So, you do realize that v.2 is speaking of what the false conveyors were saying: "the day of the Lord is here/is present [perfect indicative]"
...which is something DISTINCT FROM...
v.1's Subject ("our episynagoges UNTO HIM") that PAUL is supplying the corrective toward...
...so that, when Paul says (in v.3a) "that day will NOT be present [<--THIS PART] if not shall have come the..."
...that he is speaking to what the false conveyors were saying, by responding ABOUT THAT "day" (the one they were DECEIVING / falsely conveying about) and proceeding to explain how THAT "fits" in relation to the other.
IOW, what people TEND to do is EQUATE in their minds the Subject of v.1 and the Subject of v.2 (which are DISTINCT ITEMS), so that when they proceed to read v.3a, they read "that day will NOT be present if not shall..." and INCORRECTLY attach that to the Subject OF VERSE 1', by completely jumping clear BACK OVER v.2 (IGNORING IT) to grab v.1's Subject to explain what v.3a is starting out saying (but they are DISTINCT ITEMS!)...
...just like what Subject PAUL is bringing to the fore ['our gathering UNTO HIM' v.1 (our 'noun-event' IN THE AIR)], is COMPLETELY DISTINCT from the Subject that the false conveyors had been expressing (v.2 'the day of the Lord IS HERE,' playing out on the earth in our present experience / 'a time-period' unfolding ON THE EARTH)
Don't jump back OVER v.2 (completely BYPASSING IT) when ascertaining WHAT v.3a ('that day') is speaking about... or you'll come to a completely INCORRECT conclusion about what Paul is actually conveying in v.3.
[MAJOR GRAMMAR PROBLEM ]
...which is something DISTINCT FROM...
v.1's Subject ("our episynagoges UNTO HIM") that PAUL is supplying the corrective toward...
...so that, when Paul says (in v.3a) "that day will NOT be present [<--THIS PART] if not shall have come the..."
...that he is speaking to what the false conveyors were saying, by responding ABOUT THAT "day" (the one they were DECEIVING / falsely conveying about) and proceeding to explain how THAT "fits" in relation to the other.
IOW, what people TEND to do is EQUATE in their minds the Subject of v.1 and the Subject of v.2 (which are DISTINCT ITEMS), so that when they proceed to read v.3a, they read "that day will NOT be present if not shall..." and INCORRECTLY attach that to the Subject OF VERSE 1', by completely jumping clear BACK OVER v.2 (IGNORING IT) to grab v.1's Subject to explain what v.3a is starting out saying (but they are DISTINCT ITEMS!)...
...just like what Subject PAUL is bringing to the fore ['our gathering UNTO HIM' v.1 (our 'noun-event' IN THE AIR)], is COMPLETELY DISTINCT from the Subject that the false conveyors had been expressing (v.2 'the day of the Lord IS HERE,' playing out on the earth in our present experience / 'a time-period' unfolding ON THE EARTH)
Don't jump back OVER v.2 (completely BYPASSING IT) when ascertaining WHAT v.3a ('that day') is speaking about... or you'll come to a completely INCORRECT conclusion about what Paul is actually conveying in v.3.
[MAJOR GRAMMAR PROBLEM ]
The Greek "Apostasia" (Departure/Falling Away) isn't a Pre-Trib Rapture Of The Church To Heaven, it's that simple
Apostasia: (Defection From Truth) (Apostasy) (Falling Away) (Forsake)
Lexicon :: Strong's G646 - apostasia
Strong’s Definitions
ἀποστασία apostasía, ap-os-tas-ee'-ah; feminine of the same as G647; defection from truth (properly, the state) ("apostasy"):—falling away, forsake.
KJV Translation Count — Total: 2x
The KJV translates Strong's G646 in the following manner: to forsake (with G575) (1x), falling away (1x).
2 Thessalonians 2:3KJV
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
- Show all