Yes.Are you seriously asking that question? Really???? Are you?
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.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.
How do you know they knew that, and how would they know it?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.
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.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.
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),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.
The gathering to the Lord is what happens on the day.The gathering together is the rapture when christians depart.
NO!The day spoken of is the tribulation.
No need to.I do not have time to watch it.
Yes, rebellion has always been happening.This "apostasy"...rebellion you speak of has always been happening. It doesn't fit.
Why did the KJV change it from departure to falling away?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.
You could...and I could easily pick apart and in the past using scripture have picked apart such video's.And I could make a convincing video denying the divinity of Christ. . .which demonstrates absolutely nothing.
How about the verb of apsotasia... 868. aphistémi?I have church history and Greek dictionary to give me the use and meaning of apsotasia, your revisionist theology (video) not-with-standing.
It looks like the KJV re-invented the wheel.No need to reinvent the wheel.
It says it when it places THE departure prior to the nth-christ.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.
I have no problem with that and showing how the rapture is pre-trib.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.
Or, the physical departure comes first.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---
What is wrong with the older translations? Why did the KJV all of a sudden decide to change it?You have to go to really antiquated translations to find any that say "departure" in stead of rebellion.
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?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.
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".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.
Not necessary. . .authoritative (Lk 10:16) apostolic teaching (as distinct from personal interpretation of prophetic riddles, Nu 12:6-8) has already done it.Why did the KJV change it from departure to falling away?
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..
How about it? . . ."to cause to depart, to cause to revolt (Ac 5:37),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?