To what does the APOSTASIA refer

[Ronald D Milam]

would like to show you something behind the scenes with the following observation. The debate of the meaning of APOSTASIA in 2 Thes 2:3 must take into consideration 1 Tim 4:1 where Paul uses a verb, not a noun as in 2 Thes 2:3. Here are both verses as Paul wrote them:
2 Thes 2:3
μή τις ὑμᾶς ἐξαπατήσῃ κατὰ μηδένα τρόπον· ὅτι ἐὰν μὴ ἔλθῃ ἡ ἀποστασία πρῶτον καὶ ἀποκαλυφθῇ ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας,
1 Tim 4:1
Τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα ῥητῶς λέγει ὅτι ἐν ὑστέροις καιροῖς ἀποστήσονταί τινες τῆς πίστεως,

You will note that Paul uses the verb ἀποστήσονταί when referring unambiguously to a departure from the faith. Note also that the modifier "from the faith" is needed because the verb by itself does not denote apostasy from the faith.

Note also that in 2 Thes 2:3 the articular noun ἡ ἀποστασία is used. Had Paul wanted to use a grammatical structure and lexical item to talk about the departing from the faith, he would have used the verb as he did in 1 Tim 4. What must be pointed out is that the APOSTASIA in 2 Thes 2:3 has to be an event, not a process. If this is not understood, you will be confused about what this APOSTASIA is. The APOSTASIA and the man of lawlessness are both instantaneous events. In fact, one thing the APOSTASIA is not is a progressive happening. For example, Jude 3,4 tell of a departure from the faith, it happens over time, which would not be an event that is recognizable when it occurs.

So, 2 Thes 2:3 the APOSTASIA is a point in time event that is recognizable. Had Paul wanted to indicate it was a departure from the faith, he would have used the verb, not the noun.


It is for this reason, along with other important points, that ἡ ἀποστασία is a direct reference to the Pre-Trib Rapture. The importance of what was stated in this brief letter is to show that the APOSTASIA is an event, not something in progress, and that Paul uses the verb in 1 Tim 4:1.
I would be interested in other Pre-Tribbers thoughts on this.

My blog of 8 or so years ago destroys this whole thesis that Thess. 2:2 proves a post/mid trib. rapture.

Is the Falling Away a False Teaching?

I have evolved with much study on this. I used to argue to all that there had to be this great Falling Away also. All because of this one passage. 2 Thessalonians 2:3. I do agree that the world gets far more evil towards the end (now), as foretold in Romans chapter 1, and as Peter said, there will be scoffers in the last days etc. etc. But I do not think the true church can “Fall Away”, either you are of Christ/God or you are not, and will get left behind by the Bridegroom. Anyway, here is my understanding of 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

“Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction…” – 2 Thessalonians 2:3 (NASB) This verse is used by many and they say it implies a “Falling Away” from the faith(apostacy). But a guy named Tommy Ice has shed some exceptional light on this passage.

Mr. Ice has pointed out that the Greek noun, apostasia, is used only twice in the new testament. The other occurrence is in Acts 21:21 where it states that an accusation was made against Paul that he was “teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake [apostasia] Moses.”

The word is used in verb form a total of 15 times in the new testament, and only three of these have anything to do with a departure from the faith (Luke 8:13, 1 Timothy 4:1, and Hebrews 3:12). In other settings, the word is used for departing from iniquity (2 Timothy 2:19), departing from ungodly men (1 Timothy 6:5), departing from the temple (Luke 2:27), departing from the body (2 Corinthians 12:8), and departing from persons (Acts 12:10 and Luke 4:13).

This insight about the use and meaning of the word was certainly compelling, but the argument Mr. Ice presented that was most convincing was his revelation that the first seven English translations of the Bible rendered the noun, apostasia, as either “departure” or “departing.”

They were as follows:

1.The Wycliffe Bible (1384)
2.The Tyndale Bible (1526)
3. The Coverdale Bible (1535)
4. The Cranmer Bible (1539)
5. The Great Bible (1540)
6. The Beeches Bible (1576)
7. The Geneva Bible (1608)

Mr. Ice also noted that the Bible used by the Western world from 400 AD to the 1500s — Jerome’s Latin translation known as “The Vulgate” — rendered apostasia with the Latin word, discessio, which means “departure.” The first translation of the word to mean apostasy in an English bible did not occur until 1611 when the King James Version was issued. So, why did the King James translators introduce a completely new rendering of the word as “falling away”? The best guess is that they were taking a stab at the false teachings of Catholicism.

