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

[Eleanor]

duplicate

 

[Arial]

Are you seriously asking that question? Really???? Are you?

Yes.

2 Thess 2:1 Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you brothers,----

3. For that day will not come, unless the departure (rebellion) comes first---

The rebellion comes first. The departure comes first. So even if "departure is used" it connects with the man of lawlessness being revealed---- And the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth.


So the "departure" is not a departure of the saints from planet earth, but a departure from something else. More aptly described in 3-12 by a rebellion. If "apostasy" is used, instead of "rebellion" as is the case in some translations, the apostasy would be all those who gnash their teeth at God and his Son, including, as will be the case, given other scriptures about a great apostasy away from the faith before the end, a winnowing out of all those who merely professed Jesus as Lord but abandoned even the profession.

Our gathering to Christ is after this titanic war. 1 Thess 4:13-17 But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. For this we declare to you by a word form the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left 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.

Do you see how the "departure", "rebellion", "apostasy" must come first---before Jesus returns and all the redeemed, dead and alive, rise to meet him in the air as he is returning, and return with him? It is a simple question and one that needs, at last, to be answered?

 

[Arial]

Paul just spoke of the rapture in verse 1. He went into more detail in the 1 Thes 4 epistle. No need to present a thorough re-cap....the departure is the gathering which is also described as the rapture. Those addressed in the letter knew that.

Yes, and he tells us something else happens first. What is that that happens first? The departure can't happen both before and after the same event.

 

[Arial]

He went into more detail in the 1 Thes 4 epistle. No need to present a thorough re-cap....the departure is the gathering which is also described as the rapture. Those addressed in the letter knew that.

How do you know they knew that, and how would they know it?

 

[makesends]

I do not have time to watch it. It comes from a dispensationalist view, which I already know. He is not going to say anything that you have not already said about "departure". He will not be able to support the dispensationalists view for it referring to a pre-trib rapture anymore than you are able to. (It simply is not in the passage or anywhere else in the scriptures and would make absolutely no sense for Paul to be saying that to people who would have no idea what he was Taking about---since he doesn't say.) Because the idea of a pre-trib rapture being in that sentence has already been debunked and you won't deal with the debunking. You simply repeat yourself as a response to the debunking.

WHY?

Thought I would mention here, my favorite Koine' authority (my Dad, a missionary seminary professor, who could 'read' 7 different modern languages, plus NT Greek, Latin and a decent amount of ancient Hebrew and Arabic, and understood how human language operates (you've probably heard me talking about his understanding of the Greek prepositions and the ludicrous nature of the mechanical use that many expositors and theologians make of them), and was thoroughly immersed in the Greek (he could read it and speak it like drinking water), he that knew every dispensational point of view and way of reasoning that made any sense in the Greek), said that if a dispensational-style 7-year trib, pre-mil, was true, that he could most easily prove (from immediately relevant texts) mid-trib, but that he believed post-trib because of so much of the force of scripture not immediately relevant --scripture concerning God's purposes and God's ways of dealing with his own and others.

He heartily prayed, "...even so, come Lord Jesus", but he believed the second coming to be imminent, only in that nobody knows the day or the hour, and in that anyone could be wrong. He did not expect to be raptured, and lo and behold, he died before the rapture! (I don't know if the fundamentalist mission board we were under figured out what he meant by 'imminent'!) A pre-trib rapture did not add up to him from Scripture, even though he was surrounded, growing up and throughout his life, by dispensationalism.

Anyhow, if HE had no comprehensive answers on the subject, I'm happy to let him do the footwork in what, as @Eleanor says, is prophetic riddles.

