Who said this?

[KUWN]

What most do not realize is that from the time Jerome translated the New Testament into Latin in the fourth century to the time of the KJV, there was an unbroken record of apostasia being translated “departing.” To our knowledge, no one in the early church and up to the early seventeenth century saw that word as meaning anything else. We can therefore conclude that is the correct translation, and in all probability, is the original meaning of the word. This cements the idea that the rapture will precede the Tribulation and the revelation of the “man of sin, the son of perdition.” It also makes it understandable then that until the KJV translators arrived on the scene, virtually all known ancient translators believed likewise. Until someone can give a convincing reason why the first seven translators of the Greek New Testament into English were wrong to use the word “departing,” we are justified in believing they were correct to do so.

 

[IndianaRob]

What most do not realize is that from the time Jerome translated the New Testament into Latin in the fourth century to the time of the KJV, there was an unbroken record of apostasia being translated “departing.” To our knowledge, no one in the early church and up to the early seventeenth century saw that word as meaning anything else. We can therefore conclude that is the correct translation, and in all probability, is the original meaning of the word. This cements the idea that the rapture will precede the Tribulation and the revelation of the “man of sin, the son of perdition.” It also makes it understandable then that until the KJV translators arrived on the scene, virtually all known ancient translators believed likewise. Until someone can give a convincing reason why the first seven translators of the Greek New Testament into English were wrong to use the word “departing,” we are justified in believing they were correct to do so.

The King James translators changed the wording to make the passage easier to understand while still staying within the definition of apostasia.

The King James Bible translators knew the day of Christ wasn’t the day of the Lord and they knew the temple of God was the body of the believer.

 

[tailgator]

What most do not realize is that from the time Jerome translated the New Testament into Latin in the fourth century to the time of the KJV, there was an unbroken record of apostasia being translated “departing.” To our knowledge, no one in the early church and up to the early seventeenth century saw that word as meaning anything else. We can therefore conclude that is the correct translation, and in all probability, is the original meaning of the word. This cements the idea that the rapture will precede the Tribulation and the revelation of the “man of sin, the son of perdition.” It also makes it understandable then that until the KJV translators arrived on the scene, virtually all known ancient translators believed likewise. Until someone can give a convincing reason why the first seven translators of the Greek New Testament into English were wrong to use the word “departing,” we are justified in believing they were correct to do so.

Let's keep it in context






2 Thes 2
2 Now we beseech 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.

3 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;





1-First ,the falling away or departing
2-Then ,the man of sin is revealed
3-Last ,the coming of our Lord and our gathering together to him.Lord destroys man of sin with the brightness of his coming.