One other point Mr. Ice made that I think is significant is that Paul used a definite article with the word apostasia. The significance of this is emphasized by Daniel Davey in a thesis he wrote for the Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary:

Since the Greek language does not need an article to make the noun definite, it becomes clear that with the usage of the article, reference is being made to something in particular. In 2 Thessalonians 2:3 the word apostasia is prefaced by the definite article which means that Paul is pointing to a particular type of departure clearly known to the Thessalonian church.

In light of this grammatical point, Tommy observed that “the use of the definite article would support the notion that Paul spoke of a clear, discernible notion.” And that notion he had already identified in verse 1 when he stated that he was writing about “our gathering together to Him [Jesus].” This interpretation also corresponds to the point that Paul makes in verses 6 and 7 where he states that the man of lawlessness will not come until what “restrains” him “is taken out of the way.”

And what it is that restrains evil in the world today? The Holy Spirit working through the Church. I think when the Church Departs, the Anti-Christ will be free to come to power.

I do not think this has anything to do with a Falling Away. It is the Church Departing before the Anti-Christ is brought forth. The King James Bible changed the known understanding that had been around for 1500 some odd years in 1611.
------------------------------------------------------------

The Church must depart before the Day of the Lord (God's Wrath) can come, and the Anti-Christ must also be revealed before the DOTL comes. The Agreement (Dan. 9:27) and the Pre 70th week rapture both happen at the exact same time, because when Israel joins the E.U. that is The Agreement that kicks off the 70th week anger of God against Israel and the Fulness of the Gentiles [service unto God] is come in, the Pre 70th week rapture happens. Its all conjoined.

 

[covenantee]

the argument Mr. Ice presented that was most convincing

This argument?

Here is Wycliffe's translation:

2 Thessalonians 2:3
[That] No man deceive you in any manner. For but dissension come first [For no but departing away, or dissension, shall come first], and the man of sin be showed, the son of perdition,

Wycliffe defines "departing away" as dissension.

Did you know that the rapture is dissension?

In fact, the original 1382 Wycliffe translation does not even use the word "departing":

2 Thessalonians 2 1382 Wycliffe

3	No man disseyue you in ony manere. For but dissencioun come first, and the man of synne be schewid, the sonne of perdicioun,

Poor Ice T and his delusionees.

Exposed and humiliated again.

 

[ewq1938]

The word is used in verb form a total of 15 times in the new testament

False. It appears two times in the NT.

and departing from persons (Acts 12:10 and Luke 4:13)

Neither verse has the word apostasia.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

False. It appears two times in the NT.




Neither verse has the word apostasia.

Take a nap, wake up, and research it. You clearly do not understand these points its escaping you at the moment it seams. Brother Thomas Ice has not made a mistake on his power points.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Look at the difference between the passages.

"Many will depart from the faith". "The love of many shall grow cold", these are generalities that show conditions that will exist in the end of the age.

"That day will not come (the Day of the Lord) except the departure come first, and the man of sin be revealed. Both given as singular events, that without these events, the Day of the Lord cannot be said to have arrived.

Much love!

You are just assuming it's talking about a singular event. I see no basis for drawing that conclusion.

Regardless, it has to happen first before the rapture (coming of Christ and our being gathered to Him) and you deny that.

 

[KUWN]

Did any pretribber reply to this? I haven't seen it.

The Latin word used in the Vulgate is discessio, which means departure. Departure was the word used to describe the Rapture until the KJV introduced a new translation.

 

[marks]

You are just assuming it's talking about a singular event. I see no basis for drawing that conclusion.

Regardless, it has to happen first before the rapture (coming of Christ and our being gathered to Him) and you deny that.

"the departure", it's written as a singular act.

Much love!

 

[covenantee]

The Latin word used in the Vulgate is discessio, which means departure. Departure was the word used to describe the Rapture until the KJV introduced a new translation.

The WYC preceded the KJV by more than 200 years.

