How the Pre-Trib Rapture Became Popular in the Modern Church

[cv5]

Thanks for the show of humility - it's a nice change from the recent trend...

I am just a bit suprised you didn't label him with 'general'.

I do not know what his "level of scholarly achievement" is supposed to be. But, I commend him for giving honest effort to in-depth study of the scriptures - even to the extent of detail found in the original languages. Yet, I would certainly not put him on nearly as high a pedestal as you do. (or, seem to want to)

I believe he - like some others on here (all of whom I like and respect for the people that they are - or, certainly seem to be) - makes some [common] 'grammar of the language' mistakes when interpreting scripture.

It is neccessary to "balance" the 'trees' and the 'forest' when considering the overall meaning of words / phrases / verses in scripture.

If you look too closely at the trees while not keeping the forest in proper view, you can all-too-easily start [re-]defining everything - including the forest - erroneously - based strictly on the bark and the leaves - forgetting the roots and the branches.

@TheDivineWatermark - I believe this is an unfortunate "bad habit" with you. I want to encourage you to "balance" the 'scope' of your examination of the bark, leaves, roots, branches, trunk, shape, height, etc. of the trees as well as the patterns they make in the forest.


Yes, it does. And, if you can maintain humility in heart and mind, it will count for all-the-more...

Along with "always being ready to give an answer" - how about we all try to be ready to 'discuss' the matter at hand with a proper attitude that is encouraged by brotherly love in Christ - not "pulling out the weapons of war", as it were, or any such similar thing.

Thanks. I think lol.

The thing is GaryA, at the heart of the matter of 2Thes2 there is quintessential unequivocal biblical truth. I just happen to believe that you have it all wrong. And quite frankly I don't know why. I mean I "get it". Little old me. Because I "get it" I figure everyone else "gets it" too. But they don't. Even when it's laid out for them such a manner that it's really beyond debate.

I'm not a mind reader, or a heart reader for that matter. But I figure that misunderstanding these biblical truths has much to do with outright stubbornness.....or worse a darkened understanding and blindness of heart. I keep saying to myself "whaaaat?? You don't get it???" And it's true they don't get it. No matter how hard you try they just don't get it.

It is axiomatic that not all opinions are truths. IMO in this case there is one correct solution, all the rest are error.

 

[rayzor]

Definition of axiomatic

1: taken for granted : SELF-EVIDENT an axiomatic truth

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

A word being a later form of another word is same as saying a word has a root word.

No it isn't.


Saying "LATER FORM FOR [_____]" ...

...is NOT the same as saying...

... "THE ROOT FORM of [such and such] is [______]".


No.

 

[ewq1938]

No it isn't.


Saying "LATER FORM FOR [_____]" ...

...is NOT the same as saying...

... "THE ROOT FORM of [such and such] is [______]".


No.

Yes. You are wrong to force another word's definition onto a later formed word. The two words are different and have different definitions. This is dishonest and is clearly a desperate move to try to insert pretrib into a non-rapture text. It's further ridicolousness that people take a word meaning Apostasy and say they want to commit it because of this false idea that it can have definition of a different word! This is the highest form of biblical ignorance and it is very dangerous to the soul because Apostasy is serious business....lake of fire business!

 

[rayzor]

Jesus is going to take up the ones that are living after the ones that r dead.like in the days of Noah some things will seem normal.one will be taken one will be left.

 

[rayzor]

Yes. You are wrong to force another word's definition onto a later formed word. The two words are different and have different definitions. This is dishonest and is clearly a desperate move to try to insert pretrib into a non-rapture text. It's further ridicolousness that people take a word meaning Apostasy and say they want to commit it because of this false idea that it can have definition of a different word! This is the highest form of biblical ignorance and it is very dangerous to the soul because Apostasy is serious business....lake of fire business!

word change is of the curse from the tower of babel = confusion.the gentiles may continue in lack transparency because sin has them bond.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

The two words are different and have different definitions.

No they don't.

