Re: apostasia

From: dixonps@juno.com
Date: Mon May 08 2000 - 12:23:09 EDT


On Mon, 8 May 2000 04:59:57 -0700 Robert W Meyers <bwmeyers@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

---
B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Feb 11 2002 - 18:39:47 EST