And the WYC defined the departure, that you claim is the rapture, as "dissension".

A definition of "discessio," the word used in the Vulgate, is found at this site.

Included near the end is a specific ecclesiological subdefinition:
"In the church, a separation, schism (eccl. Lat.), Vulg. Act. 21, 21; id. 2 Thes. 2, 3."

Apparently Mr. Ice didn't want to read that far.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

"the departure", it's written as a singular act.

Much love!

I disagree, but the point I'm making, that you don't seem to want to address, is that the apostasia/falling away occurs before the rapture, so it can't be a reference to the rapture.

Any unbiased person can see that Paul referenced the rapture in 2 Thessalonians verses 1, 2 and 3. In verse 1 he referred to "His coming and our being gathered to Him", which refers to the rapture. Then in verse 2 he refers to it again but gave it the label "the day of the Lord" (or "the day of Christ"). I'm sure he did that because he didn't want to have to say "His coming and our being gathered to Him" every time he referenced the day the rapture would occur. And then in verse 3 he referenced it again as "that day".

 

[covenantee]

"the departure", it's written as a singular act.

When you substitute "the rapture" for "the departure", that too is a singular event.

 

[marks]

Then in verse 2 he refers to it again but gave it the label "the day of the Lord" (or "the day of Christ").

This is the assumption that is being made, but I don't think it's correct.

The "day of Christ", or "day of the Lord", depending on which manuscript, it said to have arrived. The word used there, enesteken, "has in-stood", in the perfect tense, so this is saying the Day of Christ/Day of the Lord has arrived and is here, remains here. That's the meaning of the perfect tense, the result of the action remains.

So if "day of Christ/Lord" is refering to the rapture, the Paul is saying, "The rapture has come, it's here, it's going to be here".

However, the harpadzo is a event that occurs and then it's over. So that doesn't make a lot of sense to me that the Day of Christ/Day of the Lord would be the rapture.

He's saying here, concerning the rapture, don't be troubled because someone is telling you the Day of the Lord, a day of wrath and judgment, is here. That day won't come except the departure come first, and the man of sin be revealed.

No departure, no man of sin, then it's not the Day of the Lord.

Oh, and by the way, seeing that I have actual reasons for what I think, do you consider me biased?

Much love!

 

[KUWN]

I disagree, but the point I'm making, that you don't seem to want to address, is that the apostasia/falling away occurs before the rapture, so it can't be a reference to the rapture.

Any unbiased person can see that Paul referenced the rapture in 2 Thessalonians verses 1, 2 and 3. In verse 1 he referred to "His coming and our being gathered to Him", which refers to the rapture. Then in verse 2 he refers to it again but gave it the label "the day of the Lord" (or "the day of Christ"). I'm sure he did that because he didn't want to have to say "His coming and our being gathered to Him" every time he referenced the day the rapture would occur. And then in verse 3 he referenced it again as "that day".

What I contend is that you are saying, "the apostasia/rapture occurs before the rapture."

More clearly, you are saying that the rapture occurs before the rapture.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

This is the assumption that is being made, but I don't think it's correct.

The "day of Christ", or "day of the Lord", depending on which manuscript, it said to have arrived. The word used there, enesteken, "has in-stood", in the perfect tense, so this is saying the Day of Christ/Day of the Lord has arrived and is here, remains here. That's the meaning of the perfect tense, the result of the action remains.

So if "day of Christ/Lord" is refering to the rapture, the Paul is saying, "The rapture has come, it's here, it's going to be here".

No brother, the Day of the Lord points to the middle of the 70th week Wrath of God. Let me put it down in plain modern English, then I will translate the KJV.

Paul in his 2nd letter to the Thessalonians says"

Brothers, please do not fear that you are in God's wrath, we urgently ask you not to fear and why? Because of the Gathering unto Christ Jesus, don't you remember we told you when we was with you before about these things? How the Church must Depart before the DOTL and the Anti-Christ also must be revealed before the Day of the Lord's wrath falls onto mankind.

NOW YOU KNOW WHAT WITHOLDS the Man of Sin (A.C.) from coming forth, he will abide in the earth, until the holy spirit which binds him from coming forth by way of working through the Church, is taken out of his way when the Church DEPARTS. ( Meaning when the Fulness of the Churches service or mission is complete, there is no longer any reason for the A.C. to be hindered from coming forth, it will be him time because the 70th week starts at the Rapture of the Church.