They both mean "a standing away from [away from a previous standing]" - apo stasis / apo stasia




(aka "departure"... and in the case of 2Th2:3 - "THE departure"... with the "definite article ['the']" which is not ordinarily necessary for this word and isn't used in the case of Acts 21:21; the "definite article" has a couple of FUNCTIONS, which the Wuest article [Greek scholar] I posted explains)







____________


[for the readers: see the word minus the pre-fix "apo" here and its RELATED DEFINITIONS--Note how its ninth occurrence, in the listing at the right side, is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT to its previous eight occurrences: https://biblehub.com/greek/4714.htm "STASIS" - "a STANDING" (1x); "Definition: a rebel, revolutionist; Usage: an insurrection, dissension; originally: standing, position, place." - "Strong's -[...] by implication, a popular uprising; figuratively, controversy -- dissension, insurrection, X standing, uproar." And yes, it's used only 1x in the NT in its "original" sense... it would be ODD for us to INSIST it means ONLY everything in the bold and for us to make it mean those definitions in this 1x [its ninth occurrence] in Heb9:8 [and which v.9 states of this, "which is A PARABLE for THE PRESENT TIME"<---pay careful att'n to this v.9 saying ])]

 

[walknlight]

It's a departure from Christ and faith in him. All scholars agree on this. You are wrong.

2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away (apostasia) first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

The word "falling away" is apostasia from where we get the words Apostate and Apostasy. Obviously it means a moral and spiritual "departure" not a physical departure.

G646
a?p?stas?´a
apostasia
Thayer Definition:
1) a falling away, defection, apostasy
Part of Speech: noun feminine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: feminine of the same as G647
Citing in TDNT: 1:513, 88

Total KJV occurrences: 2

The only other use of this word in the bible was people departing from the teachings of Moses which is an Apostasy from his teachings. Neither use has anything to do with simply going somewhere physically.

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; (1Ti 4:1 AV)

ἀφίστημι (aphístēmi | af-is'-tay-mee)
Derivation: from G575 and G2476;
Strong's: to remove, i.e. (actively) instigate to revolt; usually (reflexively) to desist, desert, etc.
KJV: —depart, draw (fall) away, refrain, withdraw self.
See: G575
See: G2476
Cognate Group: G646 (falling away), G1370 (division), G868 (depart)

 

[cv5]

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; (1Ti 4:1 AV)

ἀφίστημι (aphístēmi | af-is'-tay-mee)
Derivation: from G575 and G2476;
Strong's: to remove, i.e. (actively) instigate to revolt; usually (reflexively) to desist, desert, etc.
KJV: —depart, draw (fall) away, refrain, withdraw self.
See: G575
See: G2476
Cognate Group: G646 (falling away), G1370 (division), G868 (depart)

"some" (Strong's NT 5100) may be better translated as "a certain one"....
"apostesontai" may be better translated "to lead away"....

Hhmmm....[a certain one] [to lead away]
All of a sudden that passage makes a lot more sense to me....

Perhaps TDW can lend some insight into this tantalizing passage?

 

[DavidTree]

It's still the same Greek word that would mean a departure from the true faith....none of those bibles are going to be referring to the Rapture in that verse.

The LORD says: "In the mouth of two or more witnesses shall every word be established." Matt 18:16

The 'Falling Away" is a departure from the truth, which is the Gospel. It is not the lie of a pre-trib rapture.

Our LORD JESUS CHRIST said it, the Apostle Paul said it and the Apostle John said it and more.

It is for the Holy Spirit to know and for you to find out.
I'm in good with HS7 are you?

 

[walknlight]

The LORD says: "In the mouth of two or more witnesses shall every word be established." Matt 18:16
The 'Falling Away" is a departure from the truth, which is the Gospel.

Not disputing, but there are different words used.
Not wonder why?

 

[DavidTree]

Not disputing, but there are different words used.
Not wonder why?

If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

If we reject CLEAR, plain as the light of day, Scripture then disputing over words will only escalate the error/confusion.

 

[walknlight]

Hey again!

If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

If we reject CLEAR, plain as the light of day, Scripture then disputing over words will only escalate the error/confusion.

Word study is confusion? Not rejecting His word, Holy Spirit doesnt instruct in confusion.
Not all words do not mean the same thing in Bible as to Enlgish....
Study is a commandment, not a request.

Like this word sword......
swordG3162 of the Spirit
μάχαιρα (máchaira | makh'-ahee-rah)
Derivation: probably feminine of a presumed derivative of G3163;
Strong's: a knife, i.e. dirk; figuratively, war, judicial punishment

Not a rapier or broadsword, a dagger, up close and personal with the Word of God.....
The Lord asked Peter did he love Him, not the same words used.

So no confusion here,
Again, The Lord of my Salvation sorts the "garbage" and keeps in me that which is good to keep.....
God bless!

