I don't really "gainsay" the scholar's point regarding the "grammar," but only the "definition" he is assuming re: what v.2 tells us is the content of the false claim... it's not that the false claim consists of it being said "that THE SECOND COMING is already here / is already present [perfect indicative]"; rather, that the false claim, according to what Paul in v.2 informs of its content, is "that THE DAY OF THE LORD is already here / is already present [perfect indicative]"...
...so I think I can say I AGREE (and that's exactly what I'VE been SAYING) about the "grammar" issue he's pointing out (if I'm understanding him correctly, and I think I am)...
...however, it's not the "grammar" issue I see a problem with in his words ^ , it's the "definition" of the phrase (v.2) in what the false claim consists of ("that THE DAY OF THE LORD is already here / is already present [perfect indicative]"--not "THE SECOND COMING" that he assumes the phrase refers to--but I find that all kinds of ppl inject that "idea" into that phrase... but I've already explained in past posts why I believe "the DOTL" commences PRIOR TO the point in time of His "RETURN" to the earth at Rev19, commencing rather at the START of the 7-Trib yrs [aka the "IN THE NIGHT" aspect 1Th5:2-3 (also involving the "NIGHT WATCHES"), which PRECEDES the point in time of His Second Coming to the earth, as I've mentioned and explained elsewhere...). "Day," esp in time-prophecies regarding Israel, always start at DARK / SUNDOWN and run through DAYLIGHT of the following portion... This is how I see this long spans of time also (Trib AND MK age)
...so I think I can say I AGREE (and that's exactly what I'VE been SAYING) about the "grammar" issue he's pointing out (if I'm understanding him correctly, and I think I am)...
...however, it's not the "grammar" issue I see a problem with in his words ^ , it's the "definition" of the phrase (v.2) in what the false claim consists of ("that THE DAY OF THE LORD is already here / is already present [perfect indicative]"--not "THE SECOND COMING" that he assumes the phrase refers to--but I find that all kinds of ppl inject that "idea" into that phrase... but I've already explained in past posts why I believe "the DOTL" commences PRIOR TO the point in time of His "RETURN" to the earth at Rev19, commencing rather at the START of the 7-Trib yrs [aka the "IN THE NIGHT" aspect 1Th5:2-3 (also involving the "NIGHT WATCHES"), which PRECEDES the point in time of His Second Coming to the earth, as I've mentioned and explained elsewhere...). "Day," esp in time-prophecies regarding Israel, always start at DARK / SUNDOWN and run through DAYLIGHT of the following portion... This is how I see this long spans of time also (Trib AND MK age)
That the Day of the Lord can be in play, but the Lord has not returned, correct?
This is just not a very tenable position. It runs completely counter to the internal logic of what Paul says,
and there is no scriptural basis for this idea. Indeed the contrary.
1 Thessalonians 5:2
for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.
So it's really hard for me to see what clarity you are imparting here.