Why do we not get an Epistle as detailed as this? Because Paul says, remember when I was with you I told you these things before? So, why would he write an in depth letter retelling them what he had taught them in person? He wouldn't, he would just say remember what I taught you when I was with you, then give a brief reminder, not a detailed walk through again.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

That day (God's Wrath) shall not come until the DEPARTURE [of the Church] and it also can not come until the Man of Sin is REVEALED, meaning both have to happen before the Wrath of God falls. Which is why Paul is rebuking them for fearing.

2 Thess. 2:1 Now we beseech(Ask URGENTLY) you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

Paul asks these Thessalonians in a urgent tone, not to fear that they are in the DOTL, but why? Well he CLEARLY SAYS WHY in vs. 1, by the COMING of the Lord Jesus Christ, AND by our Gathering (RAPTURE) unto him, that you NOT FEAR that the DOTL us at hand or upon you at that present time !! Now he says why below, but later on he says did I not tell you this when I was with you before, which is why the epistle is not as detailed, if you and I talked in depth about something, then I wrote you a letter, I am not going to write a drawn out letter about something I just went over with you, I am just going to say REMEMBER what I told you? That is why verse 3 just says DEPARTURE, they know he's talking about the RAPTURE of the Church, that's why they have no reason to fear.

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

Nowhere in this whole chapter is FAITH even discussed, but a Rapture of the Church is discussed in vs. 1 (Gathering unto Christ) so Paul says do not let any man deceive you into thinking you are now in the Wrath of God (DOTL) for that day (DOTL) can not come until these two things happen first, the coming DEPARTURE [of the Church] AND the Man of Sin (A.C.) is Revealed or is on the scene. So, why do people miss it? Because the Rapture and the Man of Sin both happen at the same time, when the A.C./Beast makes an Agreement with Israel (Israel joins the E.U. as a member state) that sets off the 70th week, thus the pre 70th week rapture of the church happens AND the Man of Sin (A.C.) is Revealed, and the DOTL is 1260 days away(the Wrath of God comes in the middle of the week, the Rapture and A.C. "Agreement or Covenant with Israel, happens at the start of the 70th week). So, BOTH those things have to come to pass before the Wrath of God comes so quit fearing you are in the DOTL that is not possible. Why because the Church will not be in the DOTL, we will be Gathered unto Christ Jesus. That's why we a seen in Rev. 4:4 and in Rev. 5:9-10 before the Seals ae even broken, and in Rev. 19 Marrying the Lamb in heaven.

4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth(BINDS) will let(BIND), until he(Holy Spirit working through the Church) be taken out of the way.

Remember I already told you that we would be GATHERED unto the Lord (Depart)before God's Wrath falls now you now what keeps the Man of Sin/Beast/A.C. from coming forth until its his time to come forth. He who binds the A.C. from coming forth will keep binding him until the Church DEPARTS. So, if the Church was going to go through the Tribulation, and we do not know when its coming, Paul would have been lying to them by saying to fear not, wouldn't he? But of course he was telling them the DOTL can not come until we the church departs this earth.

 

[KUWN]

discessĭo , ōnis, f. discedo.
I. (Very rarely), a separation of married persons, Ter. And. 3, 3, 36; “of the people into parties (with seditio),” Gell. 2, 12: “stellarum et discessiones et coetus,” separations and conjunctions, id. 14, 1, 8; cf.: “plebei a patribus, et aliae dissensiones,” Sall. H. Fragm. 1, 9 Dietsch.—
II. A going away, departure, removal.
A. In gen. (very rarely; cf. “discessus): Nonanus desolatus aliorum discessione,” Tac. A. 1, 30 fin.: “necessaria,” Macr. S. 1, 5, 3.—Far more freq.,
B. In partic.
1. Polit. t. t., a going over to any one in voting: “senatusconsultum de supplicatione per discessionem fecit,” Cic. Phil. 3, 9 fin.; Tac. A. 6, 12; Suet. Tib. 31; cf. Varr. ap. Gell. 14, 7, 12.—Esp.: discessionem facere, to make a division, i. e. to get the vote of the house by dividing it, Cic. Phil. 14, 7 fin.; Hirt. B. G. 8, 52 fin.; 8, 53; Cic. Sest. 34, 74; Tac. A. 3, 69 fin. al.—
2. In the church, a separation, schism (eccl. Lat.), Vulg. Act. 21, 21; id. 2 Thes. 2, 3.

