<<If some argue for a
post-trib rapture because of a "departure" rendering of APOSTASIA, then
you might have an argument. I argue for a post-trib rapture
interpretation from this passage for other reasons.>>
I think your first post-trib should be pre-trib, at least I think that's what
you mean. While I do not think APOSTASIA refers to the rapture (I think it is
explained in 2:10-12), that view is not as nonsensical as you seem to make it
if the timing of the rapture is not clear in the Thessalonians minds. Second,
most pretribs do not teach that the rapture begins the day of the Lord or the
seven year tribulation. They see it as beginning with the signing of the
covenant in Daniel 9:26-27 or the first seal of Rev 6. The rapture does have
a relationship to the Day of the Lord because it is bound with the Parousia,
but not necessarily as the beginning of the DOL.
Charles