The English translation of 2 Thes. 2:3 according to New American Bible, Revised Edition : >3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For unless the apostasy comes first and the lawless one is revealed, the one doomed to perdition, NAB, 2011 The Greek text of 2 Thes. 2:3 according to the Textus Receptus states, >Γ μή τις ὑμᾶς ἐξαπατήσῃ κατὰ μηδένα τρόπον ὅτι ἐὰν μὴ ἔλθῃ ἡ ἀποστασία πρῶτον καὶ ἀποκαλυφθῇ ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἁμαρτίας, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας TR, 1550 For the purpose of this question which requests an answer from Catholics, let us assume Catholicism represents the true Christian faith. 1. Has the “the apostasy” (ἡ ἀποστασία) already occurred? If so, what is it, and when did it occur? 2. If not, what criteria would the Pope and magisterium use to identify the apostasy when it occurs? 3. Has “the man of sin, the son of perditionÌ (ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἁμαρτίας, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας) been revealed? If so, who is he, and when was he revealed? 4. If not, again, what criteria would the Pope and magisterium use to identify this individual when he is revealed? *Note*: The text seems to imply that “the apostasy” is not simply one individual’s apostasy, as individuals have been apostasizing since the beginning of the Church. Rather, it appears more evident, easily discernable, not *en masse*, but certainly more than a handful of individuals apostasizing from the Catholic Church (assuming the Catholic Church is the Church, the body of Christ).

From my understanding, the pre-tribulational rapture doctrine suggests that separate terms are used for the rapture event and Christ's complete arrival at the end of the tribulation. Specifically, proponents assert that *the Day of the Lord* refers to Christ's final arrival, while a term like *the Day of Christ* pertains to the rapture event. I believe John MacArthur and others have supported this perspective, stating that *the Day of Christ* refers specifically to the rapture. I am personally very persuaded of the opposite—that these various terms actually refer to the same event, each emphasizing different aspects of it. Regardless of the broader debate, focusing specifically on *the Day of Christ*: if this term indeed refers to the rapture event, how does one reconcile the belief that the rapture occurs prior to the onset of the great tribulation in light of 2 Thessalonians 2:1–3? 2 Thessalonians 2:1–3 says: >"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 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..." I find it difficult to see how one could justify the rapture occurring prior to the tribulation when considering passages like this. If *the Day of Christ* is distinct from *the Day of the Lord*, wouldn't this passage at least suggest a mid-tribulational view of the rapture, given that Paul explicitly states *the day of Christ* will not occur until a falling away happens and the man of sin is revealed? I suspect that those with a pre-tribulational view might point to the word *"revealed"* (ἀποκαλυφθῇ) as the key to their understanding. Perhaps the argument is that the man of sin being *"revealed"* is not the same event as him taking power or standing in the Holy Place? Do they interpret this as merely his coming to existence on earth, rather than his active rebellion or defilement of the temple? By no means am I am an expert in Biblical Greek, but I find this to be an unlikely interpretation of the term/phrase. Perhaps the argument instead interprets this passage as suggesting that the rapture occurs after the falling away but before the man of sin is revealed? In other words, they might propose that Paul is stating *the Day of Christ* occurs after the falling away and the revealing of the man of sin then follows. However, there seems to be no grammatical or contextual support for this view that, as I see it. Anyway, thank you in advance for any input.

In 2 Thessalonians 2:3 and Acts 20:29 I interpret them to mean that there would be a literal apostasy of the early Christian church or is there another meaning to them that I am missing? >2 Thessalonians 2:3: 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; > > Acts 20:29: For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.

Yesterday I was asked if 2 Thessalonians 2:4 suggests that the Antichrist will sit on God’s throne in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. Speaking prophetically about “the man of sin, the son of perdition” the King James Version translates 2 Thessalonians 2:4 this way: >Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. The KJV was published (1611) before pre-millennial dispensationalism became popular in the 1830’s as promoted by J.N. Darby and Plymouth Brethren. The New International Version speaks of “the man of lawlessness, the man doomed to destruction” who will set himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God. The NIV comment says God’s temple “apparently refers to a physical building (Mark 13:14) from which he makes his blasphemous pronouncements.” The English Standard Version also says “the man of lawlessness, the son of destruction... takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.” The ESV makes this comment: >The temple of God has been variously interpreted as the church, the heavenly temple, the Jerusalem temple, and for supreme blasphemous arrogance modelled on the activities of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (Daniel 11:31-35). Whatever the meaning, the context seems to indicate a concrete and observable act of defiance against God. Is there any suggestion from the Greek in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 that the temple in Jerusalem will be rebuilt? Indeed, ***is there any biblical basis for thinking that at some point during the Great Tribulation the Antichrist (man of lawlessness) will enter a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem*** (from which he will proclaim himself to be God and demand worship)?