Number I. above is used as a departure of a spouse from the other spouse. This is a good picture of the Rapture. But remember, this is used very rarely.
Number II above, this needs no explanation. This is exactly what the Rapture is.

 

[IndianaRob]

What I contend is that you are saying, "the apostasia/rapture occurs before the rapture."

More clearly, you are saying that the rapture occurs before the rapture.

The elephant in the room is the temple of God and so far I haven’t seen anybody consider that as it relates to the apostasia.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

This is the assumption that is being made, but I don't think it's correct.

The "day of Christ", or "day of the Lord", depending on which manuscript, it said to have arrived. The word used there, enesteken, "has in-stood", in the perfect tense, so this is saying the Day of Christ/Day of the Lord has arrived and is here, remains here. That's the meaning of the perfect tense, the result of the action remains.

So if "day of Christ/Lord" is refering to the rapture, the Paul is saying, "The rapture has come, it's here, it's going to be here".

No, Paul was not saying that at all. Paul was talking about what they may have heard or read that someone said that was false. Evidently, there were people trying to say that Christ's coming and our being gathered to Him (the day of Christ/the Lord) was already at hand, so Paul was telling them not to believe that if they heard or read anyone claiming that so that they wouldn't think they were suffering God's wrath and missed the rapture.

However, the harpadzo is a event that occurs and then it's over. So that doesn't make a lot of sense to me that the Day of Christ/Day of the Lord would be the rapture.

Why doesn't it make sense to you? I can't follow what you're saying at all. Please try to be more clear.

He's saying here, concerning the rapture, don't be troubled because someone is telling you the Day of the Lord, a day of wrath and judgment, is here. That day won't come except the departure come first, and the man of sin be revealed.

No, you are making it as if he was talking about two entirely different things in verses 1 and 2, which makes no sense. You make it as if he mentioned Christ's second coming and our being gathered to Him for no reason in verse 1. The reality is that He mentioned it in verse 1 and then continued discussing it in verse 2.

Wrath will come on the same day as the rapture. That's what you miss. That is what Paul taught in 1 Thess 4:14-5:3 and 2 Thess 1:7-10. You need to keep other scripture in mind when interpreting 2 Thess 2:1-3.

No departure, no man of sin, then it's not the Day of the Lord.

The day of the Lord is the day Christ returns which is when we will be gathered to Him and His wrath comes down on His enemies. That is what is indicated in 1 Thess 4:14-5:3 and in this passage as well:

2 Thessalonians 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; 10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

When else will He come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe except on the day of the rapture? This passage shows that His wrath will come down on His enemies on that same day. They will experience "sudden destruction" from which "they shall not escape" (1 Thess 5:2-3).

Oh, and by the way, seeing that I have actual reasons for what I think, do you consider me biased?

Yes, I do. I don't see any reason to try to claim that Paul completely changes the subject from Christ's coming and our being gathered to Him from 2 Thessalonians 2 verse 1 to verse 2. I don't believe anyone would do that except for the reason of doctrinal bias.

 

[Johann]

No, Paul was not saying that at all. Paul was talking about what they may have heard or read that someone said that was false. Evidently, there were people trying to say that Christ's coming and our being gathered to Him (the day of Christ/the Lord) was already at hand, so Paul was telling them not to believe that if they heard or read anyone claiming that so that they wouldn't think they were suffering God's wrath and missed the rapture.


Why doesn't it make sense to you? I can't follow what you're saying at all. Please try to be more clear.


No, you are making it as if he was talking about two entirely different things in verses 1 and 2, which makes no sense. You make it as if he mentioned Christ's second coming and our being gathered to Him for no reason in verse 1. The reality is that He mentioned it in verse 1 and then continued discussing it in verse 2.