 

[DavidTree]

Hey again!

Word study is confusion? Not rejecting His word, Holy Spirit doesnt instruct in confusion.
Not all words do not mean the same thing in Bible as to Enlgish....
Study is a commandment, not a request.

Like this word sword......
swordG3162 of the Spirit
μάχαιρα (máchaira | makh'-ahee-rah)
Derivation: probably feminine of a presumed derivative of G3163;
Strong's: a knife, i.e. dirk; figuratively, war, judicial punishment

Not a rapier or broadsword, a dagger, up close and personal with the Word of God.....
The Lord asked Peter did he love Him, not the same words used.

So no confusion here,
Again, The Lord of my Salvation sorts the "garbage" and keeps in me that which is good to keep.....
God bless!

Refer back to the Scripture i posted. The confusion is when we reject what God did say and seek to do 'word studies' in an attempt to prove something HE did NOT say = perfect example is the error of pre-trib rapture and the evidence of such 'word study errors' is very clear here in some posts - i am NOT saying yours - REPEAT - iam NOT saying yours.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

"some" (Strong's NT 5100) may be better translated as "a certain one"....

Just to note (per the 1Tim4:1 passage you are referencing), it is "plural" in this verse.






[...whereas, in Matt24:4 / Mk13:5 that same word is in the "singular" ('a certain one [singular]')]

 

[rayzor]

Refer back to the Scripture i posted. The confusion is when we reject what God did say and seek to do 'word studies' in an attempt to prove something HE did NOT say = perfect example is the error of pre-trib rapture and the evidence of such 'word study errors' is very clear here in some posts - i am NOT saying yours - REPEAT - iam NOT saying yours.

DavidTree Some people are playing dumb.

 

[walknlight]

word change is of the curse from the tower of babel = confusion.the gentiles may continue in lack transparency because sin has them bond.

By the Death of our Lord and saviour those who are His are free from Babel=confusion and from Egypt= Bondage,
translated into His Kingdom

 

[DavidTree]

By the Death of our Lord and saviour those who are His are free from Babel=confusion and from Egypt= Bondage,
translated into His Kingdom

I AGREE - as long as we do not depart from Truth - Thy Word is TRUTH.

Have you discovered, in the Word, how and when God reversed the curse of Nimrod/Tower of Babel?

 

[cv5]

Just to note (per the 1Tim4:1 passage you are referencing), it is "plural" in this verse.






[...whereas, in Matt24:4 / Mk13:5 that same word is in the "singular" ('a certain one [singular]')]

Yes I see that now thanks. At first glance I thought there might've been parallelism but nope.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

A slightly different form of the same word is translated 'forsake' in Acts 21:21.

Does your bible version say 'forsake' Moses - or does it say "make a departure from Moses"...???

GaryA, "forsake" is a verb.

The word under discussion is a noun (in both Acts 21:21 and 2Th2:3).






In view of the "Strong's" definition of the word ("TO FORSAKE"),

...I ask you to consider the following (and try to answer my questions regarding this):



[H2186 (verb) - "FORSAKE" (OT - "H" Hebrew)]

"Strong’s Definitions (Strong’s Definitions Legend)
זָנַח zânach, zaw-nakh'; a primitive root meaning to push aside, i.e. reject, forsake, fail:—cast away (off), remove far away (off)."


[ ^ a verb - meaning "forsake" ^ ]







--if the argument is, that the NOUN in Acts 21:21 ("apostasia") is defined as the "VERB - TO FORSAKE" (per "Strong's"), then are you saying this is the same word as "H2186 [VERB] FORSAKE" found in 2Chron29:19 LXX Greek (translated in the kjv as 'cast away / cast out' - VERB), OR a different "noun-word" in that verse?? If so, which English word? https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2ch/29/19/ss1/s_396019 [click on "TOOLS" to see LXX Greek for that verse].

And if it ('apostasia') is not the "VERB-word" in that verse (defined as "FORSAKE [VERB; H2186]"), then why does "Strong's" DEFINE "apostasia" as the VERB-word "TO FORSAKE"?



Questions I wonder about... as to how you (or anyone else) might address this issue (esp. re: the "Strong's" definition of this "apostasia" noun-word as "TO FORSAKE [verb]")








[p.s. in my view, Acts 21:21 would better read "[you teach...] A DEPARTURE [noun] from Moses"]