 

[Eleanor]

Thought I would mention here, my favorite Koine' authority (my Dad, a missionary seminary professor, who could 'read' 7 different modern languages, plus NT Greek, Latin and a decent amount of ancient Hebrew and Arabic, and understood how human language operates (you've probably heard me talking about his understanding of the Greek prepositions and the ludicrous nature of the mechanical use that many expositors and theologians make of them), and was thoroughly immersed in the Greek (he could read it and speak it like drinking water), he that knew every dispensational point of view and way of reasoning that made any sense in the Greek), said that if a dispensational-style 7,-year trib, pre-mil, was true, that he could most easily prove (from immediately relevant texts) mid-trib, but that he believed post-trib because of so much of the force of scripture not immediately relevant --scripture concerning God's purposes and God's ways of dealing with his own and others.

He heartily prayed, "...even so, come Lord Jesus", but he believed the second coming to be imminent, only in that nobody knows the day or the hour, and in that anyone could be wrong. He did not expect to be raptured, and lo and behold, he died before the rapture! (I don't know if the fundamentalist mission board we were under figured out what he meant by 'imminent'!) A pre-trib rapture did not add up to him from Scripture, even though he was surrounded, growing up and throughout his life, by dispensationalism.
Anyhow, if HE had no comprehensive answers on the subject, I'm happy to let him do the footwork in what, as @Eleanor says, is prophetic riddles.

Eleanor thinks NT apostolic teaching (1 Th 4:14-17), received in heaven (2 Co 12:1-7) as Jesus' teaching was received in heaven (Jn 3:13),
is more than clear regarding the order at the end:

second coming, resurrection (1 Th 4:16)
rapture (1 Th 4:17).

All understanding of prophetic riddles (Nu 12:6-8) must be in agreement with NT apostolic authoritative teaching (Lk 10:16).

 

[Tambora]

The gathering together is the rapture when christians depart.

The gathering to the Lord is what happens on the day.
And that day cannot happen until AFTER the apostasy (which you say is the rapture).
You are saying the day is when you say in your quote above the rapture happens.
But we know that the day cannot happen until AFTER the apostacy (which you also say is the rapture).
So basically, all you are saying is that the rapture cannot happen until after the rapture.
That's just bad theology.

The day (when the Lord gathers) cannot happen until AFTER the apostacy happens.

The day spoken of is the tribulation.

NO!
The day spoken of is when the gathering to the Lord happens.
You've already admitted that in you above quote.

 

[Tambora]

I do not have time to watch it.

No need to.
I can post videos that say it is not the rapture.
So, video swapping won't settle anything at all.

 

[Tambora]

This "apostasy"...rebellion you speak of has always been happening. It doesn't fit.

Yes, rebellion has always been happening.
So has tribulation.
We are not waiting for either to happen but are waiting for when God has had enough and His longsuffering ends (ie. the fullness of the gentiles/nations).

 

[Tambora]

Did you not read what I said about the verb of the word apostasia?

Verbs are not nouns.
Apostasia is a noun.

 

[CrowCross]

The Greek word is apostasia, which meaning can be seen throughout the history of the church; i.e., falling away, rebellion from belief. . .your revisionist meaning notwithstanding.

Why did the KJV change it from departure to falling away?

And I could make a convincing video denying the divinity of Christ. . .which demonstrates absolutely nothing.

You could...and I could easily pick apart and in the past using scripture have picked apart such video's.
You have not used the bible to pick apart the rapture occurring prior to the tribulation..

The departure referring to the gathering in the previous verse which speaks of the rapture in 1 Thes 4 13 and onward is show to occur prior to the anti-Christ being revealed and the consequent 7 year tribulation period.

I have church history and Greek dictionary to give me the use and meaning of apsotasia, your revisionist theology (video) not-with-standing.

How about the verb of apsotasia... 868. aphistémi?

 

[CrowCross]

No need to reinvent the wheel.

It looks like the KJV re-invented the wheel.

The pre-King James translations of the bible translated the Greek word "apostasia" in 2 Thes 2:3 as "departure".

Here are a few examples.