Wrath will come on the same day as the rapture. That's what you miss. That is what Paul taught in 1 Thess 4:14-5:3 and 2 Thess 1:7-10. You need to keep other scripture in mind when interpreting 2 Thess 2:1-3.


The day of the Lord is the day Christ returns which is when we will be gathered to Him and His wrath comes down on His enemies. That is what is indicated in 1 Thess 4:14-5:3 and in this passage as well:

2 Thessalonians 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; 10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

When else will He come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe except on the day of the rapture? This passage shows that His wrath will come down on His enemies on that same day. They will experience "sudden destruction" from which "they shall not escape" (1 Thess 5:2-3).


Yes, I do. I don't see any reason to try to claim that Paul completely changes the subject from Christ's coming and our being gathered to Him from 2 Thessalonians 2 verse 1 to verse 2. I don't believe anyone would do that except for the reason of doctrinal bias.

I am right, you are wrong,
I've held the truth all along.
My doctrines stand on holy ground,
Yours, a shaky, fleeting sound.

I’ve studied hard, I’ve read it well,
My view is clear, it rings the bell.
You’ve missed the mark, lost your way,
Misreading words from page to page.

The verses bend beneath my hand,
In my beliefs, I firmly stand.
But yours? Confusion, error deep,
A thoughtless drift, a wayward leap.

Yet pause, reflect, for even so,
We both seek truths we barely know.
Could certainty, with edges bright,
Shine blinding beams, distort the light?

Perhaps in this, our prideful fight,
We both are wrong—and none are right.

J.

 

[covenantee]

Number II above, this needs no explanation. This is exactly what the Rapture is.

Your Number II above includes neither the Church nor 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

But Number II 2 above includes both the Church and 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

It describes exactly what Paul meant by the apostasy i.e. the falling away.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I am right, you are wrong,
I've held the truth all along.
My doctrines stand on holy ground,
Yours, a shaky, fleeting sound.

I’ve studied hard, I’ve read it well,
My view is clear, it rings the bell.
You’ve missed the mark, lost your way,
Misreading words from page to page.

The verses bend beneath my hand,
In my beliefs, I firmly stand.
But yours? Confusion, error deep,
A thoughtless drift, a wayward leap.

Yet pause, reflect, for even so,
We both seek truths we barely know.
Could certainty, with edges bright,
Shine blinding beams, distort the light?

Perhaps in this, our prideful fight,
We both are wrong—and none are right.

J.

Would you like to address what I said in my post or would your rather just post poetry?

 

[marks]

No, Paul was not saying that at all. Paul was talking about what they may have heard or read that someone said that was false. Evidently, there were people trying to say that Christ's coming and our being gathered to Him (the day of Christ/the Lord) was already at hand, so Paul was telling them not to believe that if they heard or read anyone claiming that so that they wouldn't think they were suffering God's wrath and missed the rapture.


Why doesn't it make sense to you? I can't follow what you're saying at all. Please try to be more clear.


No, you are making it as if he was talking about two entirely different things in verses 1 and 2, which makes no sense. You make it as if he mentioned Christ's second coming and our being gathered to Him for no reason in verse 1. The reality is that He mentioned it in verse 1 and then continued discussing it in verse 2.

Wrath will come on the same day as the rapture. That's what you miss. That is what Paul taught in 1 Thess 4:14-5:3 and 2 Thess 1:7-10. You need to keep other scripture in mind when interpreting 2 Thess 2:1-3.


The day of the Lord is the day Christ returns which is when we will be gathered to Him and His wrath comes down on His enemies. That is what is indicated in 1 Thess 4:14-5:3 and in this passage as well:

2 Thessalonians 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; 10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

When else will He come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe except on the day of the rapture? This passage shows that His wrath will come down on His enemies on that same day. They will experience "sudden destruction" from which "they shall not escape" (1 Thess 5:2-3).


Yes, I do. I don't see any reason to try to claim that Paul completely changes the subject from Christ's coming and our being gathered to Him from 2 Thessalonians 2 verse 1 to verse 2. I don't believe anyone would do that except for the reason of doctrinal bias.

I never expected that we agree. I've given my thoughts on this, recognizing that we have some noteable differences in our foundations for understanding. There's no need we try to convince each other on this point. I don't think our views on this will have anything to do with our common faith.

Much love!