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

[Josheb]

I see in your world the mob wins and not the Word of God.

There is not a word in that sentence that is true or correct. Please do not put words in my mouth. Please do not misrepresent my point of view. Please stay on topic.

 

[Josheb]

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

This op's view of the rapture is not the one mentioned in 1 Thes. 4:16.

1 Thessalonians 4:16
For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.

In that verse the coming of Jesus and the rising of the dead co-occur at the same time..... exactly as is portrayed in Post 3's chart. Everyone but the Dispensational Premillennialist believes scripture and necessarily understand the raising of the dead and the return of Jesus co-occur. Dispensational Premillennialism is both the normative and statistical outlier. It stands apart from what Christianity has always taught and always taught as orthodoxy.

2 Thessalonians 2:3's apostasia, is not a rapture. It's an abandonment, a renunciation, a falling away from the faith, a rebellion against Christ, not a physical departure from the earth. So, no, 2 Thes. 2:3's departure is NOT the departure mentioned in 1 Thes. 4:16. One is a defection from Christ, and the other is a meeting with Christ.

1 Thessalonians 4:17
Then we who are alive, who remain, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.

The dead first, the living next. No thousand years in between. The rapture and the second coming co-occur. What Dispensational Premillennialism teaches in contrary to the plain reading of scripture.

 

[CrowCross]

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.

You can say that when you show the greek word apostate doesn't mean departure.

 

[CrowCross]

There is not a word in that sentence that is true or correct. Please do not put words in my mouth. Please do not misrepresent my point of view. Please stay on topic.

The bible isn't expressed by consession....or what the catholic church says a word should be.

 

[CrowCross]

In that verse the coming of Jesus and the rising of the dead co-occur at the same time..... exactly as is portrayed in Post 3's chart. Everyone but the Dispensational Premillennialist believes scripture and necessarily understand the raising of the dead and the return of Jesus co-occur. Dispensational Premillennialism is both the normative and statistical outlier. It stands apart from what Christianity has always taught and always taught as orthodoxy.

No, Paul taught the pre-trib rapture in 2 Thes 2......then again you already knew that.

 

[CrowCross]

2 Thessalonians 2:3's apostasia, is not a rapture. It's an abandonment, a renunciation, a falling away from the faith, a rebellion against Christ, not a physical departure from the earth. So, no, 2 Thes. 2:3's departure is NOT the departure mentioned in 1 Thes. 4:16. One is a defection from Christ, and the other is a meeting with Christ.

So, just what is THE, THE, THE, THE rebellion? Your answer is a consistent...I don't know. YET, you know it's not a departure.

10 Because you have kept My command to persevere, I will also keep you from the hour of testing that is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth. 11I am coming soon. Hold fast to what you have, so that no one will take your crown.

I'll stick with the pre-trib correct theology....you're not going to take my crown.

 

[Tambora]

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.

^^^^^^^^^
This is correct.

It is a departure from faith in the Lord.

Throughout the Greek Septuagint apostasia is ALWAYS used as a rebellion against the Lord.
It was NEVER used as a physical departure from one place to another.

To twist the word to mean a physical departure from the planet is atrocious, and I would suggest using a source from biblical Greek scholars instead of internet preachers.

 

[Josheb]

^^^^^^^^^
This is correct.

It is a departure from faith in the Lord.

Throughout the Greek Septuagint apostasia is ALWAYS used as a rebellion against the Lord.
It was NEVER used as a physical departure from one place to another.

To twist the word to mean a physical departure from the planet is atrocious, and I would suggest using a source from biblical Greek scholars instead of internet preachers.

There are a couple of examples where apostasia is conjugated in reference to divorce, but that would also count as a forsaking of one's religious commitment and it definitely would not support a physical departure from the planet .

 

[CrowCross]

^^^^^^^^^
This is correct.

It is a departure from faith in the Lord.

Throughout the Greek Septuagint apostasia is ALWAYS used as a rebellion against the Lord.
It was NEVER used as a physical departure from one place to another.

Always? How many times has the word been used?

The root word has 14 occurrences . In Acts 12:10 as an example we see.... the angel departed from him. This is a physical departure.

To twist the word to mean a physical departure from the planet is atrocious, and I would suggest using a source from biblical Greek scholars instead of internet preachers.

The video seen in post 19...did you watch it?....shows the way the word is used and made up as understood by biblical Greek scholars.

Do you consider the "rapture"...physical departure from the planet as atrocious? Is 1 Thes 4:16ish not the rapture?