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

1539 Cramer Bible
Let no man deceaue you by eny meanes, for the Lorde shall not come excepte ther come a departynge fyrst, and that that synfull man be opened, the sonne of perdicyon,

Same is true with the 1384 Wycliffe Bible as well as the 1576 Breeches Bible, 1583 Beeze Bible.
From what I understand even Jerome in the 4th century translation of the Latin Vulgate used the latin word for departure.

Why did the 1611 King James translators change "departure" to the term....'Falling away"?

2 Thes 2:3 KJV....Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

 

[CrowCross]

But the gathering is no where said to pertain to a pre-trib rapture, gathering, departure, however you want to say it. That is what you must establish as being the case. And not with edicts of truth being whatever you say, or with preconceived beliefs.

It says it when it places THE departure prior to the nth-christ.
Other verses tell us christians are not destined for wrath and that they will escape the hour of testing.

Throw in the day's of Noah and the white horse...Jesus speaking of the mansions compared to the Jewish engagement and marriage and the pretrib rapture comes clearly into focus.

 

[CrowCross]

Verbs are not nouns.
Apostasia is a noun.

...OK??????

 

[CrowCross]

No, I think it means just what it says in 1 Thess. The dead in Christ resurrected and those who remain alive, glorified, rising to meet him as he returns. I have gone over this at least three times and as yet you have failed to address it or even acknowledge that it was said. So, no you have not established any such thing as a pre-trib rapture. The anti-Christ appears prior to Christ's return.

I have no problem with that and showing how the rapture is pre-trib.

Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day (Christ's return)will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction---

Or, the physical departure comes first.

You have to go to really antiquated translations to find any that say "departure" in stead of rebellion.

What is wrong with the older translations? Why did the KJV all of a sudden decide to change it?
Personally I think it has to do with the protestant movement of that day.

And even those that use "falling away" or "apostasy" are not giving an accurate description of what is meant. Why? Because it is a rebellion that is described in the rest of that sentence and what follows. In order for it to be a pre-trib rapture the idea would have had to come completely out of the blue, no where else described or mentioned in Scripture.

No one says there will be no rebellion....in fact rebellions have always been happening. What is so special about THE rebellion mentioned in verse 3?

If he is returning in 1 Thess and the resurrected dead and the glorified who remain alive have risen to meet him, they must return with him, for it says they will remain with him forever, and he is coming, and what we see in 2 Thess 2:3 onward would have already happened. Including the anti-christ being destroyed. Revelation is not a chronological seven year event. You say "departure" in verse 3 is talking about the rapture and a pre-trib rapture at that, and you have not demonstrated that either of those things are correct Bible' interpretation. It has been shown that it can't be.

When Jesus comes back at the rapture He will be with the spirits of those who have led and they will be reunited with their bodies in the "Graves".

 

[Eleanor]

Why did the KJV change it from departure to falling away?

Why do you not see that "departure" from the faith and "falling away" from the faith are the same thing?

You could...and I could easily pick apart and in the past using scripture have picked apart such video's.
You have not used the bible to pick apart the rapture occurring prior to the tribulation..

The "tribulation" is the church age (Jn 16:33, 15:18-21, 2 Tim 3:12, Ac 14:22) of Rev 20 which church age, according to apostolic authoritative teaching (as distinct from personal interpretation of prophetic riddles, Nu 12:6-8), occurs before the rapture (1 Th 4:16-17).

The order at the end:
second coming, resurrection (1 Th 4:16)
rapture (1 Th 4:17).

The departure referring to the gathering in the previous verse which speaks of the rapture in 1 Thes 4 13 and onward is show to occur prior to the anti-Christ being revealed and the consequent 7 year tribulation period.

How about the verb of apsotasia... 868. aphistémi?

How about it? . . ."to cause to depart, to cause to revolt (Ac 5:37),
to stand off, or aloof, or to depart from anyone (Lk 4:13, 13:27, Act 5:38--refrain from), 12:10, 15:38, 19:9, 22:29, 2 Co 12:8)
withdraw from;" i.e., to fall away, to apostasize (Lk 8:13, Tim 4:1), falling away (Heb 3:12).

