apostasia

dixonps at juno.com dixonps at juno.com
Mon May 8 12:23:09 EDT 2000




On Mon, 8 May 2000 04:59:57 -0700 Robert W Meyers <bwmeyers at juno.com>
writes:
> Would not the article most naturally refer to the context,
> the first verse of the chapter, "our gathering together 
> unto Him?"
> 
> Kenneth Wuest renders he apostasia in 2 Thess. 2:3 as:
> "the aforementioned departure" referring to vs. 1.
> 
> It would seem to me that the "rebellion" interpretation is
> contextual nonsense.  There is no precedent for such
> a rebellion, at this stage, in the Pauline revelation; and
> since "rebellions" are so common throughout all time,
> it would be far to nebulous to have any real meaning
> to the comfort of the Thessalonians.

The problem with taking hH APOSTASIS in 2 Thess 2:3 as a reference to
"the aforementioned departure" of v. 1 is that this would render Paul's
argument nonsensical, double-talk.  He would then be saying:
concerning the departure (v. 1), that will not occur until the departure
takes place first (v. 3).  Huh?

Paul Dixon



More information about the B-Greek mailing list