The closest use to thie op's interpretation would be the leaving (departure) of a ship from its port, not departing the planet. There is absolutely no precedent whatsoever for this op's treatment of apostasia.

Paul established his context with the opening salutation of the epistle. He wrote of perseverance and faith (vs. 1:4), pending judgment and worthiness for the kingdom (vs. 1:5), Jesus meting out retribution from heaven (vs. 1:8), his glorification of the saints (vs. 1:9). the saints' desire for goodness and the works of faith (vs. 1:11), the glorification of Christ by grace (vs. 1:12), the composure of the saints and their not abandoning the message of Christ concerning the day of the Lord due to some message other than what they'd received from the apostles. That is the established context. There's not a single explicit reference to departing from the earth - especially not in a rapture separated from the second coming.


In other words, Dispensationalism's interpretation violates ALL the rules of sound exegesis.

Nothing in Post 6 changes these facts. So, I, therefore, encourage you to examine why there exists such a strong allegiance to Dispensational Premillennialism. LOOK at how it drives your thinking and behavior. It's had the effect of never being able to answer a question immediately when asked. That's not normal. Or healthy. Think of the disciples having to ask Jesus a question over and over and over and over many times before ever receiving and answer and when he did answer the response wouldn't be an actual answer but an obfuscation or an ad hominem, non sequitur, red herring or anything but an actual answer to the question asked. What would Jesus have said if he asked anyone a question and they delayed, obfuscated and/or attacked? Dispensationalism has had the effect of training you to constantly obfuscate, delay, and chronically change topics. It's caused you to write posts where the words "soon," "near" or "at hand" are used either without definition, defined vaguely, or used with a refusal to commit to their normal, ordinary, literal meaning. The word "near" means near! That is the normal meaning of the word in its normal, everyday usage. The word apostasy means to abandon or renounce religious belief and even if the word were translated as "departure," it would be a departure from religious belief, not departure from the planet! Look at how the eschatology has caused a lack of accountability. Verses are looked at exactly as written but before they are commented on in a thread their meaning is changed and no amount of encouragement, exhortation, or correction from anyone ever has any effect. In some cases, like the separated rapture, Dispensationalism compromises long-held, historically held, orthodox Christian thought, doctrine, and practice. No one prior to the rise of modern futurism ever believed in a separated rapture, and that belief has adverse effect on other doctrines. These are all very real and legitimate problems within Dispensational Premillennialism and something as basic as a single word in a single verse brings these problems into the light.

2 Thessalonians 2:3 is not about Christians being removed from the earth prior to the great tribulation or the millennium.

 

[Josheb]

Just how do they twist those verses???

?????

I just explained it!!!

• An atypical definition of apostasia is asserted.
• A definition contrary to the normal, ordinary (literal) meaning of the word is asserted.
• A definition contrary to ALL the prior precedents.
• The definition contradicts to Dispensational hermeneutical requirement to read the text literally, as written.
• The verse is read in a manner contrary to the context established by the text.
• The interpretation is inconsistent with many other teachings of scripture.
• The definition is contrary to historical and orthodox Christian doctrine.

One of those errors would be bad enough, but the Dispensational interpretation violates ALL the rules of exegesis and it's inconsistent with its own hermeneutic. That's how the verses are twisted.

 

[Josheb]

My post has shown the word apostasy has been and can be translated as depart.

But NOT a departure from the planet.

 

[Arial]

All 3 describe the same event.

Map that out for me using the scripture. Verses 3-12.

What is wrong with the older translations?

Sometimes the meaning of words changes over time and sometimes quite radically. Certainly when you read the older ones, the spelling did.

From what i understand the catholic church changed the meaning of apostasy to reflect a defection from the teaching of the catholic church. In doing so they labeled the protestants as rebellious.

That has nothing to do with the topic or with translations.

The chapter is about the gathering, the rapture.

Not even remotely.

The Thessalonians received a fake letter saying they were in the tribulation...Paul told them you can't be in the tribulation as you are still here.

Paul does not once use the word Tribulation or anything that can be construed as a tribulation period that D'ists designate as seven years. There is no reference to a fake letter. Paul warns them not to listen to or take to heart anything they read that claims to be from him and declares that the day of the Lord had already come. (The return of Christ.) You read an awful lot into the scriptures. We are warned quite severely not to do that.