The rapture (harpazo) is not a falling away, harpazo is a "catching up."

 

[Arial]

I have no problem with that and showing how the rapture is pre-trib.

It flat out denies a pre-trib rapture, especially when connected with Paul's other letter to the same church in 2 Thess. You seem to have difficulty following "time lines".

Or, the physical departure comes first.

There is no physical departure first. It says plainly that there is not. "This will not happen until this happens first" is the organizational thrust.

What is wrong with the older translations? Why did the KJV all of a sudden decide to change it?
Personally I think it has to do with the protestant movement of that day.

Haven't we already gone over that? Check out when the idea of a pre-trib rapture first came on the scene. Though there were a couple of views of the tribulation in the 19th century it was John Darby who popularize his version of a pre-trib rapture in 1830.

Now look at the dates of the translations that use "departure" in that passage.

All are from the 1500's. A pre-trib rapture was not even on their radar. So they did not mean what you mean. They were not using "departure" as a pre-trib rapture.

No one says there will be no rebellion....in fact rebellions have always been happening. What is so special about THE rebellion mentioned in verse 3?

Read the scripture and you will see. Check your own beliefs and see that you too are calling it a specific rebellion and name it a seven year period before Christ returns. It is distinguished from all other rebellion by the man of lawlessness being revealed and Christ destroying him and all who rebellion against the King.

When Jesus comes back at the rapture He will be with the spirits of those who have led and they will be reunited with their bodies in the "Graves".

There are a couple of very confusing things in that sentence. "the spirits of those who have led" and "in the "Graves". The rapture is shown in 1 Thess 4. Again I bring it to your attention. The dead in Christ resurrected "in glory" (glorified) and those who are alive, glorified, rise to meet him in the air and they will be with him forever. So if that is Christ's coming and his people rise to meet him in the air, what happens to them as he continues down?

 

[Eleanor]

It looks like the KJV re-invented the wheel.

The pre-King James translations of the bible translated the Greek word "apostasia" in 2 Thes 2:3 as "departure".

Again. . .it is a "departure" from the faith.

Check out church history's use of the word, it means "departure" (rebellion, falling away) from the faith.

Do your homework.

 

[Arial]

It says it when it places THE departure prior to the nth-christ.

Already debunked an nth amount of times.

Other verses tell us christians are not destined for wrath and that they will escape the hour of testing.

Christians aren't destined for the wrath of God against them. Do you think that when Jesus tells his disciples that they will suffer and be persecuted; and that when the apostles tell us that trials, and tribulations, and suffering and persecution will be a part of the Christian life, that is God's wrath against coming against us?

Rev 3: 7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write--10. Because you have kept my word about patience endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell on the earth.

Do you think that when Peter was crucified upside down, when Polycarp was burned at the stake for refusing to deny Christ, that that was the wrath of God against them?

Throw in the day's of Noah and the white horse...Jesus speaking of the mansions compared to the Jewish engagement and marriage and the pretrib rapture comes clearly into focus.

Are all the days under the sun like the days of Noah. Marrying and being given in marriage, going to work, coming home, a time for planting, a time for harvest, a time to laugh, a time to weep, etc.

When Jesus ascends into Heaven, what does the angel tell the disciples about his return? Anything about a white horse? When Paul describes his return in 1 Thess anything about a white horse? When John mentions a white horse in connection to his return, is he describing a vision that is using representations? I don't even know what you mean by "Jesus speaking of the Jewish engagement and marriage" in the context of a pre-trib rapture. What comes clearly into focus is someone grasping at straws to try and make something exist that doesn't exist.

 

[Tambora]

How about the verb of apsotasia... 868. aphistémi?

Verbs are not nouns and their meanings can vary greatly.

For instance:

I will run the marathon. (verb)​

I have a run in my stockings. (noun)​

Both have completely different meanings.