> KJV 2Th 2:1  Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord > Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,  2Th 2:2  That > ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor > by word, nor by letter as from us, as **that the day of Christ is at > hand**.  2Th 2:3  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;  2Th 2:4  Who opposeth and > exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; > so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that > he is God.**  2Th 2:5  Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, > I told you these things?  2Th 2:6  And now ye know what withholdeth > that he might be revealed in his time.  2Th 2:7  For **the mystery of > iniquity doth already work**: only he who now letteth will let, until > he be taken out of the way.  2Th 2:8  And **then shall that Wicked be > revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, > and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:**  2Th 2:9  Even > him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and > signs and lying wonders,  2Th 2:10  And with all deceivableness of > unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the > love of the truth, that they might be saved.

2 Thessalonians 2:16-17 is > "16 Now may our Lord Jesus Christ Himself and God our Father, who by > grace has loved us and given us eternal comfort and good hope, > 17 encourage your hearts and strengthen you in every good word and deed." (Berean Standard Bible) This seems a bit strange, as St. Paul is mentioning Jesus **and** the Father, but then uses singular verbs at 17. One explanation of this sometimes given by Trinitarians is that St. Paul is gesturing toward the Trinitarian nature of God with this grammatical usage. How do Biblical Unitarians understand Paul's grammar at 2 Thessalonians 2:16-17?

I've come across a passage that seems to support the idea that Hell is total annihilation. The verbiage "eternal destruction" in the English translation seems to denote that the individual is destroyed and thus ceases to exist. However, given the prevalence of the view that human souls in Hell suffer eternal conscious torment, I would assume there is some explanation for this passage that resolves the apparent conflict between this passage and that doctrine. Here is the text: > They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might. > > 2 Thessalonians 1:9

In 2 Thessalonians 1:9-10, Paul writes of the wicked (NKJV, emphasis mine): > These shall be punished with **everlasting destruction** from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, **when He comes, in that Day,** to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe, because our testimony among you was believed. Premillennialists place the Day of Judgment long after the Second Coming of Christ. However, this passage says that "everlasting destruction" will happen "when He comes, in that Day" (NKJV). Therefore, does Paul place Christ's Second Coming within the Day of Judgment? **Related:** https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/71915/in-premillennial-theology-is-the-last-judgement-before-the-millennium

2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 (ESV): > Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, 2 not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming. 9 **The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders**, 10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, 12 in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. According to Full Preterists, what historical facts fulfilled the false signs and wonders prophesied by the apostle Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:9? _______ Relevant related question on Hermeneutics: [What signs and wonders are performed by whom? 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10](https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/62523/what-signs-and-wonders-are-performed-by-whom-2-thessalonians-29-10) .

> 2 Thess 2:1-3: Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, **not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed**, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one deceive you in any way. **For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction**. Paul appears to be saying that "that day" (the day of the Lord's coming and our being gathered to him) will not come unless two conditions (the rebellion and the revelation of the lawless one) come first. According to pre-tribulational rapture theory the rapture of the Church takes place well in advance of both of these conditions. If he is writing to reassure his pre-trib rapture followers that the Second Coming of Christ (Day of the Lord) hasn't happened yet, why has he listed two conditions that they will not be around to witness? Why not say, for instance, "The rapture comes first and you're still here aren't you?"

In light of James 1:13, I would like to know the meaning of the remaining scriptures quoted below. James 1:13 >Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man. 1 Kings 22:21-23 >Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD and said, 'I will entice him.'"The LORD said to him, 'How?' And he said, 'I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.' Then He said, 'You are to entice him and also prevail. Go and do so.' "Now therefore, behold, the LORD has put a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; and the LORD has proclaimed disaster against you."… 2 Thessalonians 2:11 >For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie Judges 9:23 >God stirred up animosity between Abimelek and the citizens of Shechem so that they acted treacherously against Abimelek. 1 Samuel 16:14 >Now the Spirit of the LORD had departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD tormented him.