We know what the departure is...the rapture. Tell us just what THE rebellion is that will happen just prior to THE anti-christ being revealed?

I did. Perhaps you haven't read that post yet.

As I have said in other post departure can be physical or spiritual. You choose spiritual for no reason other than you agree with the change in the context of the scripture being presented.

I see now that you have read it. But it seems you did not understand one word of it. Read it again. Not only did it not say one word about either a spiritual or physical departure ---our even a departure ---but I showed exactly what that rebellion is and who is doing the rebelling. The scripture itself does that and quite clearly so it shouldn't have needed explaining at all.

Paul was saying the Lord had not returned....or you would not still be here.

That is not what he said at all. Not even a hint of it. However that would also be true but not because they had not been raptured out but because of what he said in 1 Thess and 1 Cor 15. When the Lord returns the dead in Christ will be raised (immortal) and those who remain alive will be changed (immortal) and meet him in the air and remain with him forever. What you are saying and what you claim Paul is saying and this, are incompatible.

 

[CrowCross]

Departure from faithfulness in Christ, not departure from the planet. For every translation you can provide using "departure," I can provide three or four that use "apostasy," "rebellion," or "falling away." Even if "departure" were viable, it would be a departure from the established context of the faith, not an extra-contextual physical departure from the planet. All those translation put together do not change the fact the word "apostasia" is never used to mean a departure from the planet but is, instead, uniformly used as a word meaning forsaking or abandoning one's religious belief or commitment, not the planet. This op's handling of the "departure" simply proves Dispensationalism eisegetically injects removal from the earth where none is stated or implied. Conjugations of apostasia are used to refer to divorce or forsaking the Law of Moses. The closest use to thie op's interpretation would be the leaving (departure) of a ship from its port, not departing the planet. There is absolutely no precedent whatsoever for this op's treatment of apostasia.

Are you now saying there will not be a rapture?

The rest of Joshebs post didn't apply to the OP. It was disregarded.

 

[CrowCross]

?????

I just explained it!!!

• An atypical definition of apostasia is asserted.
• A definition contrary to the normal, ordinary (literal) meaning of the word is asserted.
• A definition contrary to ALL the prior precedents.
• The definition contradicts to Dispensational hermeneutical requirement to read the text literally, as written.
• The verse is read in a manner contrary to the context established by the text.
• The interpretation is inconsistent with many other teachings of scripture.
• The definition is contrary to historical and orthodox Christian doctrine.

One of those errors would be bad enough, but the Dispensational interpretation violates ALL the rules of exegesis and it's inconsistent with its own hermeneutic. That's how the verses are twisted.

I see in your world the mob wins and not the Word of God. Which way is your narrow gate swinging?

As pointed out.....departure is a proper word to describe the event in 2 Thes 2.

I was kinda hoping you would have explained THE departure...and just what you think that event is. Will it be when the Greys come an tell us they created us instead of God?

 

[CrowCross]

But NOT a departure from the planet.

So, this departure is not the one mentioned in 1 Thes 4:16ish?

Do you know of another time the christians will be gathered?

There's a sign on the wall
But she wants to be sure
'Cause you know sometimes words have two meanings".....
Led Zeppelin

Question....when an airplane departs...is it physical or spiritual?

 

[CrowCross]

Map that out for me using the scripture. Verses 3-12.

Sometimes the meaning of words changes over time and sometimes quite radically. Certainly when you read the older ones, the spelling did.

That has nothing to do with the topic or with translations.

Yes, sometimes the words change....the modern interpretations changed the word from "stand away" to "rebellion".

My previous post briefly explain why theologians and scholors believe why that happened.
Here's what I said....From what I understand the catholic church changed the meaning of apostasy to reflect a defection from the teaching of the catholic church. In doing so they labeled the protestants as rebellious.

Not even remotely.

OK. You can make unsupported claims if you need to.

Paul does not once use the word Tribulation or anything that can be construed as a tribulation period that D'ists designate as seven years. There is no reference to a fake letter. Paul warns them not to listen to or take to heart anything they read that claims to be from him and declares that the day of the Lord had already come. (The return of Christ.) You read an awful lot into the scriptures. We are warned quite severely not to do that.