 

[Josheb]

You can say that when you show the greek word apostate doesn't mean departure.

I did.

The bible isn't expressed by consession....or what the catholic church says a word should be.

Irrelevant. My post and position were misrepresented in Post #14, and I'd like you not to do that again.

No, Paul taught the pre-trib rapture in 2 Thes 2......then again you already knew that.

The evidence proves otherwise.

So, just what is THE, THE, THE, THE rebellion?

I have already answered that. I went through the entirety of chapters 1 and 2 to point out what and how Paul established his context. It was not physical departure from the planet. It was abandoning their faith and the teachings of the apostles regarding the day of the Lord.

Your answer is a consistent...I don't know.

I have asked you not to misrepresent my posts. The misrepresentation undermines your position, not mine, because if the best defense you have is a straw man, then that's lame. It's happened twice in this thread.

YET, you know it's not a departure.

I have allowed for the word to mean departure, a departure from the faith and the teachings of the apostles as Paul described in that epistle. It does not mean a physical departure from the earth. And this is the thrid straw man you've posted.

I'll stick with the pre-trib correct theology....you're not going to take my crown.

We know. We all know this. You're an ideologue whose allegiance to a 19th century doctrine will not be moved by facts or reason. We get it.


It's called bondage.


Sadly, there are a lot of Christians enslaved by this doctrine. I've written six ops about problems inherent in this theology and you've wonderfully proven every single one of them and demonstrated the problems to be solved. Since the thread has become circular, unnecessarily redundant, and since the lack of change has been expressed and fallacies of ad hominem and straw man employed, I take my leave of the thread. The facts in evidence should be sufficient.

 

[Arial]

Do you consider the "rapture"...physical departure from the planet as atrocious? Is 1 Thes 4:16ish not the rapture?

It is a rapture but what happens at that time? The resurrected dead in Christ rise to meet Jesus as he is returning. Those who remain alive as he is returning are caught up to meet him in the air and according to 1 Cor 15 are glorified just as the dead in Christ are.

Does Jesus go back up and the saints go back up with him? No, for it says he is returning? Does Jesus continue down and the saints continue up? No. For it says they will be with him forever .

What's left as an option? They return with him. The King's victorious army----they have overcome through the power of the King. The last enemy, death. defeated.

A pre-trib rapture followed by a seven year tribulation, followed by a thousand year earthly reign of Christ in Jerusalem, will not fit that picture. No matter how one tries to make the pre-trib rapture etc. fit. It just can't be done. What dispensationalism does is divide the kingdom of God.

 

[Arial]

You can say that when you show the greek word apostate doesn't mean departure.

In 2 Thess 2:3 translations vary. The Geneva Bible "departure". BereanSB, ESV, NIV, NLV, "rebellion". KJV, NKJV, "falling away". NASB "apostasy". And so on.

Am. Heritage DIctionary---Apostacy: An abandonment of what one has voluntarily professed. a total desertion of departure from one's faith, principles or party; esp. the renucniciation of a religious faith.

Which is most consistent with the following text?



3;Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion (apostasy, departure) comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,who 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. 5Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 7For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 8And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming.


None are incorrect, but "rebellion" best suits what we see in the content, which is a violent rebellion, the last and final attempt to "win the Wars" by Satan. It is much akin to Psalm 2 and all those who rage against God. It will include those who abandon their professed faith, but the use of "apostasy" tends to set the focus on that aspect and not the larger picture. "Departure" would be applied in the same way as apostasy. What none of them would even remotely imply is a pre-trib removal of all Christians from the earth. The idea is utterly alien to the text.

 

[Eleanor]

All 3 describe the same event.
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.

The chapter is about the gathering, the rapture.
The Thessalonians received a fake letter saying they were in the tribulation...

FALSE. . .

Paul told them you can't be in the tribulation as you are still here.
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?
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.
Paul was saying the Lord had not returned....or you would not still be here.

Contraire. . .that would be simply repeating what they were denying, with no counter information to demonstrate their error.

Actually, what theirs above would really mean is that the Lord had returned and, not only they, but Paul was still there. . .Hardly.
That the Thessalonians would think Paul, the apostle, had missed the rapture is beyond credibility.

It's not about missing the rapture. It's about the rapture being imminent (2 Th 2:3),
as is clearly seen by his emphasis on what must occur (2 Th 2:3-8) before there will be a rapture (2 Th 2:1),
and his exhortation to get back to work instead of idly waiting for a supposedly imminent rapture (2 Th 3:10-12).