Yes, the Day of the Lord has not come. Paul told them the gathering .... departure... and revealing of the anti-christ hasn't happened yet.

I did. Perhaps you haven't read that post yet.

I must have missed the post where you told all of us what THE rebellion will be.

I see now that you have read it. But it seems you did not understand one word of it. Read it again. Not only did it not say one word about either a spiritual or physical departure ---our even a departure ---but I showed exactly what that rebellion is and who is doing the rebelling. The scripture itself does that and quite clearly so it shouldn't have needed explaining at all.

Apparently I have not read it.

That is not what he said at all. Not even a hint of it. However that would also be true but not because they had not been raptured out but because of what he said in 1 Thess and 1 Cor 15. When the Lord returns the dead in Christ will be raised (immortal) and those who remain alive will be changed (immortal) and meet him in the air and remain with him forever. What you are saying and what you claim Paul is saying and this, are incompatible.

Paul said.....the letter was fake..you're still here. The departure hasn't occurred yet.

 

[CrowCross]

I just ran across this....The semantic range of the word apostasia can allow for either type of departure: doctrinal or physical. The great falling away before Christ returns could be a reference to the wickedness of mankind or to the physical removal of believers before the day of the Lord. ref Got Questions.

 

[Arial]

Yes, sometimes the words change....the modern interpretations changed the word from "stand away" to "rebellion".

My previous post briefly explain why theologians and scholors believe why that happened.
Here's what I said....From what I understand the catholic church changed the meaning of apostasy to reflect a defection from the teaching of the catholic church. In doing so they labeled the protestants as rebellious.

Where's the MAP Crow? You completely bypassed my post with this one. Why do you do that? I know why. When someone is trying to prove something that can't be proven, they start throwing red herrings into the stream, deflecting, avoiding. and eventually insulting, nine times out of ten.

OK. You can make unsupported claims if you need to.

The scripture supports itself, which is the proper way to interpret Scripture. And I showed you exactly how it does. Which you have not addressed, just denied. More deflection.

Yes, the Day of the Lord has not come. Paul told them the gathering .... departure... and revealing of the anti-christ hasn't happened yet.

The gathering is seen in 1 Thess. The resurrected dead and those remaining alive changed, meet Him In the air. What happens with them and Jesus then? You have not even bothered to deal directly with 1 Thess. That is a sign of someone who does not want to change their beliefs no matter how much evidence is given that What they say makes no Biblical sense, and has no intention of doing so. There is no departure that you are calling the rapture. You have been shown that too.

I must have missed the post where you told all of us what THE rebellion will be.

WHy did you quote it then?

Apparently I have not read it.

And yet you quoted it.

Paul said.....the letter was fake..you're still here. The departure hasn't occurred yet.

This response also has not one thing to do with what it is quoting. Do you need to take a break? And there is no departure of believers before a seven year tribulation because there is no seven year tribulation and no rapture prior to Christ's return.

 

[Arial]

If you have time to watch this...about 47 min.....you'll see a presentaton about DEPARTURE. Dr Andy Woods.

Videos go in the video board so it has been deleted. You can repost it Where it belongs.

 

[Josheb]

Are you now saying there will not be a rapture?

The rest of Joshebs post didn't apply to the OP. It was disregarded.

I've already answered that question.

• Of the five main eschatologies in Christianity, ALL of them assert a rapture.
• Four of the five hold the rapture and the second coming co-occur.
• Only Dispensational Premillennialism separates the two.
• Dispensational Premillennialism teaches a position on the rapture completely differently and entirely irreconcilable with all other points of view, completely different than what Christianity has always believed until Dispensational Premillennialism began teaching the separated rapture, completely different than what has been held as orthodoxy for the entirety of Christianity's existence. This proven in the third row of the chart contained in Post #3.
• This op is both the normative and the statistical outlier.

No, I am not saying there will not be a rapture. Yes! There will be a rapture. Of course there will be a rapture. The rapture simply will not be what Dispensational Premillennial Dispensationalism teaches. It will be what everyone else in the entire history of Christianity teaches as orthodox. It will be what scripture teaches when scripture is properly, correctly exegeted.