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

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 must have missed the post where you told all of us what THE rebellion will be.
Apparently I have not read it.
Paul said.....the letter was fake..you're still here. The departure hasn't occurred yet.

FALSE.

Paul said the rapture was not imminent (2 Th 2:3), not that it had not occurred.
It was not imminent because the apostasy had not yet occurred and the man of lawlessness had not yet been revealed (2 Th 1:3). Paul said that at that coming of Jesus and rapture (2 Th 1:1), Jesus will destroy the man of lawlessness (2 Th 1:8), repeating what he said in 2 Th 1:6-10.
2 Th 2 clearly and specifically teaches that the rapture will occur when Jesus comes in judgment.

 

[CrowCross]

It is a rapture but what happens at that time? The resurrected dead in Christ rise to meet Jesus as he is returning. Those who remain alive as he is returning are caught up to meet him in the air and according to 1 Cor 15 are glorified just as the dead in Christ are.

Does Jesus go back up and the saints go back up with him? No, for it says he is returning? Does Jesus continue down and the saints continue up? No. For it says they will be with him forever .

What's left as an option? They return with him. The King's victorious army----they have overcome through the power of the King. The last enemy, death. defeated.

A pre-trib rapture followed by a seven year tribulation, followed by a thousand year earthly reign of Christ in Jerusalem, will not fit that picture. No matter how one tries to make the pre-trib rapture etc. fit. It just can't be done. What dispensationalism does is divide the kingdom of God.

You completely disregard the two returns....the second return Christ is riding a white horse. Not so at the rapture or departure.

 

[CrowCross]

FALSE. . .

Contraire. . .that is merely repeating what they were denying, with no counter information to demonstrate their error.

Actually, what theirs above would really mean is that the Lord had returned and, not only they, but Paul was still there. . .Hardly.
That the Thessalonians would think Paul, the apostle, had missed the rapture is beyond credibility.

It's not about missing the rapture. It's about the rapture being imminent (2 Th 2:3),
as is clearly seen by his emphasis on what must occur (2 Th 2:3-8) before there will be a rapture (2 Th 2:1),
and his exhortation to get back to work instead of idly waiting for a supposedly imminent rapture (2 Th 3:10-12).



FALSE.

Paul said the rapture was not imminent (2 Th 2:3), not that it had not occurred.
It was not imminent because the apostasy had not yet occurred and the man of lawlessness had not yet been revealed (2 Th 1:3). Paul said that at that coming of Jesus and rapture (2 Th 1:1), Jesus will destroy the man of lawlessness (2 Th 1:8), repeating what he said in 2 Th 1:6-10.
2 Th 2 clearly and specifically teaches that the rapture will occur when Jesus comes in judgment.

Nice theory.

But you didn't show how the word doesn't mean departure.
Once you admitt the word means departure....then we can look into if it's a spiritual or physical departure.

 

[Arial]

You completely disregard the two returns....the second return Christ is riding a white horse. Not so at the rapture or departure.

When and if you learn how to read Revelation as visions that depict something, instead of picking and choosing what will be literal for your position and what will not be literal; learn the difference between literally and literalisticlly; learn that Revelation is not a chronological sequence of events;learn that it is a letter that of necessity had to make sense to it recipients; iow consider the possibility that you may be wrong and just for the sake of education and curiosity examine views that are different from the one you treasure as if your crown depended on it; then you might realize that Jesus never returns on a white horse, and that when he does return he brings the resurrected and glorified saints with him.

Until then. hold tight by all means your position, no matter how unbiblical it is. Continue to post as if it were Law and a human the law giver. There is no point for me in hearing you repeat yourself ad nauseam.

 

[Eleanor]

Nice theory.

But you didn't show how the word doesn't mean departure.

Don't have to. . .the dictionary does that.
The word means defection (desertion of professed principles or faith).

Once you admitt the word means departure....then we can look into if it's a spiritual or physical departure.

You abuse a lot of language and Scripture to get your theology.

 

[Eleanor]

You completely disregard the two returns....the second return Christ is riding a white horse. Not so at the rapture or departure.

You take as literal what is given in riddles and not clearly (i.e., prophecy, Nu 12:6-8).

 

[Mr GLee]

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


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.

Apostasy . .The hardening of one.

Therefore, not receiving the gospel rest.

Galatians 3 Calls foolish Chistian's. No god in their heart or thoughts.

 

[makesends]

Nice theory.

But you didn't show how the word doesn't mean departure.
Once you admitt the word means departure....then we can look into if it's a spiritual or physical departure.

Play the game your way??? Wondering from whom you learned that debate tactic.